ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Sugammadex is the first selective relaxant binding agent. When compared with neostigmine, following sugammadex administration patients wake earlier and have shorter recovery times. In this study, we hypothesized that fast and clear awakening in patients undergoing general anesthesia has positive effects on cognitive functions in the early period after operation. METHODS: Approved by the local ethical committee, 128 patients were enrolled in this randomized, prospective, controlled, double-blind study. Patients were allocated to either Sugammadex group (Group S) or the Neostigmine group (Group N). The primary outcome of the study was early postoperative cognitive recovery as measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). After baseline assessment 12-24h before the operation. After the operation, when the Modified Aldrete Recovery Score was ≥9 the MMSE and 1h later the MoCA tests were repeated. RESULTS: Although there was a reduction in MoCA and MMSE scores in both Group S and Group N between preoperative and postoperative scores, there was no statistically significant difference in the slopes (p>0.05). The time to reach TOF 0.9 was 2.19min in Group S and 6.47min in Group N (p<0.0001). Recovery time was 8.26min in Group S and 16.93min in Group N (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: We showed that the surgical procedure and/or accompanying anesthetic procedure may cause a temporary or permanent regression in cognitive function in the early postoperative period. However, better cognitive performance could not be proved in the Sugammadex compared to the Neostigmine.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia Recovery Period , Cognition/drug effects , gamma-Cyclodextrins/pharmacology , Adult , Anesthesia, General , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Neostigmine/pharmacology , Postoperative Period , Prospective Studies , SugammadexABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Sugammadex is the first selective relaxant binding agent. When compared with neostigmine, following sugammadex administration patients wake earlier and have shorter recovery times. In this study, we hypothesized that fast and clear awakening in patients undergoing general anesthesia has positive effects on cognitive functions in the early period after operation. METHODS: Approved by the local ethical committee, 128 patients were enrolled in this randomized, prospective, controlled, double-blind study. Patients were allocated to either Sugammadex group (Group S) or the Neostigmine group (Group N). The primary outcome of the study was early postoperative cognitive recovery as measured by the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) and Mini Mental State Examination (MMSE). After baseline assessment 12-24h before the operation. After the operation, when the Modified Aldrete Recovery Score was ≥9 the MMSE and 1h later the MoCA tests were repeated. RESULTS: Although there was a reduction in MoCA and MMSE scores in both Group S and Group N between preoperative and postoperative scores, there was no statistically significant difference in the slopes (p>0.05). The time to reach TOF 0.9 was 2.19min in Group S and 6.47min in Group N (p<0.0001). Recovery time was 8.26min in Group S and 16.93min in Group N (p<0.0001). CONCLUSION: We showed that the surgical procedure and/or accompanying anesthetic procedure may cause a temporary or permanent regression in cognitive function in the early postoperative period. However, better cognitive performance could not be proved in the Sugammadex compared to the Neostigmine.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy of levobupivacaine induced continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) versus single dose spinal anesthesia (SDSA) in patients who are planned to undergo transurethral prostate resection. METHODS: Sixty years or older, ASA I-II or III, 50 patients were included in the study. 12.5mg 0.5% levobupivacaine were administered intrathecally in SDSA group. In CSA group, initially 2mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine were administered through spinal catheter. In order to achieve sensory block level at T10 dermatome, additional 1mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine were administered through the catheter in every 10min. Hemodynamic parameters and block characteristics were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative blood samples of the patients were drawn to determine plasma cortisone and plasma epinephrine levels. RESULTS: CSA technique provided better hemodynamic stability compared to SDSA technique particularly 90min after intrathecal administration. The rise in sensory block level was rapid and the time to reach surgical anesthesia was shorter in SDSA group. Motor block developed faster in SDSA group. In CSA group, similar anesthesia level was achieved by using lower levobupivacaine dose and which was related to faster recovery. Although, both techniques were effective in preventing surgical stress respond, postoperative cortisone levels were suppressed more in SDSA group. CONCLUSION: CSA technique with 0.25% levobupivacaine can be used as a regional anesthesia method for elderly patients planned to have TUR-P operation.