Comparison of the genotoxicity of propofol and desflurane using the comet assay in the lymphocytes of patients who underwent lumbar discectomy: A randomized trial.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the genotoxic effects of desflurane and propofol using comet assay in patients undergoing elective discectomy surgery. METHODS: This was a randomized controlled study. Patients who underwent elective lumbar discectomy under general anesthesia with propofol or desflurane were included in the study. Venous blood samples were obtained at 4 different time points: 5 minutes before anesthesia induction (T1), 2 hours after the start of anesthesia (T2), the first day after surgery (T3), and the fifth day following surgery (T4). Deoxyribonucleic acid damage in lymphocytes was assessed via the comet assay. RESULTS: A total of 30 patients, 15 in each group, were included in the analysis. The groups were similar in terms of age and gender distribution. There were no significant differences in demographics, duration of surgery, total remifentanil consumption, and total rocuronium bromide consumption. The comet assay revealed that head length, head intensity, tail intensity, tail moment at T1 were similar in the desflurane and propofol groups. Head length, tail length and tail moment measured in the desflurane group at T4 were significantly higher compared to the propofol group. Tail lengths of the desflurane group at T1, T2 and T3 were significantly higher than the corresponding values in the propofol group. CONCLUSION: Propofol and desflurane do not appear to induce DNA damage in lymphocytes. However, when the quantitative data were compared, it was determined that propofol had relatively lower genotoxic potential than desflurane.ClinicalTrials.gov Reg. No.: NCT05185167.

Effect of propofol and ciprofol on the euphoric reaction in patients with painless gastroscopy: A prospective randomized controlled trial.

Objective: To explore the effects of propofol and ciprofol on patient euphoric reactions during sedation in patients undergoing gastroscopy and to investigate potential factors that may influence euphoric reactions in patients. Methods: A total of 217 patients were randomly divided into two groups: the propofol group (P group, n = 109) and the ciprofol group (C group, n = 108). The patients in the P group were given 2 mg/kg propofol, and those in the C group were given 0.5 mg/kg ciprofol. The patients were assessed using the Addiction Research Center Inventory-Chinese Version (ARCI-CV) to measure euphoric reactions at three time points: preexamination, 30 min after awakening, and 1 week after examination. Anxiety, depression, and sleep status were evaluated using appropriate scales at admission and 1 week after the examination. The dream rate, sedative effects, vital sign dynamics, and adverse reactions were documented during the sedation process. Results: After 30 min of awakening, the P group and C group showed no statistically significant differences in the mean morphine-benzedrine group (MBG) score (8.84 vs. 9.09, P > 0.05), dream rate (42.2 % vs. 40.7 %, P > 0.05), or MBG score one week after the examination (7.04 vs. 7.05, P > 0.05). The regression analysis revealed that sex, dream status, Alcohol Use Disorders Identification Test (AUDIT) score, and examination time had notable impacts on the MBG-30 min score. No statistically significant differences were observed in sedative effects, anxiety, depression, or sleep status between the two groups (P > 0.05). The incidence of injection pain and severe hypotension was significantly lower in the C group (P < 0.05), and hemodynamics and SpO2 were more stable during sedation (P < 0.05). Conclusion: There was no significant difference between propofol and ciprofol in terms of euphoria experienced by patients after sedation in patients undergoing gastroscopy. Ciprofol has demonstrated addictive potential similar to that of propofol, warranting careful attention to its addictive potential during clinical application.

Cardiopulmonary function, anesthetic effects, quality of arousal, hematology, and blood biochemistry during continuous intravenous infusion of a combination solution of xylazine, butorphanol, and propofol in calves.

General anesthesia in calves is easier to perform under field conditions, total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) than using inhalation anesthesia. In the present study, cardiopulmonary function, anesthetic effects, quality of arousal, hematology, and blood biochemistry were assessed during continuous infusion of a combination solution of 0.01% xylazine, 0.001% butorphanol, and 0.2% propofol (XBP) at doses of 6 (G6; 10 µg/kg/min xylazine, 1 µg/kg/min butorphanol, 200 µg/kg/min propofol) and 9 mL/kg/h (G9; 15 µg/kg/min xylazine, 1.5 µg/kg/min butorphanol 300 µg/kg/min propofol). For both groups, five castrated Holstein calves received intravenous injections of xylazine (0.2 mg/kg) and propofol (2 mg/kg), followed by a continuous infusion of XBP for 60 min to maintain anesthesia. Respiratory management consisted of tracheal intubation followed by spontaneous inhalation of pure oxygen. Cardiopulmonary, anesthesia, hematology, and blood biochemistry variables were assessed at rest (baseline) and every 5 or 15 min after the start of the XBP infusion. Quality of arousal was assessed based on the swallowing reflex recovery time from the stop of XBP infusion, and the sternal position time and standing time after atipamezole administration. XBP produced adequate sedation, analgesia, and muscle relaxation in all calves and maintained stable anesthesia for 60 min. As XBP infusion time passed, rectal temperature and heart rate became lower, and mean arterial blood pressure increased. In both groups, hematologic and blood biochemical effects were mild. The quality of arousal was not different, and all calves were standing. The results of the present study suggested that XBP is useful for TIVA in calves.

Anesthesia and cancer recurrence: a narrative review.

Cancer is a leading cause of death worldwide. With the increasingly aging population, the number of emerging cancer cases is expected to increase markedly in the foreseeable future. Surgical resection with adjuvant therapy is the best available option for the potential cure of many solid tumors; thus, approximately 80% of patients with cancer undergo at least one surgical procedure during their disease. Agents used in general anesthesia can modulate cytokine release, transcription factors, and/or oncogenes. This can affect host immunity and the capability of cancer cells to survive and migrate, not only during surgery but for up to several weeks after surgery. However, it remains unknown whether exposure to anesthetic agents affects cancer recurrence or metastasis. This review explores the current literature to explain whether and how the choice of anesthetic and perioperative medication affect cancer surgery outcomes.

Efficacy and safety of ciprofol for sedation in outpatient gynecological procedures: a phase III multicenter randomized trial.

Objective: Ciprofol (also known as cipepofol and HSK3486), is a compound similar to propofol in chemical structure and hypnotic effect. Herein we evaluated the efficacy and safety of ciprofol for sedation in outpatient gynecological procedures. Methods: This phase III multicenter randomized trial with a non-inferiority design was conducted in nine tertiary hospitals. We enrolled 135 women aged 18-65 years who were scheduled for ambulatory gynecological procedures. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either ciprofol (0.4 mg/kg for induction and 0.2 mg/kg for maintenance) or propofol (2.0 mg/kg for induction and 1.0 mg/kg for maintenance) sedation in a 2:1 ratio. Patients and investigators for data collection and outcome assessment were blinded to study group assignments. The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation, defined as completion of procedure without remedial anesthetics. The non-inferiority margin was set at -8%. Secondary outcomes included time to successful induction, time to full awake, time to meet discharge criteria, and satisfaction with sedation assessed by patients and doctors. We also monitored occurrence of adverse events and injection pain. Results: A total of 135 patients were enrolled; 134 patients (90 patients received ciprofol sedation and 44 patients propofol sedation) were included in final intention-to-treat analysis. The success rates were both 100% in the two groups (rate difference, 0.0%; 95% CI, -4.1 to 8.0%), i.e., ciprofol was non-inferior to propofol. When compared with propofol sedation, patients given ciprofol required more time to reach successful induction (median difference [MD], 2 s; 95% CI, 1 to 7; p < 0.001), and required more time to reach full awake (MD, 2.3 min; 95% CI, 1.4 to 3.1; p < 0.001) and discharge criteria (MD, 2.3 min; 95% CI, 1.5 to 3.2; p < 0.001). Fewer patients in the ciprofol group were dissatisfied with sedation (relative risk, 0.21; 95% CI, 0.06 to 0.77; p = 0.024). Patients given ciprofol sedation had lower incidences of treat-emergent adverse events (34.4% [31/90] vs. 79.5% [35/44]; p < 0.001) and injection pain (6.7% [6/90] vs. 61.4% [27/44]; p < 0.001). Conclusion: Ciprofol for sedation in ambulatory gynecological procedures was non-inferior to propofol, with less adverse events and injection pain. Clinical trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier NCT04958746.

Quantitation of propofol metabolites by LC-MS/MS demonstrating long detection window for urine drug monitoring.

Introduction: Chromatographic methods for analysis of propofol and its metabolites have been widely used in pharmacokinetic studies of propofol distribution, metabolism, and clearance. Application of chromatographic methods is also needed in clinical and forensic laboratories for detecting and monitoring propofol misuse. Objective: We report a method for sensitive analysis of propofol, propofol 1-glucuronide (PG), 4-hydroxypropofol 1-glucuronide (1-QG), 4-hydroxypropofol 4-glucuronide (4-QG) and 4-hydroxypropofol 4-sulfate (4-QS) in urine by LC-MS/MS analysis. The method employs a simple dilute-and-analyze sample preparation with stable isotope internal standardization. Results: Validation studies demonstrate a linear calibration model (100-10,000 ng/mL), with dilution integrity verified for the extended range of concentrations experienced in propofol use. Criteria-based validation was achieved, including an average coefficient of variation of 6.5 % and a percent bias of -4.2 ng/mL. The method was evaluated in 12 surgical patients, with monitoring periods lasting up to 30 days following intravenous propofol administrations of 100-3000 mg on the day of surgery. While the concentration ratio of PG to 4-hydroxy propofol metabolite decreased significantly in the days following surgery, PG maintained the highest concentration in all specimens. Both PG and 1-QG were detectable throughout the monitoring periods, including in a patient monitored for 30 days. Lower concentrations were determined for 4-QG and 4-QS, with evidence of detection up to 20 days. Propofol was not detectable in any urine specimens, thereby proving ineffective for identifying drug use. Conclusion: The validated method for quantifying propofol metabolites demonstrates its applicability for the sensitive detection of propofol misuse over a long window of drug-use detection.

Sedation for Colonoscopy Procedures Using Dexmedetomidine Versus Propofol-Fentanyl Infusions: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial.

Objective: Different anaesthetists for sedation or monitored anaesthesia care have been used for colonoscopy. The target of this research was the ability to perform colonoscopy under a painless degree of sedation and the prevalence of undesired proceedings. Methods: A total of 60 patients were randomly divided into two groups: Group D received dexmedetomidine and Group PF received propofol-fentanyl. Patients in both groups received the same infusion ratio. The minimum infusion amount of dexmetatomidine is (0.1 to 0.4 µg kg-1 h-1) in Group D, whereas fentanyl is administered at a rate of 0.01 to 0.05 µg kg-1 min-1 in the PF group during the approximately 45-min colonoscopy. Results: Group D exhibited significantly lower modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation (OAA/S) scores at intraoperative time points T1-T12. Group D also exhibited significantly lower visual analog scale scores for pain at intraoperative time points T4 and T7. The mean arterial pressure was significantly lower in Group D at intraoperative times T6-T8 and T11-T12, as well as upon admission to the post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) and 30 min after admission to the PACU. The results of the ANOVA tests revealed a significantly lower heart rate in Group D. The respiratory rate exhibited a notable decrease during time intervals T8 and T10 in the PF group. Conclusion: The administration of dexmetatomidine and propofol-fentanyl during colonoscopy was found to be safe. In addition, dexmetatomidine may present significant benefits in this context because of its lower occurrence of adverse respiratory events.

Substance specific EEG patterns in mice undergoing slow anesthesia induction.

The exact mechanisms and the neural circuits involved in anesthesia induced unconsciousness are still not fully understood. To elucidate them valid animal models are necessary. Since the most commonly used species in neuroscience are mice, we established a murine model for commonly used anesthetics/sedatives and evaluated the epidural electroencephalographic (EEG) patterns during slow anesthesia induction and emergence. Forty-four mice underwent surgery in which we inserted a central venous catheter and implanted nine intracranial electrodes above the prefrontal, motor, sensory, and visual cortex. After at least one week of recovery, mice were anesthetized either by inhalational sevoflurane or intravenous propofol, ketamine, or dexmedetomidine. We evaluated the loss and return of righting reflex (LORR/RORR) and recorded the electrocorticogram. For spectral analysis we focused on the prefrontal and visual cortex. In addition to analyzing the power spectral density at specific time points we evaluated the changes in the spectral power distribution longitudinally. The median time to LORR after start anesthesia ranged from 1080 [1st quartile: 960; 3rd quartile: 1080]s under sevoflurane anesthesia to 1541 [1455; 1890]s with ketamine. Around LORR sevoflurane as well as propofol induced a decrease in the theta/alpha band and an increase in the beta/gamma band. Dexmedetomidine infusion resulted in a shift towards lower frequencies with an increase in the delta range. Ketamine induced stronger activity in the higher frequencies. Our results showed substance-specific changes in EEG patterns during slow anesthesia induction. These patterns were partially identical to previous observations in humans, but also included significant differences, especially in the low frequencies. Our study emphasizes strengths and limitations of murine models in neuroscience and provides an important basis for future studies investigating complex neurophysiological mechanisms.

Avoiding pain during propofol injection in pediatric anesthesia: Hypnoanalgesia of the hand versus intravenous lidocaine.

INTRODUCTION: Pain related to injection of propofol during induction of anesthesia decreases from 66.8% without prevention, to 22-31% of cases when lidocaine is associated. Hypnoanalgesia of the hand is currently used for painful procedures in children but has never been evaluated in this indication. The primary aim of this prospective randomized single-blind study was to evaluate the efficacy of hypnoanalgesia of the hand for the prevention of moderate to severe pain during intravenous injection of propofol alone in comparison to lidocaine admixture. The secondary aim was to compare the global satisfaction of children in both methods. PATIENTS AND METHODS: One hundred patients aged 7-14 years, ASA 1-2, admitted for scheduled surgery under general anesthesia were randomized into two groups. Group L received a mixture of 1% propofol (3 mg/kg) and 1% Lidocaine (0.3 mg/kg). Group H received 1% propofol (3 mg/kg) after hypnoanalgesia of the hand realized by a single experimented operator. A video was made in order to evaluate the pain related to propofol injection by a blinded observer using the 4-point score of Cameron (painful ≥ 2). The global satisfaction of children was evaluated in postanesthesia care unit and documented if visual analog score was <7/10. RESULTS: Ninety-six patients were analyzed. The rate of painful patients did not differ significantly between groups (8.5% in group H [n = 47] vs 6.1% in group L [n = 49], OR= 0.70; 95% CI [0.13-3.35], p = 0.65), nor did the rate of nonsatisfied patients (10.6 in group H vs. 12.2% in group L, OR = 0.85; 95% CI [0.19-3.65], p = 1). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that hypnoanalgesia of the hand alone is effective to prevent the pain related to propofol injection in children. No significant difference was found in comparison with lidocaine admixture nor for pain or satisfaction.

A Comparison of Efficacy between Low-dose Dexmedetomidine and Propofol for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients Undergoing Hip Fracture Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Aims and background: The efficacy of dexmedetomidine and propofol in preventing postoperative delirium is controversial. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and propofol for preventing postoperative delirium in extubated elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. Materials and methods: This randomized controlled trial included participants undergoing hip fracture surgery. Participants were randomly assigned to receive dexmedetomidine, propofol, or placebo intravenously during intensive care unit (ICU) admission (8 p.m. to 6 a.m.). The drug dosages were adjusted to achieve the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) of 0 to -1. The primary outcome was postoperative delirium. The secondary outcomes were postoperative complications, fentanyl consumption, and length of hospital stay. Results: 108 participants were enrolled (n = 36 per group). Postoperative delirium incidences were 8.3%, 22.2%, and 5.6% in the dexmedetomidine, propofol, and placebo groups, respectively. The hazard ratios of dexmedetomidine and propofol compared with placebo were 1.49 (95% CI, 0.25, 8.95; p = 0.66) and 4.18 (95% CI, 0.88, 19.69; p = 0.07). The incidence of bradycardia was higher in the dexmedetomidine group compared with others (13.9%; p = 0.01) but not for hypotension (8.3%; p = 0.32). The median length of hospital stays (8 days, IQR: 7, 11) and fentanyl consumption (240 µg, IQR: 120, 400) were not different among groups. Conclusion: This study did not successfully demonstrate the impact of nocturnal low-dose dexmedetomidine and propofol in preventing postoperative delirium among elderly patients undergoing hip fracture surgery. While not statistically significant, it is noteworthy that propofol exhibited a comparatively higher delirium rate. How to cite this article: Ekkapat G, Kampitak W, Theerasuwipakorn N, Kittipongpattana J, Engsusophon P, Phannajit J, et al. A Comparison of Efficacy between Low-dose Dexmedetomidine and Propofol for Prophylaxis of Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients Undergoing Hip Fracture Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial. Indian J Crit Care Med 2024;28(5):467-474.

Comparison of Propofol and Alfaxalone as Anesthesic Drugs in Bitches Undergoing Ovariohysterectomies (Healthy Bitches and with Pyometra) and Cesarean Sections.

This study evaluated the efficacy and safety of two anesthetic agents, alfaxalone and propofol, on maternal physiological parameters (heart and respiratory rates, blood pressure, and temperature) on either ovariohysterectomies or cesarean sections in bitches. A total of 34 healthy and pyometra-affected females (classified as ASA II), were induced with IV propofol (4 mg/kg), while 35 females, both healthy and pyometra affected, were induced with IV alfaxalone (1 mg/kg). For cesarean sections, females (ASA II) were induced with propofol (n = 14) or alfaxalone (n = 14). Additionally, the neonatal viability and modified Apgar score were recorded at 5, 60, and 120 min post-delivery. There were no significant differences in the physiological parameters when comparing the use of propofol and alfaxalone in bitches undergoing ovariohysterectomies, regardless of their health status, nor when comparing cesarean sections. It was observed that bitches induced with propofol occasionally required an additional dose for maintenance of the anesthesia. Neonatal mortality rates were similar for both groups; however, alfaxalone was associated with higher neonatal viability as indicated by the Apgar scores. The findings suggest that both anesthetic protocols are effective and safe for use in canine reproductive surgeries, with no major differences in basic physiological parameters' alteration or neonatal outcomes between the two agents.

Effect of Butorphanol-Medetomidine and Butorphanol-Dexmedetomidine on Echocardiographic Parameters during Propofol Anaesthesia in Dogs.

This study compared the effects of butorphanol-medetomidine and butorphanol-dexmedetomidine combinations on echocardiographic parameters during propofol anaesthesia in dogs. The dogs were randomly divided into two groups. In the butorphanol-medetomidine (BM) group, butorphanol (0.2 mg/kg) and medetomidine (15 µg/kg) were intravenously administered; in the butorphanol-dexmedetomidine (BD) group, butorphanol (0.2 mg/kg) and dexmedetomidine (7.5 µg/kg) was used. Anaesthesia was induced with propofol and maintained with a constant-rate infusion of propofol (0.2 mg/kg/min). The echocardiographic parameters were assessed in conscious dogs (T0). Echocardiography was conducted again at 10 min post premedication (T1), followed by assessments at 30 (T2), 60 (T3), and 90 (T4) mins. The dogs were subjected to diagnostic procedures (radiography, computed tomography) under anaesthesia. A significant reduction in heart rate and cardiac output was noted in both groups at T1. There was no significant difference in the stroke volume between the BM and BD groups. The application of butorphanol-dexmedetomidine caused a significant increase in the left ventricular internal diameter in diastole and the diameter of the left atrium compared to that caused by butorphanol-medetomidine. This study documented that butorphanol-medetomidine and butorphanol-dexmedetomidine combinations caused similar reductions in heart rate and cardiac output in both groups. 'New´ valvular regurgitation occurred following their administration.

Comparison of propofol and desflurane for postoperative neurocognitive function in patients with aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage: A prospective randomized trial.

Background: Following aneurysmal subarachnoid hemorrhage, 40-50% of survivors experience cognitive dysfunction, which affects their quality of life. Anesthetic agents play a pivotal role in aneurysm surgeries. However, substantial evidence regarding their effects on neurocognitive function is lacking. This study evaluated the effects of propofol and desflurane on postoperative neurocognitive function and serum S-100B levels. Methods: One hundred patients were equally randomized to receive either propofol (Group P) or desflurane (Group D). Cognitive function was assessed using the Montreal Cognitive Assessment scale at three different time points: Preoperatively, at the time of discharge, and one month after surgery. Perioperative serum levels of S-100B were also measured. Results: The preoperative mean cognitive score in Group P was 21.64 + 4.46 and in Group D was 21.66 + 4.07 (P = 0.79). At discharge, a significant decrease in cognitive scores was observed compared to preoperative scores (Group P- 20.91 + 3.94, P = 0.03 and Group D-19.28 + 4.22, P = 0.00); however, scores were comparable between the two groups (P = 0.09). One month following surgery, mean cognitive scores were 22.63 + 3.57 in Group P and 20.74 + 3.89 in Group D, and the difference was significant (P = 0.04). Higher memory and orientation scores were observed in Group P than in Group D at one month (P < 0.05) in the subgroup analysis. Both groups had similar serum S-100B levels. Conclusion: The mean cognitive scores one month after surgery improved significantly with propofol compared with desflurane, but without clinical significance. Individual domain analysis demonstrated that orientation and memory scores were better preserved with propofol.

Efficacy and safety of ciprofol versus propofol for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Propofol has been the gold standard for anesthesia induction and maintenance due to its rapid onset and favorable pharmacokinetic properties. However, the search for alternative agents with improved safety and efficacy has led to the emergence of ciprofol (HSK3486), a structural analog of propofol. This systematic review and meta-analysis aim to comprehensively assess the safety and efficacy of ciprofol compared to propofol for anesthesia induction and maintenance in adult patients undergoing surgical procedures. METHODS: This study included only double-arm RCTs in which participants were aged eighteen or older undergoing surgery. For the statistical analysis of the extracted data, we employed RevMan 5.4.1. RESULTS: Ciprofol demonstrated a promising trend of higher anesthesiologists' satisfaction during the induction phase (MD 0.14, 95%, CI - 0.28 to 0.56, p = 0.51), whereas Propofol was favored during maintenance. Propofol also exhibited advantages with a shorter time to successful anesthesia induction (MD 0.08 min, 95% CI 0.00 to 0.15, p = 0.04), and quicker attainment of full alertness (MD 0.11 min, 95% CI - 1.29 to 1.52, p = 0.87), suggesting its efficiency in clinical practice. Importantly, there were no significant disparities in the success rate of anesthesia. CONCLUSION: Both ciprofol and propofol demonstrate comparable efficacy and safety for anesthesia induction and maintenance in adult patients undergoing surgery. While propofol provides a faster onset of induction, ciprofol exhibits advantages in terms of pain management. Clinicians should consider these findings when selecting anesthetic agents, and tailoring choices to individual patient needs and clinical scenarios.

Propofol and Dexmedetomidine Ameliorate Endotoxemia-Associated Encephalopathy via Inhibiting Ferroptosis.

Background: Sepsis is recognized as a multiorgan and systemic damage caused by dysregulated host response to infection. Its acute systemic inflammatory response highly resembles that of lipopolysaccharide (LPS)-induced endotoxemia. Propofol and dexmedetomidine are two commonly used sedatives for mechanical ventilation in critically ill patients and have been reported to alleviate cognitive impairment in many diseases. In this study, we aimed to explore and compare the effects of propofol and dexmedetomidine on the encephalopathy induced by endotoxemia and to investigate whether ferroptosis is involved, finally providing experimental evidence for multi-drug combination in septic sedation. Methods: A total of 218 C57BL/6J male mice (20-25 g, 6-8 weeks) were used. Morris water maze (MWM) tests were performed to evaluate whether propofol and dexmedetomidine attenuated LPS-induced cognitive deficits. Brain injury was evaluated using Nissl and Fluoro-Jade C (FJC) staining. Neuroinflammation was assessed by dihydroethidium (DHE) and DCFH-DA staining and by measuring the levels of three cytokines. The number of Iba1+ and GFAP+ cells was used to detect the activation of microglia and astrocytes. To explore the involvement of ferroptosis, the levels of ptgs2 and chac1; the content of iron, malondialdehyde (MDA), and glutathione (GSH); and the expression of ferroptosis-related proteins were investigated. Conclusion: The single use of propofol and dexmedetomidine mitigated LPS-induced cognitive impairment, while the combination showed poor performance. In alleviating endotoxemic neural loss and degeneration, the united sedative group exhibited the most potent capability. Both propofol and dexmedetomidine inhibited neuroinflammation, while propofol's effect was slightly weaker. All sedative groups reduced the neural apoptosis, inhibited the activation of microglia and astrocytes, and relieved neurologic ferroptosis. The combined group was most prominent in combating genetic and biochemical alterations of ferroptosis. Fpn1 may be at the core of endotoxemia-related ferroptosis activation.

Dexmedetomidine Pretreatment Confers Myocardial Protection and Reduces Mechanical Ventilation Duration for Patients Undergoing Cardiac Valve Replacement under Cardiopulmonary Bypass.

PURPOSE: The study aims to assess the effects of dexmedetomidine (Dex) pretreatment on patients during cardiac valve replacement under cardiopulmonary bypass. METHODS: For patients in the Dex group (n = 52), 0.5 µg/kg Dex was given before anesthesia induction, followed by 0.5 µg/kg/h pumping injection before aortic occlusion. For patients in the control group (n = 52), 0.125 ml/kg normal saline was given instead of Dex. RESULTS: The patients in the Dex group had longer time to first dose of rescue propofol than the control group (P = 0.003). The Dex group required less total dosage of propofol than the control group (P = 0.0001). The levels of cardiac troponin I (cTnI), creatine kinase isoenzyme MB (CK-MB), malondialdehyde (MDA), and tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) were lower in the Dex group than the control group at T4, 8 h after the operation (T5), and 24 h after the operation (T6) (P <0.01). The Dex group required less time for mechanical ventilation than the control group (P = 0.003). CONCLUSION: The study suggests that 0.50 µg/kg Dex pretreatment could reduce propofol use and the duration of mechanical ventilation, and confer myocardial protection without increased adverse events during cardiac valve replacement.

PRESS (Propofol, Remifentanil, Electricity/EEG, Setup and Setting) to Start: Introducing a Total Intravenous Anaesthesia Checklist at a Large Teaching Hospital.

Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) is becoming more widely used, and as of yet there are few safety checks for the use of TIVA when compared to inhaled anaesthesia. This study aims to assess the feasibility and utility of introducing a TIVA checklist at a large teaching hospital. Methods A survey was sent out to all consultant and trainee anaesthetists at our hospital regarding their use of TIVA and errors in practice related to its use. A checklist was created based on common errors reported in the survey, errors described in NAP5 and our hospital's standard operating procedure. The checklist was introduced, and another survey was distributed a month later to assess compliance and utility and to gain feedback. Results In the first survey, there were 39 responses. A total of 64% had seen an error with the use of TIVA. For those using TIVA 70% of the time or more, 31% had seen an error in the last three months. Twelve per cent of those who had seen errors found that the errors led to patient harm. Only 33% used a method to double-check for errors prior to commencing TIVA. In the follow-up survey, 80% of those who used the checklist had found it useful, and 30% had corrected an error while using the checklist. Eighty-seven per cent felt the checklist would prevent errors from being made. Eighty per cent of respondents said they would use the checklist in their future practice. The checklist was found to be more useful for trainees, and for those who use TIVA less often. Discussion The 'PRESS to start TIVA" checklist has been shown to be a useful tool to prevent errors and a majority of anaesthetists at our hospital plan to use it going forward. Our data suggests that anaesthetists who are less experienced with TIVA benefit more from having a checklist. There was a marked increase in the number of anaesthetists who would use a checklist in the future, compared to those who used one in the initial survey. This shows that introducing a checklist is feasible and is likely to reduce errors going forward.

Neutrophils and Anesthetic Drugs: Implications in Onco-Anesthesia.

Apart from being a significant line of defense in the host defense system, neutrophils have many immunological functions. Although there are not many publications that accurately present the functions of neutrophils in relation to oncological pathology, their activity and implications have been studied a lot recently. This review aims to extensively describe neutrophils functions'; their clinical implications, especially in tumor pathology; the value of clinical markers related to neutrophils; and the implications of neutrophils in onco-anesthesia. This review also aims to describe current evidence on the influence of anesthetic drugs on neutrophils' functions and their potential influence on perioperative outcomes.

The association between different anesthetic techniques and outcomes in patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve replacement.

Background: There is an increasing number of patients undergoing transfemoral aortic valve replacement (TAVR) with sedation. There is limited data assessing the efficacy and safety of the different types of sedative drugs. The objective was to compare two sedation techniques with regard to the need for vasoactive support, respiratory support, rate of conversion to general anesthesia (GA), common perioperative morbidities, intensive care unit (ICU) stay, and in-hospital mortality. Methods: A retrospective chart review study conducted among patients who underwent TAVR at a specialized cardiac center between January 2016 and December 2019. Data collection included patient diagnosis, preoperative comorbidities, intraoperative outcomes, and postoperative outcomes. Results: A total of 289 patients received local anesthesia; 210 received propofol infusion and 79 received a mixed propofol-ketamine infusion (Ketofol). The average age was 75.5 ± 8.9 years and 58.1% of the patients were females. Comparing propofol and ketofol groups, 31.2% and 34.2% of the patients required drug support, 7.6% and 6.3% required conversion to GA, 46.7% and 59.5% required respiratory support, respectively. These intraoperative outcomes were not significantly different between groups, P = 0.540, P = 0.707, and P = 0.105, respectively. In-hospital 30-day mortality in propofol and ketofol groups were 1.9% and 3.8%, respectively, P = 0.396. In both groups, the median post-procedure coronary care unit stay was 26 hours while post-procedure hospital stay was 3 days. Conclusions: There were no significant differences in perioperative or postoperative outcomes in TAVR patients receiving either propofol or ketofol. Propofol infusion, either alone or with ketamine, is reliable and safe, with minimal side effects.

Comparison of the effects of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) on postoperative analgesia and intraoperative hemodynamics in patients undergoing spine surgery: A prospective randomized double-blind controlled trial.

Background: Opioids form the basis of perioperative pain management but are associated with multiple side effects. In opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), several non-opioid drugs or neuraxial/regional blocks are used as substitutes for opioids. Ketamine, a N-methyl-d-aspartate antagonist, provides intense analgesia. However, there is a shortage of literature on the effects of ketamine-based OFA on hemodynamics (HD) and postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing thoracolumbar spine surgery. Materials and Methods: This prospective randomized controlled trial included 60 adult patients. The patients in Group OFA (n = 30) received OFA with ketamine and ketofol (1:5) infusion, and those in Group OBA (n = 30) received opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) with fentanyl and propofol infusion. The postoperative pain-free period, pain scores, rescue analgesia, intraoperative HDs, and postoperative complications were assessed. Results: The mean pain-free period in Group OFA (9.86 ± 1.43 hr) was significantly higher than that in Group OBA (6.93 ± 1.93 hr) (P = 0.002). During the postoperative 48 hours, the total requirement of fentanyl was considerably lower in Group OFA (P < 0.05). There was a significantly higher incidence of hypertension in Group OFA (46%) and hypotension (43%) in Group OBA (43%), respectively. Postoperative nausea vomiting (PONV) was more common in Group OBA at the 2nd and 6th hr (P = 0.046 and P = 0.038). Conclusion: OFA with ketamine and ketofol provided adequate postoperative analgesia with a lower incidence of PONV after spine surgery. However, hypertension in the ketamine group and hypotension in the propofol group required fine titration of the infusion rate of drugs during the intraoperative period.