Development, Validation, and Comparison of a Novel Nociception/Anti-Nociception Monitor against Two Commercial Monitors in General Anesthesia.

In this paper, we present the development and the validation of a novel index of nociception/anti-nociception (N/AN) based on skin impedance measurement in time and frequency domain with our prototype AnspecPro device. The primary objective of the study was to compare the Anspec-PRO device with two other commercial devices (Medasense, Medstorm). This comparison was designed to be conducted under the same conditions for the three devices. This was carried out during total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) by investigating its outcomes related to noxious stimulus. In a carefully designed clinical protocol during general anesthesia from induction until emergence, we extract data for estimating individualized causal dynamic models between drug infusion and their monitored effect variables. Specifically, these are Propofol hypnotic drug to Bispectral index of hypnosis level and Remifentanil opioid drug to each of the three aforementioned devices. When compared, statistical analysis of the regions before and during the standardized stimulus shows consistent difference between regions for all devices and for all indices. These results suggest that the proposed methodology for data extraction and processing for AnspecPro delivers the same information as the two commercial devices.

Comparison of Remimazolam and Propofol on Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients Undergoing Radical Resection of Colon Cancer: A Single-Center Prospective Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND We compared the effect of remimazolam and propofol intravenous anesthesia on postoperative delirium in elderly patients undergoing laparoscopic radical resection of colon cancer. MATERIAL AND METHODS One hundred patients undergoing elective radical operation of colon cancer under general anesthesia were divided into a remimazolam group (group R) and propofol group (group P) by a random number table method. During anesthesia induction and maintenance, group R was intravenously injected with remimazolam to exert sedation; however, in group P, propofol was injected instead of remimazolam. The occurrence of postoperative delirium was assessed with the Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit scale and postoperative pain was assessed with the visual analogue score (VAS). The primary outcome measures were the incidence and duration of delirium within 7 days following surgery. Secondary outcome measures included postoperative VAS scores, intraoperative anesthetic drug dosage, and adverse reactions, including nausea and vomiting, hypoxemia, and respiratory depression. RESULTS There was no significant difference in baseline data between the 2 groups (P>0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence and duration of postoperative delirium between the 2 groups (P>0.05). There were no significant differences in VAS scores, remifentanil consumption, and adverse reactions, including nausea and vomiting, hypoxemia, and respiratory depression between the 2 groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS In elderly patients undergoing radical colon cancer surgery, remimazolam administration did not improve or aggravate the incidence and duration of delirium, compared with propofol.

Safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation of elderly patients undergoing ERCP.

BACKGROUND: Proper sedation of patients, particularly elderly individuals, who are more susceptible to sedation-related complications, is of significant importance in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). This study aims to assess the safety and efficacy of a low-dose combination of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing ERCP, compared to a group of middle-aged patients. METHODS: The medical records of 610 patients with common bile duct stones who underwent elective ERCP under deep sedation with a three-drug regimen, including midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol at Shandong Provincial Third Hospital from January 2023 to September 2023 were retrospectively reviewed in this study. Patients were categorized into three groups: middle-aged (50-64 years, n = 202), elderly (65-79 years, n = 216), and very elderly (≥ 80 years, n = 192). Intraoperative vital signs and complications were compared among these groups. RESULTS: The three groups showed no significant difference in terms of intraoperative variation of systolic blood pressure (P = 0.291), diastolic blood pressure (P = 0.737), heart rate (P = 0.107), peripheral oxygen saturation (P = 0.188), bispectral index (P = 0.158), and the occurrence of sedation-related adverse events including hypotension (P = 0.170) and hypoxemia (P = 0.423). CONCLUSION: The results suggest that a low-dose three-drug regimen consisting of midazolam, alfentanil, and propofol seems safe and effective for deep sedation of elderly and very elderly patients undergoing ERCP procedures. However, further studies are required to verify these findings and clarify the benefits and risks of this method.

Dexmedetomidine for Preventing Sleep Disturbance after Ambulatory Anesthesia: A Case Report.

Propofol anesthesia may impact a patient's sleep quality in the immediate postprocedure timeframe. We describe a 24-year-old man presenting for gastrostomy-jejunostomy tube replacement who reported debilitating sleep-onset disturbances after 3 previous anesthetic exposures for the same procedure. Review of the patient's records revealed the recurring use of propofol infusion. We proposed using dexmedetomidine infusion to potentially avoid another extended sleep disturbance. Following a dexmedetomidine-centered plan, the patient reported experiencing his usual sleep pattern without side-effects for 5 consecutive days postprocedure. This case highlights the potential for propofol-induced sleep disturbance in the ambulatory setting, which may be avoided with dexmedetomidine administration.

Application of propofol-remifentanil intravenous general anesthesia combined with regional block in pediatric ophthalmic surgery.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study is to observe the anesthetic effect and safety of intravenous anesthesia without muscle relaxant with propofol-remifentanil combined with regional block under laryngeal mask airway in pediatric ophthalmologic surgery. METHODS: A total of 90 undergoing ophthalmic surgery were anesthetized with general anesthesia using the laryngeal mask airway without muscle relaxant. They were randomly divided into two groups: 45 children who received propofol-remifentanil intravenous anesthesia combined with regional block (LG group), and 45 children who received total intravenous anesthesia (G group). The peri-operative circulatory indicators, awakening time after general anesthesia, postoperative analgesic effect and the incidence of anesthesia-related adverse events were respectively compared between the two groups. RESULTS: All the children successfully underwent the surgical procedure. The awakening time after general anesthesia and removal time of laryngeal mask were significantly shorter in the LG group than in the G group (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the heart rates in the perioperative period between the two groups (P > 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative physical response, respiratory depression, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and emergence agitation (EA) between the two groups (P > 0.05). The pain score at the postoperative hour 2 was lower in the LG group than in the G group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Propofol-remifentanil intravenous anesthesia combined with long-acting local anesthetic regional block anesthesia, combined with laryngeal mask ventilation technology without muscle relaxants, can be safely used in pediatric eye surgery to achieve rapid and smooth recovery from general anesthesia and better postoperative analgesia. This anesthesia scheme can improve the comfort and safety of children in perioperative period, and has a certain clinical popularization value.

Impact of various anesthetic regimens on motor-evoked potentials in infants undergoing spinal surgery: A case series.

Motor-evoked potential (MEP) monitoring is commonly used in children. MEP monitoring in infants is difficult due to smaller signals requiring higher stimulation voltages. There is limited information on the effect of different anesthetics on MEP monitoring in this age group. This case series describes the effect of different anesthetic regimens on MEP monitoring in infants. Patients <1 year of age who underwent spinal surgery with MEP monitoring between February 2022 and July 2023 at a single tertiary care children hospital were reviewed. The motor-evoked potential amplitudes were classified into 4 levels based on the voltage in the upper and lower limbs (none, responded, acceptable, sufficient). "Acceptable" or "sufficient" levels were defined as successful monitoring. A total of 19 infants were identified, involving 3 anesthesia regimens: 4/19 (21.1%) cases were anesthetized with propofol/remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), 3/19 (15.8%) with propofol/remifentanil/low-dose sevoflurane and another 12/19 (63.2%) cases who initially received propofol/remifentanil/sevoflurane and were converted to propofol/remifentanil anesthesia intraoperatively. The 4 cases with propofol/remifentanil showed 20/32 (62.5%) successful monitoring points. In contrast, 6/24 (25%) successful points were achieved with propofol/remifentanil intravenous anesthesia/0.5 age-adjusted minimum alveolar concentration sevoflurane. In 12 cases converted from propofol/remifentanil/low-dose inhalational anesthetics to TIVA alone, successful MEP monitoring points increased from 46/96 (47.9%) to 81/96 (84.4%). Adding low-dose inhalation anesthetic to propofol-based TIVA suppresses MEP amplitudes in infants. The optimal anesthetic regimen for infants requires further investigation.

Comparison of patient-controlled analgesia and sedation (PCAS) with remifentanil and propofol versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with midazolam, fentanyl, and propofol for colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Colonoscopy is a commonly performed gastroenterological procedure in patients associated with anxiety and pain. Various approaches have been used to provide sedation and analgesia during colonoscopy, including patient-controlled analgesia and sedation (PCAS). This study aims to evaluate the feasibility and efficiency of PCAS administered with propofol and remifentanil for colonoscopy. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial was performed in an authorized and approved endoscopy center. A total of 80 outpatients were recruited for the colonoscopy studies. Patients were randomly allocated into PCAS and total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) groups. In the PCAS group, the dose of 0.1 ml/kg/min of the mixture was injected after an initial bolus of 3 ml mixture (1 ml containing 3 mg of propofol and 10 µg of remifentanil). Each 1 ml of bolus was delivered with a lockout time of 1 min. In the TIVA group, patients were administered fentanyl 1 µg/kg, midazolam 0.02 mg/kg, and propofol (dosage titrated). Cardiorespiratory parameters and auditory evoked response index were continuously monitored during the procedure. The recovery from anesthesia was assessed using the Aldrete scale and the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale. The Visual Analogue Scale was used to assess the satisfaction of patients and endoscopists. RESULTS: No statistical differences were observed in the Visual Analogue Scale scores of the patients (9.58 vs 9.50) and the endoscopist (9.43 vs 9.30). A significant decline in the mean arterial blood pressure, heart rate, and auditory evoked response index parameters was recorded in the TIVA group (P < 0.05). The recovery time was significantly shorter in the PCAS group than in the TIVA group (P = 0.00). CONCLUSION: The combination of remifentanil and propofol could provide sufficient analgesia, better hemodynamic stability, lighter sedation, and faster recovery in the PCAS group of patients compared with the TIVA group.

Effectiveness and safety of remimazolam combined with alfentanil in hysteroscopic examination: A prospective, randomized, single-blind trial.

BACKGROUND: Remimazolam is a novel, ultrashort-acting benzodiazepine. This study aimed to compare the efficacy and safety of remimazolam and propofol for hysteroscopic examination, to determine the optimal dose of remimazolam combined with alfentanil for painless hysteroscopy, and to calculate its median effective dose (ED50). METHODS: Step 1: A total of 208 patients undergoing hysteroscopic examination were prospectively included in this study. Patients were randomized into 4 groups: 0.2 mg/kg remimazolam (group A), 0.25 mg/kg remimazolam besylate (group B), 0.3 mg/kg remimazolam (group C), and 2 mg/kg propofol (group D), with 52 patients in each group. One minute after losing consciousness, patients received an intravenous injection of alfentanil at 5 µg/kg, followed by a continuous infusion of alfentanil at 0.5 µg/kg/min. If patients showed frowning, movement, or MOAA/S > 1, sedatives were added: 0.05 mg/kg/dose of remimazolam for groups A, B, and C, and 0.5 mg/kg/dose of propofol for group D. Step 2: Dixon's up-and-down method was used to calculate the ED50 of remimazolam combined with alfentanil during hysteroscopic examination. MAIN RESULTS: The sedation success rates of the remimazolam groups were 88.46%, 94.23%, and 98.08%, respectively, compared to 96.15% in the propofol group, with no significant difference (P = .175). MAP in groups A and B was higher than in group D (P < .05), and significantly higher in group C than in group D (P = .0016). SpO2 values in groups A, B, and C were higher than in group D at T2 to T3 (P < .001). HR in groups A, B, and C was significantly higher than in group D (P < .001). The ED50 of remimazolam combined with alfentanil in hysteroscopy was 0.244 mg/kg, 95%CI (0.195-0.22) and ED95 was 0.282 mg/kg, 95%CI (0.261-1.619). CONCLUSION: In hysteroscopy, the sedative effect of remimazolam is like that of propofol, with 0.25 mg/kg remimazolam showing better safety and efficacy, and less impact on the respiratory and circulatory systems. Additionally, under the influence of alfentanil, the ED50 of remimazolam in hysteroscopy is 0.244 mg/kg, with no severe adverse reactions observed.

Comparison Between the Protective Effect of Isoflurane and Propofol on Myocardium During Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

OBJECTIVE: Intravenous non-volatile anaesthetics like propofol are commonly used in cardiac surgeries across several countries. Volatile anaesthetics like isoflurane may help in protecting the myocardium and minimize ischaemia-reperfusion injury. Hence, we did this review to compare the cardioprotective effect of isoflurane and propofol among patients undergoing coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG). METHODS: We conducted a search in the databases Medical Literature Analysis and Retrieval System Online (or MEDLINE), Embase, PubMed Central®, ScienceDirect, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library from inception until April 2021. We carried out a meta-analysis with random-effects model and reported pooled risk ratio (RR) or standardized mean difference (SMD) with 95% confidence interval (CI) depending on the type of outcome. RESULTS: We analysed 13 studies including 808 participants. Almost all were low-quality studies. For cardiac index, the pooled SMD was 0.14 (95% CI: -0.22 to 0.50); for cardiac troponin I, pooled SMD was 0.10 (95% CI: -0.28 to 0.48). For mortality, the RR was 3.00 (95% CI: 0.32 to 28.43); for MI, pooled RR was 1.58 (95% CI: 0.59 to 4.20); and for inotropic drug use, pooled RR was 1.04 (95% CI: 0.90 to 1.21). For length of intensive care unit stay, the pooled SMD was 0.13 (95% CI: -0.29 to 0.55), while pooled SMD for mechanical ventilation time was -0.02 (95% CI: -0.54 to 0.51). CONCLUSION: Isoflurane did not have significant cardioprotective effect compared to propofol following CABG. Hence, the anaesthetists need to check some viable alternatives to manage these patients and reduce the rate of postoperative complications.

Apnea during moderate to deep sedation using continuous infusion of remimazolam compared to propofol and dexmedetomidine: A retrospective observational study.

Remimazolam's rapid onset and offset make it an innovative sedative for use during regional anesthesia. However, its respiratory safety profile is not well understood. We compared the continuous infusion of remimazolam with commonly used sedatives, propofol and dexmedetomidine, after regional anesthesia. In this retrospective study, the incidence of apnea (>10 seconds) was assessed in patients who underwent orthopedic surgery under regional anesthesia and received moderate to deep sedation using continuous infusion of remimazolam (group R: 0.1 mg/kg in 2 minutes followed by 0.5 mg/kg/hr). The incidence was compared with that of propofol (group P: 2-3 µg/mL target-controlled infusion) and dexmedetomidine (group D: 1 µg/kg in 10 minutes followed by 0.4-1 µg/kg/hr). Propensity score weighted multivariable logistic regression model was utilized to determine the effects of the sedative agents on the incidence of apnea. A total of 634 (191, 278, and 165 in group R, P, and D) cases were included in the final analysis. The incidence of apnea was 63.9%, 67.3%, and 48.5% in group R, P, and D, respectively. The adjusted odds ratios for apnea were 2.33 (95% CI, 1.50 to 3.61) and 2.50 (95% CI, 1.63 to 3.85) in group R and P, compared to group D. The incidence of apnea in patients receiving moderate to deep sedation using continuous infusion of remimazolam with dosage suggested in the current study was over 60%. Therefore, careful titration and respiratory monitoring is warranted.

Restrictive use of Restraints and Delirium Duration in the Intensive Care Unit (R2D2-ICU): protocol for a French multicentre parallel-group open-label randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: Physical restraint (PR) is prescribed in patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation in the intensive care unit (ICU) to avoid unplanned removal of medical devices. However, it is associated with an increased risk of delirium. We hypothesise that a restrictive use of PR, as compared with a systematic use, could reduce the duration of delirium in ICU patients receiving invasive mechanical ventilation. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: The Restrictive use of Restraints and Delirium Duration in ICU (R2D2-ICU) study is a national multicentric, parallel-group, randomised (1:1) open-label, controlled, superiority trial, which will be conducted in 10 ICUs. A total of 422 adult patients requiring invasive mechanical ventilation for an expected duration of at least 48 hours and eligible for prescription of PR will be randomly allocated within 6 hours from intubation to either the restrictive PR use group or the systematic PR use group, until day 14, ICU discharge or death, whichever comes first. In both groups, PR will consist of the use of wrist straps. The primary endpoint will be delirium or coma-free days, defined as the number of days spent alive in the ICU without coma or delirium within the first 14 days after randomisation. Delirium will be assessed using the Confusion Assessment Method-ICU twice daily. Key secondary endpoints will encompass agitation episodes, opioid, propofol, benzodiazepine and antipsychotic drug exposure during the 14-day intervention period, along with a core outcome set of measures evaluated 90 days postrandomisation. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The R2D2-ICU study has been approved by the Comité de Protection des Personnes (CPP) ILE DE FRANCE III-PARIS (CPP19.09.06.37521) on June 10th, 2019). Participant recruitment started on 25 January 2021. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals and presented at conferences. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04273360.

Comparison of efficacy and safety of equivalent doses of remimazolam versus propofol for gastroscopy anesthesia in elderly patients.

Remimazolam, a novel intravenous anesthetic, has been proven to be safe and efficacious in the gastroscopy setting among the elderly. However, reports comparing the effectiveness and safety of using equivalent doses of remimazolam with propofol have not been seen. The aim of this study was to compare the sedation efficacy and safety of the 95% effective doses (ED95) of remimazolam versus propofol combined with sufentanil in the gastroscopy setting among the elderly. In the first step of this two-step study, a modified up-and-down method was used to calculate the ED95 of remimazolam and propofol when combined with 0.1 µg/kg sufentanil in inhibiting body movement of elderly patients undergoing gastroscopy. In the second step, ED95 of both agents calculated in the first step were administered, endpoints of efficacy, safety, and incidence of adverse events were compared. A total of 46 individuals completed the first step. The ED95 of remimazolam was 0.163 mg/kg (95% CI 0.160-0.170 mg/kg), and that of propofol was 1.042 mg/kg (95% CI 1.007-1.112 mg/kg). In the second step, 240 patients completed the trial. The anesthetic effective rates of the remimazolam group and the propofol group were 78% and 83%, respectively, with no statistical difference (P = 0.312). Patients in the remimazolam group had more stable circulatory functions (P < 0.0001) and a lower incidence of pain on injection (3.3% vs. 19.5%, P < 0.0001). The incidence of hypotension was low in the remimazolam versus propofol group (15.6% vs. 39.0%, P < 0.0001). Overall adverse event was low in the remimazolam versus propofol group (21.3% vs. 62.7%, P < 0.0001).In this study, we found that when anesthesia was administered to elderly gastroscopy patients based on 95% effective doses of remimazolam and propofol, remimazolam was as effective as propofol, but was safer with a lower incidence of adverse events.Study registration: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry, ChiCTR2000034234. Registered 29/06/2020, https://www.chictr.org.cn .

Volatile versus propofol sedation after cardiac valve surgery: a single-center prospective randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Optimal intensive care of patients undergoing valve surgery is a complex balancing act between sedation for monitoring and timely postoperative awakening. It remains unclear, if these requirements can be fulfilled by volatile sedations in intensive care medicine in an efficient manner. Therefore, this study aimed to assess the time to extubation and secondary the workload required. METHODS: We conducted a prospective randomized single-center trial at a tertiary university hospital to evaluate the postoperative management of open valve surgery patients. The study was randomized with regard to the use of volatile sedation compared to propofol sedation. Sedation was discontinued 60 min after admission for critical postoperative monitoring. RESULTS: We observed a significantly earlier extubation (91 ± 39 min vs. 167 ± 77 min; p < 0.001), eye-opening (86 ± 28 min vs. 151 ± 71 min; p < 0.001) and command compliance (93 ± 38 min vs. 164 ± 75 min; p < 0.001) using volatile sedation, which in turn was associated with a significantly increased workload of a median of 9:56 min (± 4:16 min) set-up time. We did not observe any differences in complications. Cardiopulmonary bypass time did not differ between the groups 101 (IQR 81; 113) versus 112 (IQR 79; 136) minutes p = 0.36. CONCLUSIONS: Using volatile sedation is associated with few minutes additional workload in assembling and enables a significantly accelerated evaluation of vulnerable patient groups. Volatile sedation has considerable advantages and emerges as a safe sedation technique in our vulnerable study population. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical trials registration (NCT04958668) was completed on 1 July 2021.

The effect of methylphenidate on anaesthesia recovery: An experimental study in pigs.

INTRODUCTION: Due to the lack of specific antagonists for general anaesthetics, the pharmacological stimulation of the arousal pathways might contribute to reduce recovery time. We aimed at assessing the effect of methylphenidate on physiological parameters, nociceptive withdrawal reflex thresholds, electroencephalographic variables and time of reappearance of reflexes in pigs undergoing propofol anaesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Two experiments have been performed. Five (experiment 1) and sixteen (experiment 2) healthy juvenile pigs were anaesthetised with propofol. In experiment 1, saline, methylphenidate 10 mg/kg or methylphenidate 20 mg/kg was administered intravenously at the end of propofol administration, using a cross-over design. In experiment 2, saline (n = 8) or methylphenidate 20 mg/kg (n = 8) was administered immediately after extubation. In both experiments, physiological parameters, nociceptive withdrawal reflex thresholds, electroencephalographic variables and time of reappearance of reflexes were assessed. Comparison among groups was performed using either the two-way repeated measures ANOVA followed by Bonferroni-Test or the t-test in case of parametric data, and either the Kruskal-Wallis test or the Mann-Whitney Rank Sum test in case of non-parametric data. A p value < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: No clinically relevant changes were observed in both experiments for physiological parameters, nociceptive withdrawal reflex thresholds and electroencephalographic variables. CONCLUSIONS: Methylphenidate does not shorten or modify anaesthesia recovery in pigs, when the sole propofol is administered.

The role of perioperative sedative anesthetics in preventing postoperative delirium: a systematic review and network-meta analysis including 6679 patients.

OBJECTIVE: Postoperative delirium is a common and debilitating complication that significantly affects patients and their families. The purpose of this study is to investigate whether there is an effective sedative that can prevent postoperative delirium while also examining the safety of using sedatives during the perioperative period. METHODS: The net-meta analysis was used to compare the incidence of postoperative delirium among four sedatives: sevoflurane, propofol, dexmedetomidine, and midazolam. Interventions were ranked according to their surface under the cumulative ranking curve (SUCRA). RESULTS: A total of 41 RCT studies involving 6679 patients were analyzed. Dexmedetomidine can effectively reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium than propofol (OR 0.47 95% CI 0.25-0.90), midazolam (OR 0.42 95% CI 0.17-1.00), normal saline (OR 0.42 95% CI 0.33-0.54) and sevoflurane (OR 0.39 95% CI 0.18-0.82). The saline group showed a significantly lower incidence of bradycardia compared to the group receiving dexmedetomidine (OR 0.55 95% CI 0.37-0.80). In cardiac surgery, midazolam (OR 3.34 95%CI 2.04-5.48) and normal saline (OR 2.27 95%CI 1.17-4.39) had a higher rate of postoperative delirium than dexmedetomidine, while in non-cardiac surgery, normal saline (OR 1.98 95%CI 1.44-2.71) was more susceptible to postoperative delirium than dexmedetomidine. CONCLUSION: Our analysis suggests that dexmedetomidine is an effective sedative in preventing postoperative delirium whether in cardiac surgery or non-cardiac surgery. The preventive effect of dexmedetomidine on postoperative delirium becomes more apparent with longer surgical and extubation times. However, it should be administered with caution as it was found to be associated with bradycardia.

Development of extended pharmacokinetic models for propofol based on measured blood and brain concentrations.

Propofol's pharmacokinetics have been extensively studied using human blood samples and applied to target-controlled infusion systems; however, information on its concentration in the brain remains scarce. Therefore, this study aimed to simultaneously measure propofol plasma and brain concentrations in patients who underwent awake craniotomy and establish new pharmacokinetic model. Fifty-seven patients with brain tumors or brain lesions who underwent awake craniotomy were sequentially assigned to model-building and validating groups. Plasma and brain (lobectomy or uncapping margins) samples were collected at five time-points. The concentration of propofol was measured using high-performance liquid chromatography. Population pharmacokinetic analysis was conducted through a nonlinear mixed-effects modeling program using a first-order conditional estimation method with interactions. Propofol's brain concentrations were higher than its plasma concentrations. The measured brain concentrations were higher than the effect site concentrations using the previous models. Extended models were constructed based on measured concentrations by incorporating the brain/plasma partition coefficient (Kp value). Extended models showed good predictive accuracy for brain concentrations in the validating group. The Kp value functioned as a factor explaining retention in the brain. Our new pharmacokinetic models and Kp value can predict propofol's brain and plasma concentrations, contributing to safer and more stable anesthesia.

Bolus administration of remimazolam was superior to midazolam for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing diagnostic bronchoscopy: A randomized, double-blind, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: To date, there is no standardized practice for the use of pharmacological sedatives during flexible bronchoscopy, particularly for elderly patients. This exploratory study aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of remimazolam at a single induced dose for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing diagnostic flexible bronchoscopy (DFB), and compare with midazolam, a commonly used sedative. METHODS: A total of 100 elderly patients (age range 65-80 yr; American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I-III) undergoing DFB were randomly allocated into 2 groups according to the sedatives used for induction: the remimazolam group and the midazolam group. Sedation induction was initiated by an intravenous bolus of remimazolam (0.135 mg/kg) or midazolam (0.045 mg/kg), respectively, both groups were combined with a high-dose of alfentanil (18 µg/kg), and supplemented with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) oxygen supply at a flow rate of 45 L/min. If the target depth of sedation was not achieved, propofol would be titrated as a rescue. The primary outcome was the success rate of sedation at a single induced dose to achieve target depth (Ramsay sedation score [RSS] = 4) during induction, intraoperative changes in vital signs, postoperative follow-up situation and incidence of post-bronchoscopy adverse events were evaluated as secondary outcomes. RESULTS: The success rate of sedation in the remimazolam group was significantly higher than that in the midazolam group (65.2% vs 39.6%, P = .013), while the incidence of extra sleep within 6 hours after procedure was lower in the remimazolam group as compared to the midazolam group (10.9% vs 31.3%, P = .016). No statistically significant differences were observed between the 2 groups regarding hemodynamic fluctuations, incidence of hypoxemia, and cough response during the procedure, as well as postoperative recall, willingness to undergo reexamination, and other post-bronchoscopy adverse events. CONCLUSIONS: Bolus administration of remimazolam offers advantages over midazolam for deep sedation in elderly patients undergoing DFB, in terms of a higher success rate of sedation and a lower incidence of extra sleep within 6 hours after procedure, though the safety profiles of both groups were favorable.

Effect of Remimazolam- versus Propofol-Based Total Intravenous General Anesthesia on Intraoperative Hemodynamic Stability for Major Spine Surgery in the Prone Position: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Background and Objectives: Remimazolam offers advantages over propofol in terms of hemodynamic stability. However, it remains unclear whether remimazolam-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) can reduce intraoperative hypotension compared to propofol-based TIVA, especially after prone positioning. In this study, we compared the effects of remimazolam- and propofol-based TIVA on intraoperative hemodynamic stability in patients undergoing surgery in the prone position. Materials and Methods: This study randomly assigned patients undergoing major spinal surgery in the prone position to the propofol or remimazolam group. Target-controlled infusion (2-3.5 µg/mL for induction and 2-3 µg/mL for maintenance) was used in the propofol group and continuous infusion (6 mg/kg/h for induction and 1-2 mg/kg/h for maintenance) was used in the remimazolam group; target-controlled infusion (3-5 ng/mL) of remifentanil was performed in both groups. The primary outcomes were the incidence of hypotensive episodes during the first hour after prone positioning. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of severe hypotension and the total amount of inotropic or vasopressor medication. Systolic and mean arterial pressure, heart rate, cardiac index and output, stroke volume, stroke volume variation, and pleth variability index were also evaluated. These variables were recorded per minute for the first 10 min after prone positioning, and every 10 min thereafter. Results: The study enrolled 94 patients (47 patients in each group). The incidence of hypotension or severe hypotension did not differ significantly between the two groups during the first hour after prone positioning. The total amount of ephedrine administered during the first hour after prone positioning was lesser (p = 0.020) and the mean arterial pressure during the initial 10 min after prone positioning was higher in the remimazolam group (p = 0.003). Conclusions: Our study uncovered no significant differences in the incidence of hypotension between remimazolam- and propofol-based TIVA in patients undergoing major spine surgery in prone position.

Propofol improves survival in a murine model of sepsis via inhibiting Rab5a-mediated intracellular trafficking of TLR4.

BACKGROUND: Propofol is a widely used anesthetic and sedative, which has been reported to exert an anti-inflammatory effect. TLR4 plays a critical role in coordinating the immuno-inflammatory response during sepsis. Whether propofol can act as an immunomodulator through regulating TLR4 is still unclear. Given its potential as a sepsis therapy, we investigated the mechanisms underlying the immunomodulatory activity of propofol. METHODS: The effects of propofol on TLR4 and Rab5a (a master regulator involved in intracellular trafficking of immune factors) were investigated in macrophage (from Rab5a-/- and WT mice) following treatment with lipopolysaccharide (LPS) or cecal ligation and puncture (CLP) in vitro and in vivo, and peripheral blood monocyte from sepsis patients and healthy volunteers. RESULTS: We showed that propofol reduced membrane TLR4 expression on macrophages in vitro and in vivo. Rab5a participated in TLR4 intracellular trafficking and both Rab5a expression and the interaction between Rab5a and TLR4 were inhibited by propofol. We also showed Rab5a upregulation in peripheral blood monocytes of septic patients, accompanied by increased TLR4 expression on the cell surface. Propofol downregulated the expression of Rab5a and TLR4 in these cells. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that Rab5a regulates intracellular trafficking of TLR4 and that propofol reduces membrane TLR4 expression on macrophages by targeting Rab5a. Our study not only reveals a novel mechanism for the immunomodulatory effect of propofol but also indicates that Rab5a may be a potential therapeutic target against sepsis.