• J Zattoni, A Rossi, F Cella, C Ori, E Facco, G P Giron, N Stocchetti, A Chieregato, T Serioli, P Zuccoli, A Parma, and R Trazzi.
• Department of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care, University of Genova.
• Minerva Anestesiol. 2000 Jul 1; 66 (7-8): 531-7; discussion 537-9.

BackgroundThe 2% formulation of the intravenous anaesthetic agent, propofol (Diprivan), delivers half the amount of lipid compared with the original 1% formulation. This may provide an acceptable alternative for patients who have an impaired ability to metabolise lipids.MethodsThis study was a multicentre, randomised, open comparison of parallel groups. Seventy-three adult patients undergoing elective craniotomy in neurosurgery were randomised to receive either propofol 1% (10 mg/ml) or propofol 2% (20 mg/ml) for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia.ResultsAnalysis of induction time (199 s, 1%; 202 s, 2%; p > 0.05) and induction dose (1.13 mg/kg, 1.12 mg/kg; p > 0.05) shows that propofol 1% and propofol 2% are pharmacodynamically equivalent. Both formulations were similar regarding overall administration rates, recovery times, haemodynamic variables and tolerability. Plasma triglyceride levels, were lower in the propofol 2% group compared with the propofol 1% group, and significantly lower (p < 0.05) from 1 to 4 hours after induction.ConclusionsWe conclude that propofol 2% is as effective and as well-tolerated as propofol 1% for anaesthesia and is an acceptable alternative to propofol 1% in patients undergoing elective craniotomy in neurosurgery. The lower lipid load suggests it may be of particular benefit to patients with disorders of lipid metabolism.

16 keywords...

hide…