Anaesthesia
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Bronchial mucus transport velocity in patients receiving anaesthesia with propofol and morphine or propofol and remifentanil.
In vitro morphine does not reduce cilia beat frequency, a key factor determining bronchial mucus transport velocity. There are no reports about the effect of remifentanil on bronchial mucus transport. We compared the bronchial mucus transport velocity in patients having total intravenous anaesthesia with either propofol and morphine, or propofol and remifentanil. ⋯ Compared with morphine, bronchial mucus transport velocity was significantly reduced in patients receiving remifentanil (morphine mean (SD) 9.2 (5.8) vs remifentanil 4.2 (3.0) mm.min(-1), p = 0.028). Anaesthesia with remifentanil may lead to significantly impaired bronchociliary clearance in comparison to morphine. This could have clinical implications, in particular in patients at risk.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Propofol/remifentanil vs sevoflurane/remifentanil for long lasting surgical procedures: a randomised controlled trial.
We compared the haemodynamics, emergence and recovery characteristics of total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol/remifentanil with sevoflurane/remifentanil anaesthesia, under bispectral index guidance, in 103 patients undergoing surgical procedures lasting > 3.5 h. Time to tracheal extubation was significantly shorter in the propofol group than in the sevoflurane group (mean (SD) 8.3 (3.5) min vs 10.8 (4.6) min, respectively; p = 0.0024), but further recovery was comparable in both groups. ⋯ During and after anaesthesia of comparable depth for long lasting surgical procedures, both propofol/remifentanil and sevoflurane/remifentanil enable haemodynamic stability and fast emergence. The shorter time to extubation in the propofol group does not offer a relevant clinical advantage.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
The effect of caudal block on functional residual capacity and ventilation homogeneity in healthy children.
Caudal block results in a motor blockade that can reduce abdominal wall tension. This could interact with the balance between chest wall and lung recoil pressure and tension of the diaphragm, which determines the static resting volume of the lung. On this rationale, we hypothesised that caudal block causes an increase in functional residual capacity and ventilation distribution in anaesthetised children. ⋯ In both groups, parameters of ventilation distribution were consistent with the changes in functional residual capacity. Caudal block resulted in a significant increase in functional residual capacity and improvement in ventilation homogeneity in comparison with the control group. This indicates that caudal block might have a beneficial effect on gas exchange in anaesthetised, spontaneously breathing preschool-aged children with healthy lungs.