• B Bein, P Turowski, J Renner, R Hanss, M Steinfath, J Scholz, and P H Tonner.
• Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Schwanenweg 21, D-24105 Kiel, Germany. bein@anaesthesie.uni-kiel.de
• Anaesthesia. 2005 Oct 1; 60 (10): 960-7.

AbstractXenon, a noble gas with anaesthetic and analgesic properties, has gained renewed interest due to its favourable physical properties which allow a rapid emergence from anaesthesia. However, high costs limit its use to a subset of patients who may benefit from xenon, thereby offsetting its costs. To date, there are only limited data available on the performance of xenon in high risk patients. We studied 39 patients with ASA physical status III undergoing aortic surgery. The patients were randomly assigned to either a xenon (Xe, n = 20) or a TIVA (T, n = 19) group. Global cardiac performance and myocardial contractility were assessed using transoesophageal echocardiography, and myocardial cell damage with troponin T and CK-MB. Echocardiographic measurements were made prior to xenon administration, following xenon administration, and after clamping of the abdominal aorta, after declamping and at corresponding time points in the TIVA group. Laboratory values were determined repeatedly for up to 72 h. Data were analysed using two-way anova factoring for time and anaesthetic agent or with ancova comparing linear regression lines. No significant differences were found in global myocardial performance, myocardial contractility or laboratory values at any time during the study period. Mean (SEM) duration of stay on the ICU (xenon: 38 +/- 46 vs. TIVA 25 +/- 15 h) or in hospital (xenon: 14 +/- 12 vs. TIVA 10 +/- 6 days) did not differ significantly between the groups. Although xenon has previously been shown to exert superior haemodynamic stability, we were unable to demonstrate an advantage of xenon-based anaesthesia compared to TIVA in high risk surgical patients.

25 keywords...

hide…