-
Pediatr Crit Care Me · Jan 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialComparison of intermittent versus continuous infusion of propofol for elective oncology procedures in children.
- Scott M Klein, Gabriel J Hauser, Barry D Anderson, Aziza T Shad, Joseph E Gootenberg, Heidi J Dalton, and James H Hertzog.
- Division of Pediatric Critical Care and Pulmonary Medicine, Department of Pediatrics, Georgetown University Medical Center, Washington, DC 20007, USA.
- Pediatr Crit Care Me. 2003 Jan 1; 4 (1): 78-82.
ObjectiveTo compare the effects of administering propofol as a continuous infusion vs. bolus dosing in children undergoing ambulatory oncologic procedures in the pediatric intensive care unit (PICU).DesignProspective, randomized study.SettingTertiary PICU in a university hospital.PatientsAmbulatory oncology patients scheduled for diagnostic or therapeutic procedures with propofol anesthesia in the PICU were eligible for enrollment.InterventionsPatients were randomly assigned to receive either continuous infusion or bolus administration of propofol in a protocol-driven manner. All patients received an initial bolus of 1.5 mg/kg, with additional 0.5 mg/kg doses until complete induction. Continuous infusions were started at 0.1 mg/kg/min and, if needed, increased 20% after a bolus of 0.5 mg/kg. Bolus group patients were given doses of 0.5 mg/kg if needed. Ramsay scores of < 5 were used as criteria for additional dosing.Measurements And Main ResultsEighteen patients undergoing 40 separate procedures were enrolled during the study period. Twenty procedures each were performed with continuous or bolus administration of propofol. No differences were present between groups in demographic characteristics, induction dose and time, procedure and recovery times, or adverse events. All patients had adequate anesthesia and favorable satisfaction scores. More boluses were needed in the bolus group (8.5 +/- 4.6 vs. 5.4 +/- 2.9; p < .05). Average systolic blood pressure decreased more in the continuous infusion group (26.4% +/- 12 vs. 19.3% +/- 10; p < .05). Total propofol dose was higher in the continuous infusion group (8.0 mg/kg +/- 3.8 vs. 5.7 mg/kg +/- 2.4; p < .05).ConclusionBoth continuous and bolus administration of propofol provided conditions for conducting oncologic procedures that were satisfying to patients, their families, and physicians. Continuous infusions were associated with a larger total dose and greater decreases in systolic blood pressure. Physician preference is likely to dictate which method is used.
Notes
Knowledge, pearl, summary or comment to share?You can also include formatting, links, images and footnotes in your notes
- Simple formatting can be added to notes, such as
*italics*
,_underline_
or**bold**
. - Superscript can be denoted by
<sup>text</sup>
and subscript<sub>text</sub>
. - Numbered or bulleted lists can be created using either numbered lines
1. 2. 3.
, hyphens-
or asterisks*
. - Links can be included with:
[my link to pubmed](http://pubmed.com)
- Images can be included with:
![alt text](https://bestmedicaljournal.com/study_graph.jpg "Image Title Text")
- For footnotes use
[^1](This is a footnote.)
inline. - Or use an inline reference
[^1]
to refer to a longer footnote elseweher in the document[^1]: This is a long footnote.
.