Anaesthesia
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
The effect of remifentanil on propofol requirements to achieve loss of response to command vs. loss of response to pain.
When providing total intravenous anaesthesia, careful selection of end-points is required in titrating dose to effect during induction. Although propofol and remifentanil have predominantly different pharmacodynamic effects, they are seen to interact in achieving loss of consciousness and analgesia. To highlight these differences, we performed a double-blind, randomised controlled trial, comparing one group of patients receiving propofol alone (n = 42) with another group receiving remifentanil plus propofol (n = 46) as a target-controlled infusion of remifentanil (Minto; 3 ng.ml-1 ). ⋯ The effect-site concentration of propofol at which 50% of patients lost tactile/verbal response was 2.9 μg.ml-1 in the propofol only group and 2.4 μg.ml-1 in the remifentanil with propofol group. In contrast, loss of pain response occurred at 4.4 μg.ml-1 in the propofol group, and 2.7 μg.ml-1 in the remifentanil with propofol group, with correspondingly lower bispectral index values. Judicious use of analgesia in total intravenous anaesthesia can have a propofol-sparing effect and potentially minimise the suppression of brain electrical activity. .
-
Airway management in patients with periglottic tumour is a high-risk procedure with potentially serious consequences. There is no consensus on how best to secure the airway in this group of patients. We conducted a feasibility study of awake tracheal intubation using a King Vision® videolaryngoscope with a channelled blade in a cohort of 25 patients, with a periglottic tumour requiring diagnostic or radical surgery. ⋯ Traces of blood in the airway were observed in 4/25 (16%, 95%CI 6-35%) patients. Although airway management in this group of patients was expected to be difficult, successful awake intubation with the King Vision videolaryngoscope was achieved in the majority of patients within less than a minute. This study highlights a number of potential advantages of awake videolaryngoscope-assisted intubation over other awake methods of securing the airway in patients with upper airway obstruction due to periglottic mass.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
Difficult tracheal tube passage and subglottic airway injury during intubation with the GlideScope(®) videolaryngoscope: a randomised, controlled comparison of three tracheal tubes.
Difficulty during placement of the tracheal tube is a known problem when intubating with the GlideScope® , which may lead to subglottic airway injury. This randomised, controlled clinical trial was designed to compare the resistance to passage of PVC (polyvinyl chloride), reinforced or BlockBuster tracheal tubes during intubation with the GlideScope. Secondary outcomes included the time taken to intubate and assessment of subglottic airway injury. ⋯ BlockBuster). Subglottic airway injury, assessed using a fibreoptic bronchoscope after extubation, was higher with the PVC tube (p < 0.001) and the reinforced tube (p = 0.012) compared with the BlockBuster tube. We conclude that the BlockBuster tracheal tube is a better choice for orotracheal intubation with the GlideScope than PVC or reinforced tubes.