Der Anaesthesist
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
[Cost aspects in anesthesia. Propofol versus isoflurane anesthesia].
Cost control is no longer an option, but a necessity. Propofol anaesthesia is expensive, however, the true differences in comparison to volatile anaesthetics (isoflurane) are not known. ⋯ A climate of cost-consciousness and cost-containment prevails at the present time. The costs of propofol and 'standard' isoflurane anaesthesia were without differences; however, isoflurane used in a low-flow system had the lowest cost in this study. Doubts are justified, however, as to whether the choice of anaesthetic agents may considerably lower the costs of an anaesthesia department.
-
Recently, two new halogenated volatile anaesthetics, sevoflurane and desflurane, have been approved for clinical use in Germany. Their low solubility in blood is the most important common property, and this represents the most obvious difference from the inhalational anaesthetics currently used. Extensive clinical and experimental evaluations have confirmed the superior pharmacokinetic properties predicted. ⋯ Nevertheless, potential side-effects may result from degradation in dry absorbents and subsequent release of CO, from its extreme pungency and irritating airway effects. Thus, desflurane is not recommended for induction of anaesthesia, especially in children. The tendency for desflurane transiently to stimulate sympathetic activity, especially at concentrations above 1.0 MAC, limits its application in patients with cardiac disease.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
[Ropivacaine for spinal anesthesia. A dose-finding study].
Several clinical studies have demonstrated the efficacy of ropivacaine in different regional anaesthesia techniques, e.g., epidural anaesthesia. However, the efficacy of ropivacaine for spinal anaesthesia has only been demonstrated in animal experiments up to now. The objective of this study was the investigation of the efficacy and appropriate dosage of isobaric ropivacaine for spinal anaesthesia in humans. ⋯ At concentrations of 0.5% and 0.75%, ropivacaine results in long-lasting spinal anaesthesia. (A
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical Trial
[Age-related correlation between EEG parameters and depth of anesthesia under propofol. Effect of fentanyl].
This study was designed to determine the relationship between the electroencephalogram (EEG) and clinical signs of depth of anaesthesia during induction of anaesthesia by slow infusion of propofol (18 mg/kg.h). ⋯ Different clinical signs corresponding to different levels of depth of anaesthesia could be differentiated by their EEG parameters. The EEG stage allowed better differentiation of the clinical conditions than the single-parameter EEG derivatives median and SEF. The results of this study show that EEG monitoring provides information about depth of anaesthesia.
-
The separation of whole blood into components is the state-of-the-art in transfusion of allogeneic blood. The main reasons are the negative effects of the buffy coat and the need for FFP. Nevertheless, especially in Germany whole blood is being rejected more and more even as autologous blood. However, most of the negative effects of the buffy coat do not apply to autologous blood. Additionally, these patients usually do not develop coagulation disorders and therefore do not need plasma as a hemostatic component. On the other hand, separation into components of autologous blood leads to an increase of costs and to logistic problems that restrict autologous blood predeposit to a few institutions. Therefore, we have reviewed the literature in order to find a scientific basis for this. ⋯ Whole blood (resuspended in CPDA-1) and red cell units (stabilized in CPDA-1 or additive solutions) with a different buffy coat or leucocyte content have comparable pH values and red cell 2,3-DPG and ATP concentrations at the end of the approved storage time. The potassium load of a whole blood unit appears to be higher than red cell concentrates, but this is to some extent caused by the higher plasma content of whole blood and is not thought to be a clinically relevant problem for patients receiving only a few units. A number of studies demonstrate that dependent upon the leucocyte content of a red cell unit, leucocyte metabolites and enzymes are released and accumulate during storage. A detrimental influence on the integrity of the red cell membrane was found in several in vitro studies. Nevertheless, a significant improvement in red cell survival by leucocyte reduction was detected by only one group. Undoubtedly, nonhemolytic febrile transfusion reactions (NHFTR) are generally caused by an antibody-antigen interaction due to the transfusion of allogeneic buffy coat. On the other hand, there is some evidence that non-specific immunological mechanisms such as the release of histamine or cytokines are also capable of causing NHFTR. Thus, these reactions are expected to occur in autologous blood transfusion. However, so far, there are no data about the frequency and severity of these reactions and whether they are more likely to emerge after transfusion of blood units with a particular preparation. Blood transfusions can cause septic complications due to bacterial contamination of the transfused units. These fatal but rare complications may be reduced by pre-storage filtration of blood, but there is no indication that buffy coat reduction is effective. Three cases with septic complications have been reported after autologous transfusion, in two of which red cell concentrates (at least one was free of buffy coat) had been used. Thus, there is no justification for the conclusion that the risk of septic complications is increased by transfusion of whole blood. After all, whole blood and red cell concentrates exhibit only minor differences in relevant in vitro parameters. Hence, a higher incidence of adverse effects following the transfusion of autologous whole blood compared to autologous red cell concentrations is unlikely. Therefore, the 24 h in vivo recovery is considered to be the most valid criterion to assess the quality of red cell preparations.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED)