Propofol and Fentanyl Take Longer for Induction of Anesthesia in Aortic Regurgitation: A Case-Controlled Prospective Study

Objectives This study was conducted to determine if induction time of anesthesia in patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) is different from patients with a normal aortic valve (AV). Design A prospective, case-control study. Setting A single institutional study conducted in a tertiary care teaching...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:
Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia 2014-04, Vol.28 (2), p.290-294
Hauptverfasser: Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC, Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS, Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC
Format: Artikel
Sprache:eng
Schlagworte:
Online-Zugang:Volltext
Tags: Tag hinzufügen
Keine Tags, Fügen Sie den ersten Tag hinzu!
container_end_page 294
container_issue 2
container_start_page 290
container_title Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia
container_volume 28
creator Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC
Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS
Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC
description Objectives This study was conducted to determine if induction time of anesthesia in patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) is different from patients with a normal aortic valve (AV). Design A prospective, case-control study. Setting A single institutional study conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Participants Twenty-four male patients scheduled for cardiac surgery, group I (n = 12) patients with competent AV and group 2 (n = 12) with severe AR. Interventions General anesthesia was induced by intravenous infusion of propofol and fentanyl. Measurements and Main Results Continuous measurements of heart rate, intra-arterial blood pressure, and bispectral index were recorded. Induction doses of propofol and fentanyl were analyzed and compared. There was significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of induction time of anesthesia (mean±SD 308±68.2 seconds in group 1 v 445±97.9 seconds in group 2). The patients in group 2 (AR) required significantly larger doses of propofol (0.91±0.40 mg/kg) than the patients in group 1 (0.49±0.17 mg/kg). Similarly, fentanyl dose was increased in the group 2 patients (20.8±15.9 µg/kg) compared with the group 1 patients (9.2±2.9 µg/kg). Conclusion The authors concluded that there was a significant prolongation of the induction time of anesthesia and the need of larger doses of propofol and fentanyl by slow intravenous infusion regimen in patients with AR compared with patients with a competent aortic valve.
doi_str_mv 10.1053/j.jvca.2013.05.038
format Article
fullrecord <record><control><sourceid>proquest_cross</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1508421100</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><els_id>1_s2_0_S1053077013003133</els_id><sourcerecordid>1508421100</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-14f14b062ea964dacd1610b6146ce00315dec3d6f66d247b5d9f81d2b115ce33</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNp9kcGO0zAQhi0EYpfCC3BAPnJJmLGTtIsQUlWxsFIlENu75diT4mxqFzupVJ4eR104cOBkH_7_88xnxl4jlAi1fNeX_cnoUgDKEuoS5OoJu8ZaimJVCfE033OqgOUSrtiLlHoAxLpePmdXooKmEiCu2a9vMRxDFwauveW35EftzwPf6Qfi2-D3FHkXIr_zdjKjC56Hjq89pfEHJae583wd4ugM_077Ke7dqOfUe77mG52o2AQ_xjAMZHl-KB0pQ07E78fJnl-yZ50eEr16PBdsd_tpt_lSbL9-vtust4Wp5HIssOqwaqERpG-aympjsUFoG6waQwASa0tG2qZrGiuqZVvbm26FVrR5WUNSLtjbC_YYw88pT64OLhkaBu0pTElhDVkXYkYtmLhETZ41RerUMbqDjmeFoGaZqlezcjUrV1CrrDyX3jzyp_ZA9m_lj-Mc-HAJUF7y5CiqZBx5Q9bF7EPZ4P7P__hP3QzOO6OHBzpT6sMUfdanUCWhQN3PnPnPUc5ypJS_AcHMp8U</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Aggregation Database</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>1508421100</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Propofol and Fentanyl Take Longer for Induction of Anesthesia in Aortic Regurgitation: A Case-Controlled Prospective Study</title><source>MEDLINE</source><source>Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals</source><creator>Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC ; Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS ; Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC</creator><creatorcontrib>Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC ; Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS ; Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC</creatorcontrib><description>Objectives This study was conducted to determine if induction time of anesthesia in patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) is different from patients with a normal aortic valve (AV). Design A prospective, case-control study. Setting A single institutional study conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Participants Twenty-four male patients scheduled for cardiac surgery, group I (n = 12) patients with competent AV and group 2 (n = 12) with severe AR. Interventions General anesthesia was induced by intravenous infusion of propofol and fentanyl. Measurements and Main Results Continuous measurements of heart rate, intra-arterial blood pressure, and bispectral index were recorded. Induction doses of propofol and fentanyl were analyzed and compared. There was significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of induction time of anesthesia (mean±SD 308±68.2 seconds in group 1 v 445±97.9 seconds in group 2). The patients in group 2 (AR) required significantly larger doses of propofol (0.91±0.40 mg/kg) than the patients in group 1 (0.49±0.17 mg/kg). Similarly, fentanyl dose was increased in the group 2 patients (20.8±15.9 µg/kg) compared with the group 1 patients (9.2±2.9 µg/kg). Conclusion The authors concluded that there was a significant prolongation of the induction time of anesthesia and the need of larger doses of propofol and fentanyl by slow intravenous infusion regimen in patients with AR compared with patients with a competent aortic valve.</description><identifier>ISSN: 1053-0770</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1532-8422</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2013.05.038</identifier><identifier>PMID: 24064202</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Adult ; Aged ; Anesthesia &amp; Perioperative Care ; Anesthesia, General ; Anesthesia, Intravenous - adverse effects ; Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods ; Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration &amp; dosage ; Anesthetics, Intravenous - adverse effects ; aortic regurgitation ; Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery ; bispectral index ; Body Weight - physiology ; Case-Control Studies ; Consciousness Monitors ; Coronary Artery Bypass ; Critical Care ; fentanyl ; Fentanyl - administration &amp; dosage ; Fentanyl - adverse effects ; Hemodynamics - physiology ; Humans ; induction time ; Kaplan-Meier Estimate ; Male ; Middle Aged ; Monitoring, Intraoperative ; propofol ; Propofol - administration &amp; dosage ; Propofol - adverse effects ; Prospective Studies</subject><ispartof>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia, 2014-04, Vol.28 (2), p.290-294</ispartof><rights>Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>2014 Elsevier Inc.</rights><rights>Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><citedby>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-14f14b062ea964dacd1610b6146ce00315dec3d6f66d247b5d9f81d2b115ce33</citedby><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-14f14b062ea964dacd1610b6146ce00315dec3d6f66d247b5d9f81d2b115ce33</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S1053077013003133$$EHTML$$P50$$Gelsevier$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>314,776,780,3537,27901,27902,65306</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/24064202$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC</creatorcontrib><title>Propofol and Fentanyl Take Longer for Induction of Anesthesia in Aortic Regurgitation: A Case-Controlled Prospective Study</title><title>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia</title><addtitle>J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth</addtitle><description>Objectives This study was conducted to determine if induction time of anesthesia in patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) is different from patients with a normal aortic valve (AV). Design A prospective, case-control study. Setting A single institutional study conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Participants Twenty-four male patients scheduled for cardiac surgery, group I (n = 12) patients with competent AV and group 2 (n = 12) with severe AR. Interventions General anesthesia was induced by intravenous infusion of propofol and fentanyl. Measurements and Main Results Continuous measurements of heart rate, intra-arterial blood pressure, and bispectral index were recorded. Induction doses of propofol and fentanyl were analyzed and compared. There was significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of induction time of anesthesia (mean±SD 308±68.2 seconds in group 1 v 445±97.9 seconds in group 2). The patients in group 2 (AR) required significantly larger doses of propofol (0.91±0.40 mg/kg) than the patients in group 1 (0.49±0.17 mg/kg). Similarly, fentanyl dose was increased in the group 2 patients (20.8±15.9 µg/kg) compared with the group 1 patients (9.2±2.9 µg/kg). Conclusion The authors concluded that there was a significant prolongation of the induction time of anesthesia and the need of larger doses of propofol and fentanyl by slow intravenous infusion regimen in patients with AR compared with patients with a competent aortic valve.</description><subject>Adult</subject><subject>Aged</subject><subject>Anesthesia &amp; Perioperative Care</subject><subject>Anesthesia, General</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Intravenous - adverse effects</subject><subject>Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Anesthetics, Intravenous - adverse effects</subject><subject>aortic regurgitation</subject><subject>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery</subject><subject>bispectral index</subject><subject>Body Weight - physiology</subject><subject>Case-Control Studies</subject><subject>Consciousness Monitors</subject><subject>Coronary Artery Bypass</subject><subject>Critical Care</subject><subject>fentanyl</subject><subject>Fentanyl - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Fentanyl - adverse effects</subject><subject>Hemodynamics - physiology</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>induction time</subject><subject>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</subject><subject>Male</subject><subject>Middle Aged</subject><subject>Monitoring, Intraoperative</subject><subject>propofol</subject><subject>Propofol - administration &amp; dosage</subject><subject>Propofol - adverse effects</subject><subject>Prospective Studies</subject><issn>1053-0770</issn><issn>1532-8422</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2014</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>EIF</sourceid><recordid>eNp9kcGO0zAQhi0EYpfCC3BAPnJJmLGTtIsQUlWxsFIlENu75diT4mxqFzupVJ4eR104cOBkH_7_88xnxl4jlAi1fNeX_cnoUgDKEuoS5OoJu8ZaimJVCfE033OqgOUSrtiLlHoAxLpePmdXooKmEiCu2a9vMRxDFwauveW35EftzwPf6Qfi2-D3FHkXIr_zdjKjC56Hjq89pfEHJae583wd4ugM_077Ke7dqOfUe77mG52o2AQ_xjAMZHl-KB0pQ07E78fJnl-yZ50eEr16PBdsd_tpt_lSbL9-vtust4Wp5HIssOqwaqERpG-aympjsUFoG6waQwASa0tG2qZrGiuqZVvbm26FVrR5WUNSLtjbC_YYw88pT64OLhkaBu0pTElhDVkXYkYtmLhETZ41RerUMbqDjmeFoGaZqlezcjUrV1CrrDyX3jzyp_ZA9m_lj-Mc-HAJUF7y5CiqZBx5Q9bF7EPZ4P7P__hP3QzOO6OHBzpT6sMUfdanUCWhQN3PnPnPUc5ypJS_AcHMp8U</recordid><startdate>20140401</startdate><enddate>20140401</enddate><creator>Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC</creator><creator>Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS</creator><creator>Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>7X8</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20140401</creationdate><title>Propofol and Fentanyl Take Longer for Induction of Anesthesia in Aortic Regurgitation: A Case-Controlled Prospective Study</title><author>Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC ; Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS ; Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c437t-14f14b062ea964dacd1610b6146ce00315dec3d6f66d247b5d9f81d2b115ce33</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2014</creationdate><topic>Adult</topic><topic>Aged</topic><topic>Anesthesia &amp; Perioperative Care</topic><topic>Anesthesia, General</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Intravenous - adverse effects</topic><topic>Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Anesthetics, Intravenous - adverse effects</topic><topic>aortic regurgitation</topic><topic>Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery</topic><topic>bispectral index</topic><topic>Body Weight - physiology</topic><topic>Case-Control Studies</topic><topic>Consciousness Monitors</topic><topic>Coronary Artery Bypass</topic><topic>Critical Care</topic><topic>fentanyl</topic><topic>Fentanyl - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Fentanyl - adverse effects</topic><topic>Hemodynamics - physiology</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>induction time</topic><topic>Kaplan-Meier Estimate</topic><topic>Male</topic><topic>Middle Aged</topic><topic>Monitoring, Intraoperative</topic><topic>propofol</topic><topic>Propofol - administration &amp; dosage</topic><topic>Propofol - adverse effects</topic><topic>Prospective Studies</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><jtitle>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Nath, Soumya S., MD, PDCC</au><au>Tripathi, Mukesh, MD, MNAMS</au><au>Banerjee, Sudipto, MD, PDCC</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Propofol and Fentanyl Take Longer for Induction of Anesthesia in Aortic Regurgitation: A Case-Controlled Prospective Study</atitle><jtitle>Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia</jtitle><addtitle>J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth</addtitle><date>2014-04-01</date><risdate>2014</risdate><volume>28</volume><issue>2</issue><spage>290</spage><epage>294</epage><pages>290-294</pages><issn>1053-0770</issn><eissn>1532-8422</eissn><abstract>Objectives This study was conducted to determine if induction time of anesthesia in patients with aortic regurgitation (AR) is different from patients with a normal aortic valve (AV). Design A prospective, case-control study. Setting A single institutional study conducted in a tertiary care teaching hospital. Participants Twenty-four male patients scheduled for cardiac surgery, group I (n = 12) patients with competent AV and group 2 (n = 12) with severe AR. Interventions General anesthesia was induced by intravenous infusion of propofol and fentanyl. Measurements and Main Results Continuous measurements of heart rate, intra-arterial blood pressure, and bispectral index were recorded. Induction doses of propofol and fentanyl were analyzed and compared. There was significant difference between the 2 groups in terms of induction time of anesthesia (mean±SD 308±68.2 seconds in group 1 v 445±97.9 seconds in group 2). The patients in group 2 (AR) required significantly larger doses of propofol (0.91±0.40 mg/kg) than the patients in group 1 (0.49±0.17 mg/kg). Similarly, fentanyl dose was increased in the group 2 patients (20.8±15.9 µg/kg) compared with the group 1 patients (9.2±2.9 µg/kg). Conclusion The authors concluded that there was a significant prolongation of the induction time of anesthesia and the need of larger doses of propofol and fentanyl by slow intravenous infusion regimen in patients with AR compared with patients with a competent aortic valve.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>24064202</pmid><doi>10.1053/j.jvca.2013.05.038</doi><tpages>5</tpages></addata></record>
fulltext fulltext
identifier ISSN: 1053-0770
ispartof Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia, 2014-04, Vol.28 (2), p.290-294
issn 1053-0770
1532-8422
language eng
recordid cdi_proquest_miscellaneous_1508421100
source MEDLINE; Elsevier ScienceDirect Journals
subjects Adult
Aged
Anesthesia & Perioperative Care
Anesthesia, General
Anesthesia, Intravenous - adverse effects
Anesthesia, Intravenous - methods
Anesthetics, Intravenous - administration & dosage
Anesthetics, Intravenous - adverse effects
aortic regurgitation
Aortic Valve Insufficiency - surgery
bispectral index
Body Weight - physiology
Case-Control Studies
Consciousness Monitors
Coronary Artery Bypass
Critical Care
fentanyl
Fentanyl - administration & dosage
Fentanyl - adverse effects
Hemodynamics - physiology
Humans
induction time
Kaplan-Meier Estimate
Male
Middle Aged
Monitoring, Intraoperative
propofol
Propofol - administration & dosage
Propofol - adverse effects
Prospective Studies
title Propofol and Fentanyl Take Longer for Induction of Anesthesia in Aortic Regurgitation: A Case-Controlled Prospective Study
url https://sfx.bib-bvb.de/sfx_tum?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-02-09T02%3A43%3A19IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-proquest_cross&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Propofol%20and%20Fentanyl%20Take%20Longer%20for%20Induction%20of%20Anesthesia%20in%20Aortic%20Regurgitation:%20A%20Case-Controlled%20Prospective%20Study&rft.jtitle=Journal%20of%20cardiothoracic%20and%20vascular%20anesthesia&rft.au=Nath,%20Soumya%20S.,%20MD,%20PDCC&rft.date=2014-04-01&rft.volume=28&rft.issue=2&rft.spage=290&rft.epage=294&rft.pages=290-294&rft.issn=1053-0770&rft.eissn=1532-8422&rft_id=info:doi/10.1053/j.jvca.2013.05.038&rft_dat=%3Cproquest_cross%3E1508421100%3C/proquest_cross%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&disable_directlink=true&sfx.directlink=off&sfx.report_link=0&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=1508421100&rft_id=info:pmid/24064202&rft_els_id=1_s2_0_S1053077013003133&rfr_iscdi=true