World journal of methodology · 2026
Comparison of propofol alone vs propofol-phenylephrine combination for intraoperative hemodynamic stability in glioma surgery.
СтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Thotungal Rhea, Kaushal Ashutosh, Agrawal Amit, Jain Anuj, Waindeskar Vaishali, Haldar Rudrashish, Lokho Pfokreni
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Propofol is widely used for induction in glioma surgery for its neuroprotective effects and favorable recovery profile. However, its dose-dependent hypotension is a major limitation in procedures requiring stable cerebral perfusion.
AIM: To compare the efficacy of propofol vs propofol-phenylephrine (PPE) combination in maintaining hemodynamic stability in patients undergoing glioma surgery.
METHODS: Ninety American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II patients scheduled for elective glioma surgery were randomized to receive either propofol (group P) or a PPE admixture (group PPE). Induction was performed with slow titration of the study drug until loss of verbal response and Bispectral index < 60, followed by a continuous infusion (50 μg/kg/minute) until skin closure. Hemodynamic parameters [mean arterial pressure (MAP), systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate] were recorded at baseline, during induction, immediately after intubation, and at predefined intraoperative time points. The incidence of hypotension, vasopressor and esmolol use, and brain relaxation scores were compared.
RESULTS: Group PPE demonstrated significantly better preservation of MAP, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate throughout the peri-induction and intraoperative periods (P < 0.05). The mean maximum MAP reduction during induction was greater in group P compared with group PPE (19.7 mmHg vs 12.5 mmHg; P < 0.01). Hypotensive episodes were significantly more frequent in group P than in group PPE (84.4% vs 6.7%; P < 0.001). Rescue phenylephrine requirements were markedly lower in group PPE (P < 0.001). Esmolol use and brain relaxation scores were comparable between groups.
CONCLUSION: Adding phenylephrine to propofol for induction and maintenance provides superior hemodynamic stability without compromising brain relaxation in glioma surgery.
AIM: To compare the efficacy of propofol vs propofol-phenylephrine (PPE) combination in maintaining hemodynamic stability in patients undergoing glioma surgery.
METHODS: Ninety American Society of Anesthesiologists I-II patients scheduled for elective glioma surgery were randomized to receive either propofol (group P) or a PPE admixture (group PPE). Induction was performed with slow titration of the study drug until loss of verbal response and Bispectral index < 60, followed by a continuous infusion (50 μg/kg/minute) until skin closure. Hemodynamic parameters [mean arterial pressure (MAP), systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate] were recorded at baseline, during induction, immediately after intubation, and at predefined intraoperative time points. The incidence of hypotension, vasopressor and esmolol use, and brain relaxation scores were compared.
RESULTS: Group PPE demonstrated significantly better preservation of MAP, systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate throughout the peri-induction and intraoperative periods (P < 0.05). The mean maximum MAP reduction during induction was greater in group P compared with group PPE (19.7 mmHg vs 12.5 mmHg; P < 0.01). Hypotensive episodes were significantly more frequent in group P than in group PPE (84.4% vs 6.7%; P < 0.001). Rescue phenylephrine requirements were markedly lower in group PPE (P < 0.001). Esmolol use and brain relaxation scores were comparable between groups.
CONCLUSION: Adding phenylephrine to propofol for induction and maintenance provides superior hemodynamic stability without compromising brain relaxation in glioma surgery.