Drug design, development and therapy · 2025
Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine (1.0 mg/Kg) on Propofol ED50 and ED95 for Successful Double-Lumen Laryngeal Mask Airway Placement in Hysteroscopy Patients: A Randomized Controlled Trial.
СтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Zhang Jingwen, Li Jiaxing, Ni Juan
Аннотация
PURPOSE: It has been demonstrated that administration of intravenous lidocaine promotes laryngeal mask airway (LMA) placement. This research aimed to evaluate the effect of intravenous lidocaine at a dosage of 1.0 mg/kg on the 50% and 95% effective doses (ED50 and ED95) of propofol required for the successful placement of a double-lumen LMA during propofol-fentanyl-based anesthesia in patients undergoing hysteroscopy.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty patients who underwent hysteroscopy were screened and randomly enrolled in either lidocaine group (group L, n=40) or the saline group (group S, n=40). The propofol induction dose per patient was established via an up-and-down sequential method. Under the guidance of bispectral index (BIS) value monitoring, the propofol doses required for the successful placement of a double-lumen LMA in 50% and 95% of the patients in the two groups (ED50 and ED95) were compared. The total propofol induction dose, awakening duration, and adverse outcomes were documented and analyzed.
RESULTS: The propofol's ED50 was notably lower in the L group than in the S group (1.15±0.27 mg/kg versus 1.83±0.26 mg/kg; p<0.05, Cohen's d=2.56). The ED95 (95% confidence interval) of propofol was 2.04 (1.23-2.85) mg/kg in the L group and 2.64 (1.95-3.33) mg/kg in the S group, with a small effect size for the difference (Cohen's d=0.25). The total propofol induction dose in the L group was lower than that in the S group (p<0.05). There existed no variations in terms of awakening duration or incidence of adverse events.
CONCLUSION: In patients who underwent hysteroscopy, post-propofol intravenous lidocaine at 1.0 mg/kg markedly reduced the propofol's ED50 in propofol-fentanyl-based anesthesia for successful placement of a double-lumen LMA without significant adverse reactions.
PATIENTS AND METHODS: Eighty patients who underwent hysteroscopy were screened and randomly enrolled in either lidocaine group (group L, n=40) or the saline group (group S, n=40). The propofol induction dose per patient was established via an up-and-down sequential method. Under the guidance of bispectral index (BIS) value monitoring, the propofol doses required for the successful placement of a double-lumen LMA in 50% and 95% of the patients in the two groups (ED50 and ED95) were compared. The total propofol induction dose, awakening duration, and adverse outcomes were documented and analyzed.
RESULTS: The propofol's ED50 was notably lower in the L group than in the S group (1.15±0.27 mg/kg versus 1.83±0.26 mg/kg; p<0.05, Cohen's d=2.56). The ED95 (95% confidence interval) of propofol was 2.04 (1.23-2.85) mg/kg in the L group and 2.64 (1.95-3.33) mg/kg in the S group, with a small effect size for the difference (Cohen's d=0.25). The total propofol induction dose in the L group was lower than that in the S group (p<0.05). There existed no variations in terms of awakening duration or incidence of adverse events.
CONCLUSION: In patients who underwent hysteroscopy, post-propofol intravenous lidocaine at 1.0 mg/kg markedly reduced the propofol's ED50 in propofol-fentanyl-based anesthesia for successful placement of a double-lumen LMA without significant adverse reactions.