Journal of anesthesia · 2023
Effects of anesthetics on nociceptive sensory evoked potentials by intraepidermal noxious electrical stimulation of A-δ fibers.
СтатьяНазвание 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.
Mitsuzawa Kunihiro, Ishida Takashi, Tanaka Ryusuke, Ito Mariko, Tanaka Satoshi, Kawamata Mikito
Аннотация
PURPOSE: Generation of nociceptive sensory evoked potentials (NEPs) by selective stimulation of nociceptive intraepidermal nerve fibers is a simple technique which could be used as intraoperative nociception monitor. We evaluated the effects of remifentanil, propofol and sevoflurane on NEPs by this technique.
METHODS: Patients undergoing general anesthesia were assigned to groups in two studies. A-δ fiber selective NEPs were recorded. Study 1: NEPs were recorded at control, under anesthetics administration: remifentanil at an effect-site concentration (Ce) of 1.0 ng/mL (n = 10), propofol at Ce of 0.5 µg/mL (n = 10), or sevoflurane at 0.2 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) (n = 10), and recovery from the anesthetics. Study 2: NEPs were recorded at control and under administration of higher dose anesthetics: propofol at Ce of 0.5 and 1.0 µg/mL (n = 10) or sevoflurane at 0.2 and 0.5 MAC (n = 10). A P-value < 0.016 was considered statistically significant in multiple analyses.
RESULTS: Study 1: Remifentanil at Ce of 1.0 ng/mL significantly suppressed the amplitude of NEPs (mean amplitude (standard deviation) of control vs. remifentanil administration: 16.8 µV (3.8) vs. 10.1 µV (2.5), P < 0.001). Propofol and sevoflurane did not suppress the amplitude significantly. Study 2: Propofol at Ce of 0.5 and 1.0 µg/mL and sevoflurane at 0.2 and 0.5 MAC did not suppress the amplitude significantly.
CONCLUSION: The amplitude of A-δ fiber selective NEPs was suppressed by remifentanil but not propofol or sevoflurane. NEPs with intraepidermal electrical stimulation can assess the analgesic effect of anesthetics.
CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: UMIN000038214 REGISTRY URL: https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000043328.
METHODS: Patients undergoing general anesthesia were assigned to groups in two studies. A-δ fiber selective NEPs were recorded. Study 1: NEPs were recorded at control, under anesthetics administration: remifentanil at an effect-site concentration (Ce) of 1.0 ng/mL (n = 10), propofol at Ce of 0.5 µg/mL (n = 10), or sevoflurane at 0.2 minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) (n = 10), and recovery from the anesthetics. Study 2: NEPs were recorded at control and under administration of higher dose anesthetics: propofol at Ce of 0.5 and 1.0 µg/mL (n = 10) or sevoflurane at 0.2 and 0.5 MAC (n = 10). A P-value < 0.016 was considered statistically significant in multiple analyses.
RESULTS: Study 1: Remifentanil at Ce of 1.0 ng/mL significantly suppressed the amplitude of NEPs (mean amplitude (standard deviation) of control vs. remifentanil administration: 16.8 µV (3.8) vs. 10.1 µV (2.5), P < 0.001). Propofol and sevoflurane did not suppress the amplitude significantly. Study 2: Propofol at Ce of 0.5 and 1.0 µg/mL and sevoflurane at 0.2 and 0.5 MAC did not suppress the amplitude significantly.
CONCLUSION: The amplitude of A-δ fiber selective NEPs was suppressed by remifentanil but not propofol or sevoflurane. NEPs with intraepidermal electrical stimulation can assess the analgesic effect of anesthetics.
CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: UMIN000038214 REGISTRY URL: https://center6.umin.ac.jp/cgi-open-bin/ctr_e/ctr_view.cgi?recptno=R000043328.