Comparison of intubating conditions after induction with propofol and remifentanil or sufentanil : Randomized controlled REMIDENT trial for surgical tooth extraction.
Vergleich der Intubationsbedingungen nach Induktion mit Propofol und Remifentanil oder Sufentanil : Randomisierte kontrollierte REMIDENT-Studie bei chirurgischer Zahnextraktion.
Adolescent
Adult
Anesthesia, General
Anesthesia, Intravenous
/ methods
Anesthetics, Intravenous
/ administration & dosage
Blood Pressure
/ drug effects
Double-Blind Method
Female
Heart Rate
/ drug effects
Humans
Intubation, Intratracheal
/ methods
Male
Middle Aged
Pain, Postoperative
/ diagnosis
Pharyngitis
/ etiology
Propofol
/ administration & dosage
Prospective Studies
Remifentanil
/ administration & dosage
Respiratory Mechanics
/ drug effects
Sufentanil
/ administration & dosage
Tooth Extraction
/ methods
Treatment Outcome
Young Adult
Anesthetics, intravenous
Bolus injection
Muscle relaxant
Pain
Visual analog scale
Journal
Der Anaesthesist
ISSN: 1432-055X
Titre abrégé: Anaesthesist
Pays: Germany
ID NLM: 0370525
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
04 2020
04 2020
Historique:
received:
23
10
2019
accepted:
13
12
2019
revised:
05
12
2019
pubmed:
1
3
2020
medline:
30
3
2021
entrez:
1
3
2020
Statut:
ppublish
Résumé
The aim of this study was to compare tracheal intubation conditions after induction of anesthesia with a bolus of propofol-sufentanil or propofol-remifentanil and a rapid induction technique. A total of 70 patients (American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification I‑II) undergoing outpatient surgery under general anesthesia with intubation for tooth extraction were randomly assigned to two groups in this double-blind study. Patients received either a bolus of remifentanil (3 μg/kg) or sufentanil (0.3 μg/kg) together with 2.5 mg/kg propofol for intubation. The primary outcome was the percentage of excellent intubation conditions and the secondary outcomes were the percentage of patients with a decrease of over 20% in mean arterial pressure (MAP) or heart rate (HR), time to achieve spontaneous respiration, time between the end of surgery and extubation and time to achieve an Aldrete score of 10. VAS pain score was >3 or having laryngeal pain 15 min after arriving in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were also analyzed. Intubating conditions (perfect + good conditions) were significantly better with remifentanil than with sufentanil (88.5% vs. 68.6%; p = 0.01). When using remifentanil, the hemodynamic conditions were good. Using remifentanil did not significantly increase the pain score or the laryngeal pain in the recovery room. This was confirmed by no significant differences between the groups for morphine consumption. Remifentanil significantly decreased the time to achieve an Aldrete score of 10. When intubation without muscle relaxants is required, intubating conditions are much better when a remifentanil bolus is used compared to a sufentanil bolus. The remifentanil/propofol rapid induction technique is a valuable technique to quickly intubate and achieve good conditions.
Identifiants
pubmed: 32112114
doi: 10.1007/s00101-020-00739-0
pii: 10.1007/s00101-020-00739-0
doi:
Substances chimiques
Anesthetics, Intravenous
0
Sufentanil
AFE2YW0IIZ
Remifentanil
P10582JYYK
Propofol
YI7VU623SF
Types de publication
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
262-269Références
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2003 Jan;20(1):37-43
pubmed: 12557834
Anaesthesia. 1999 Nov;54(11):1032-6
pubmed: 10540090
Anesth Analg. 1998 Jan;86(1):45-9
pubmed: 9428849
Can J Anaesth. 2003 Feb;50(2):116-20
pubmed: 12560299
Lancet Respir Med. 2019 Feb;7(2):129-140
pubmed: 30224322
J Clin Anesth. 2010 Sep;22(6):437-42
pubmed: 20868965
Anesth Pain Med. 2012 Winter;1(3):210-1
pubmed: 24904800
Anesthesiology. 2016 Oct;125(4):647-55
pubmed: 27496656
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2005 Sep;22(9):672-7
pubmed: 16163913
Saudi J Anaesth. 2015 Oct-Dec;9(4):409-12
pubmed: 26543458
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2004 Jan;48(1):35-9
pubmed: 14674971
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007 Aug;51(7):789-808
pubmed: 17635389
Anaesthesia. 2009 Jul;64(7):719-26
pubmed: 19624626
Anesthesiology. 1997 Dec;87(6):1290-7
pubmed: 9416711
Anesth Analg. 1992 Nov;75(5):788-93
pubmed: 1416135
Ann Fr Anesth Reanim. 1998;17(11):1317-23
pubmed: 9972359
Drugs Aging. 2012 Nov;29(11):905-9
pubmed: 23090780
Anaesthesia. 1999 Nov;54(11):1037-40
pubmed: 10540091
Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015 Aug;28(4):403-10
pubmed: 26087274
J Clin Anesth. 2012 Aug;24(5):392-7
pubmed: 22748212
BMJ. 2012 Oct 15;345:e6329
pubmed: 23077290
Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2013 Jul;17(14):1967-73
pubmed: 23877864
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2000 Apr;44(4):465-9
pubmed: 10757583
Anesthesiology. 1997 Jan;86(1):24-33
pubmed: 9009936
Br J Anaesth. 2007 Aug;99(2):276-81
pubmed: 17573390
Cas Lek Cesk. 2008;147(2):96-101
pubmed: 18383960