Intravenous infusion of rocuronium bromide prolongs emergence from propofol anesthesia in rats.
Journal
PloS one
ISSN: 1932-6203
Titre abrégé: PLoS One
Pays: United States
ID NLM: 101285081
Informations de publication
Date de publication:
2021
2021
Historique:
received:
12
09
2020
accepted:
27
01
2021
entrez:
11
2
2021
pubmed:
12
2
2021
medline:
8
9
2021
Statut:
epublish
Résumé
Neuromuscular blocking agents induce muscle paralysis via the prevention of synaptic transmission at the neuromuscular junction and may have additional effects at other sites of action. With regard to potential effects of neuromuscular blocking agents on the central nervous system, a definitive view has not been established. We investigated whether intravenous infusion of rocuronium bromide affects the emergence from propofol anesthesia. Using an in vivo rat model, we performed propofol infusion for 60 minutes, along with rocuronium bromide at various infusion rates or normal saline. Sugammadex or normal saline was injected at the end of the infusion period, and we evaluated the time to emergence from propofol anesthesia. We also examined the neuromuscular blocking, circulatory, and respiratory properties of propofol infusion along with rocuronium bromide infusion to ascertain possible factors affecting emergence. Intravenous infusion of rocuronium bromide dose-dependently increased the time to emergence from propofol anesthesia. Sugammadex administered after propofol infusion not containing rocuronium bromide did not affect the time to emergence. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, partial pressures of oxygen and carbon dioxide, and pH were not affected by rocuronium bromide infusion. Neuromuscular blockade induced by rocuronium bromide, even at the greatest infusion rate in the emergence experiment, was rapidly antagonized by sugammadex. These results suggest that intravenous infusion of rocuronium bromide dose-dependently delays the emergence from propofol anesthesia in rats. Future studies, such as detection of rocuronium in the cerebrospinal fluid or central nervous system, electrophysiologic studies, microinjection of sugammadex into the brain, etc., are necessary to determine the mechanism of this effect.
Sections du résumé
BACKGROUND
Neuromuscular blocking agents induce muscle paralysis via the prevention of synaptic transmission at the neuromuscular junction and may have additional effects at other sites of action. With regard to potential effects of neuromuscular blocking agents on the central nervous system, a definitive view has not been established. We investigated whether intravenous infusion of rocuronium bromide affects the emergence from propofol anesthesia.
METHODS
Using an in vivo rat model, we performed propofol infusion for 60 minutes, along with rocuronium bromide at various infusion rates or normal saline. Sugammadex or normal saline was injected at the end of the infusion period, and we evaluated the time to emergence from propofol anesthesia. We also examined the neuromuscular blocking, circulatory, and respiratory properties of propofol infusion along with rocuronium bromide infusion to ascertain possible factors affecting emergence.
RESULTS
Intravenous infusion of rocuronium bromide dose-dependently increased the time to emergence from propofol anesthesia. Sugammadex administered after propofol infusion not containing rocuronium bromide did not affect the time to emergence. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, partial pressures of oxygen and carbon dioxide, and pH were not affected by rocuronium bromide infusion. Neuromuscular blockade induced by rocuronium bromide, even at the greatest infusion rate in the emergence experiment, was rapidly antagonized by sugammadex.
CONCLUSIONS
These results suggest that intravenous infusion of rocuronium bromide dose-dependently delays the emergence from propofol anesthesia in rats. Future studies, such as detection of rocuronium in the cerebrospinal fluid or central nervous system, electrophysiologic studies, microinjection of sugammadex into the brain, etc., are necessary to determine the mechanism of this effect.
Identifiants
pubmed: 33571289
doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0246858
pii: PONE-D-20-28778
pmc: PMC7877640
doi:
Substances chimiques
Rocuronium
WRE554RFEZ
Propofol
YI7VU623SF
Types de publication
Journal Article
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Langues
eng
Sous-ensembles de citation
IM
Pagination
e0246858Déclaration de conflit d'intérêts
The authors have declared that no competing interests exist.
Références
Anaesthesia. 2020 May;75(5):583-590
pubmed: 31808151
Anesthesiology. 1994 May;80(5):1155-61; discussion 29A
pubmed: 7912481
Anesthesiology. 2007 Apr;106(4):763-72
pubmed: 17413914
Intensive Care Med. 2006 Mar;32(3):391-7
pubmed: 16450097
J Anesth. 2016 Aug;30(4):671-6
pubmed: 27146658
Behav Brain Res. 2019 Jul 23;367:59-67
pubmed: 30898682
Br J Anaesth. 2000 Jan;84(1):43-7
pubmed: 10740546
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2004 Aug;48(7):903-8
pubmed: 15242438
Anesthesiology. 1998 Apr;88(4):1003-13
pubmed: 9579510
Anesthesiology. 1994 Feb;80(2):392-401
pubmed: 8311321
Paediatr Anaesth. 2010 Aug;20(8):697-703
pubmed: 20670234
Anesthesiology. 2002 Jun;96(6):1498-503
pubmed: 12170066
Anesthesiology. 2016 Jun;124(6):1328-37
pubmed: 26938988
A A Case Rep. 2016 May 1;6(9):286-7
pubmed: 27002754
Psychopharmacologia. 1973 Aug 22;32(1):85-92
pubmed: 4743238
Medicine (Baltimore). 2020 Aug 21;99(34):e21819
pubmed: 32846823
Anesthesiology. 2000 May;92(5):1476-80
pubmed: 10781295
Anesth Analg. 1993 Jun;76(6):1304-9
pubmed: 8098920
Anesthesiology. 1992 Oct;77(4):686-90
pubmed: 1416166
Int J Med Sci. 2017 Feb 23;14(3):224-230
pubmed: 28367082
Int J Med Sci. 2013 Aug 03;10(10):1278-85
pubmed: 23983586
Anesth Analg. 2002 Mar;94(3):604-8; table of contents
pubmed: 11867383
Paediatr Anaesth. 2016 Jan;26(1):109-11
pubmed: 26456087
J Pharm Sci. 2013 Sep;102(9):3343-55
pubmed: 23650139
J Clin Monit Comput. 2010 Oct;24(5):371-6
pubmed: 20734116
Neuroreport. 2007 Nov 19;18(17):1817-20
pubmed: 18090318
J Anesth. 2008;22(3):236-41
pubmed: 18685929
Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1997 Apr;41(4):502-5
pubmed: 9150779
Anesthesiology. 2012 May;116(5):998-1005
pubmed: 22446983