Search citation statements
Paper Sections
Citation Types
Year Published
Publication Types
Relationship
Authors
Journals
Background: Gastric cancer is the third most common malignant tumor with the second highest mortality rate in the world, and radical gastrectomy is the main treatment method, but the operation needs a long period of time to carry out and has strong surgical trauma stimulation, which is likely to cause sympathetic nerve excitement and stress reaction in the body. Therefore, the selection of appropriate anesthetic medication regimen and anesthesia method has an important impact on the intraoperative management and postoperative recovery of patients. This study aims to compare the clinical effects of dexmedetomidine alone in combination with propofol, etomidate and propofol-etomidate mixture in the treatment of radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: A total of 90 patients undergoing elective radical gastrectomy were randomly divided into the propofol group (group P), the etomidate group (group E), and the etomidate–propofol mixture group (group PE). Anesthesia induction was performed under the monitoring of bispectral index anesthesia depth. The same pumping drugs were used in 3 groups: 0.1 to 0.3 μg/kg·min remifentanil, 0.5 μg/kg·h dexmedetomidine, and 5 to 10 μg/kg·min rocuronium. The primary outcome indicator was the hemodynamic conditions. The secondary outcome indicators included awakening time and time to accurately answer questions after operation, the prevalence of postoperative respiratory depression and adverse events, the incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction, and preoperative and postoperative Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-Mental State Examination scores. Results: Among the 3 groups of patients, the use rate of vasoactive drugs in group P was higher (P < .05); the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate of group P at T1 to T4 were significantly lower than those of groups E and PE (P < .05); the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate of group E in T 2, T 4, and T 6 were significantly higher than those of groups P and PE (P < .05). The wake-up time after operation and the time to accurately answer the questions were longer in group E than in groups P and PE (P < .05). The incidence of postoperative respiratory depression in group P was higher than that in groups E and PE (P < .05). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment score of group P was lower than that of groups E and PE 7 days after operation (P < .05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine combined with propofol–etomidate mixture is a better anesthesia drug combination.
Background: Gastric cancer is the third most common malignant tumor with the second highest mortality rate in the world, and radical gastrectomy is the main treatment method, but the operation needs a long period of time to carry out and has strong surgical trauma stimulation, which is likely to cause sympathetic nerve excitement and stress reaction in the body. Therefore, the selection of appropriate anesthetic medication regimen and anesthesia method has an important impact on the intraoperative management and postoperative recovery of patients. This study aims to compare the clinical effects of dexmedetomidine alone in combination with propofol, etomidate and propofol-etomidate mixture in the treatment of radical gastrectomy for gastric cancer. Methods: A total of 90 patients undergoing elective radical gastrectomy were randomly divided into the propofol group (group P), the etomidate group (group E), and the etomidate–propofol mixture group (group PE). Anesthesia induction was performed under the monitoring of bispectral index anesthesia depth. The same pumping drugs were used in 3 groups: 0.1 to 0.3 μg/kg·min remifentanil, 0.5 μg/kg·h dexmedetomidine, and 5 to 10 μg/kg·min rocuronium. The primary outcome indicator was the hemodynamic conditions. The secondary outcome indicators included awakening time and time to accurately answer questions after operation, the prevalence of postoperative respiratory depression and adverse events, the incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction, and preoperative and postoperative Montreal Cognitive Assessment and Mini-Mental State Examination scores. Results: Among the 3 groups of patients, the use rate of vasoactive drugs in group P was higher (P < .05); the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate of group P at T1 to T4 were significantly lower than those of groups E and PE (P < .05); the systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and heart rate of group E in T 2, T 4, and T 6 were significantly higher than those of groups P and PE (P < .05). The wake-up time after operation and the time to accurately answer the questions were longer in group E than in groups P and PE (P < .05). The incidence of postoperative respiratory depression in group P was higher than that in groups E and PE (P < .05). The Montreal Cognitive Assessment score of group P was lower than that of groups E and PE 7 days after operation (P < .05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine combined with propofol–etomidate mixture is a better anesthesia drug combination.
We hypothesized that the combined use of etomidate and propofol for endoscopic sedation in elderly hypertensive patients could reduce adverse reactions while providing ideal sedation. To validate our hypothesis, we conducted a prospective, randomized, controlled, double‐blinded study. A total of 360 elderly hypertensive patients scheduled for gastroscopy at our hospital were enrolled in the study, of whom 328 completed the trial. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: the propofol group (group P), the etomidate group (group E), or the propofol‐etomidate combination group (mixed at a ratio of 1:1, group PE). We collected and analyzed the cardiopulmonary effects and side effects in each group. Regardless of the sedation drug used, the systolic blood pressure, mean blood pressure, and heart rate of involved patients were significantly affected. Oxygen desaturation and injection pain were more common in group P compared to groups E (33.6% vs. 14.8%, 31.8% vs. 2.7%, both P < 0.01) and group PE (33.6% vs. 13.6%, 31.8% vs. 6.4%, both P < 0.01). The incidence of myoclonus in the PE group was lower than that in the E group (10.9% vs. 61.2%, P < 0.01). Our results indeed demonstrated that the combined use of etomidate and propofol appeared to maintain cardiopulmonary stability with minimal side effects in older hypertensive patients scheduled for gastroscopy, which further implied that this sedation strategy could be a safe and pain‐free option for managing patients undergoing gastroscopy, particularly those at a higher risk of adverse cardiovascular events.
Background Rapid sequence intubation (RSI) have been shown to be effective in preventing reflux aspiration in patients with a full stomach during anaesthesia induction and endotracheal intubation. However, there is currently no standardized operation protocol or anaesthesia induction drug standard for RSI. Furthermore, there is a lack of evidence regarding the use of RSI in patients older than 65. In this study, we aimed to investigate the cardiovascular effects of different doses of alfentanil combined with propofol and etomidate during RSI in elderly patients aged 65–80 years. Methods A total of 96 patients aged 65–80 years who underwent general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation were selected for this study. The patients were randomly assigned to one of four groups using a random number table. Group A patients received an induction dose of 10 µg/kg alfentanil, group B patients received 15 µg/kg alfentanil, group C patients received 20 µg/kg alfentanil, and group D patients received 25 µg/kg alfentanil. Heart rate (HR), mean arterial pressure (MAP), cardiac index (CI), and ejection fraction (EF) were measured at three time points: 5 min before anaesthesia induction (T0), 1 min after endotracheal intubation (T1), and 5 min after endotracheal intubation (T2). Concurrently, 4 ml of arterial blood was collected from patients at three time points, and the concentrations of norepinephrine (NE) and cortisol (Cor) in plasma were detected. Occurrences of hypertension, hypotension, bradycardia and tachycardia during anesthesia induction to 5 min after tracheal intubation were noted. Results Compared with T0, the HR, MAP, NE and Cor concentrations in group A and group B were increased at the T1 and T2 time points, CI and EF values were decreased ( P < 0.05). HR and MAP in groups C and D were increased at the T1 time point, while they were decreased at the T2 time point in group D ( P < 0.05). The changes in CI and EF values, concentrations of NE and Cor, were not significant at T1 and T2 time points in group C ( P > 0.05). Additionally, they were not significant in group D at the T1 time point ( P > 0.05), but decreased at the T2 time point ( P < 0.05). Compared with group A, the HR, MAP, NE and Cor concentrations in groups C and D were decreased at T1 and T2 time points ( P < 0.05). The CI and EF values of groups C and D were increased at T1 time point but decreased at T2 time point in group D ( P < 0.05). The incidence of hypertension and tachycardia in group A was significantly higher than that in group C and group D ( P < 0.05), and the incidence of hypotension and bradycardia in group D was significantly higher than that in group A and group B ( P < 0.05). Conclusion Alfent...
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.