CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Kasaba, T.
Right arrow Articles by Takasaki, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Kasaba, T.
Right arrow Articles by Takasaki, M.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 45, 1061-1065, Copyright © 1998 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Haemodynamic effects of induction of general anaesthesia with propofol during epidural anaesthesia

T Kasaba, O Kondou, Y Yoshimura, Y Watanabe and M Takasaki
Department of Anesthesiology, Miyazaki Medical College, Japan. binjik@post1.miyazaki-med.ac.jp

PURPOSE: To clarify whether propofol administration during thoracic or lumbar epidural anaesthesia intensifies the haemodynamic depression associated with epidural anaesthesia. METHODS: Patients (n = 45) undergoing procedures of similar magnitude were randomly divided into three study groups: a control group (n = 15) receiving general anaesthesia alone and two study groups undergoing thoracic (n = 15) and lumbar epidural anaesthesia (n = 15) before induction of general anaesthesia. All patients received 2 mg.kg-1 propofol at a rate of 200 mg.min-1, followed by a continuous infusion of 4 mg.kg-1.hr-1. Mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were measured at baseline, three minutes after induction, and one minute after tracheal intubation in all three groups and at 20 min after epidural anaesthesia was established in the thoracic and lumbar groups. RESULTS: Following epidural anaesthesia, MAP decreased from 94 +/- 14 (SD) at baseline to 75 +/- 11 mmHg (P € 0.0001) in the thoracic group and from 92 +/- 12 to 83 +/- 15 mmHg in the lumbar group. After propofol administration, MAP decreased further in the thoracic group to 63 +/- 9 mmHg (P = 0.0077) and to 67 +/- 10 mmHg (P = 0.0076) in the lumbar group. The MAP following propofol induction in the thoracic group (P _ 0.0001) and in the lumbar group (P = 0.0001) was lower than MAP in the control group (81 +/- 9 mmHg). HR decreased only in response to thoracic epidural anaesthesia (P = 0.0066). CONCLUSION: The hypotensive effects of propofol are additive to those of epidural anaesthesia, resulting in a profound decrease in mean arterial pressure.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
V. Von Dossow, M. Welte, U. Zaune, E. Martin, M. Walter, J. Ruckert, W. J. Kox, and C. D. Spies
Thoracic Epidural Anesthesia Combined with General Anesthesia: The Preferred Anesthetic Technique for Thoracic Surgery
Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2001; 92(4): 848 - 854.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Canadian J. AnesthesiaHome page
T. Kasaba, M. Yamaga, T. Iwasaki, Y. Yoshimura, and M. Takasaki
Ephedrine, dopamine, or dobutamine to treat hypotension with propofol during epidural anesthesia
Can J Anesth, March 1, 2000; 47(3): 237 - 241.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.