Dose–response relationship of propofol on mid‐latency auditory evoked potentials (MLAEP) in cardiac surgery

Le résumé fourni par la source

BACKGROUND: Propofol-sufentanil anaesthesia has become popular during cardiac surgery for its titrability and short recovery time. Avoidance of awareness is a major goal during cardiac surgery. We therefore investigated the dose-response relationship of propofol and cortical responses (mid-latency auditory evoked potentials, MLAEP). METHODS: One hundred patients undergoing cardiac surgery were investigated. Basic anaesthesia was performed with sufentanil (4.5 microg kg(-1) h(-1)) / flunitrazepam (9 microg kg(-1) h(-1)) infusion (control group); the other groups received in addition a loading dose of propofol 2 mg kg(-1) and a maintainance infusion of 1-3.5 mg kg(-1) h(-1). MLAEP were evaluated by using Pa/Nb-amplitudes and Nb-latencies. Haemodynamics were monitored by ECG, arterial blood pressure and cardiac function with pulmonary artery catheterization. RESULTS: In the control group, median amplitude of MLAEP decreased by 50% with a wide range, but were detectable in >90% of patients throughout surgery. Propofol suppressed amplitude Pa/Nb of MLAEP dose dependently. With 3.5 mg kg(-1) h(-1) amplitudes disappeared in >40% of patients throughout cardiac surgery. Median Nb-latencies increased in the control group from 44 to a range from 50 to 60 ms. In groups with propofol >2 mg kg(-1) h(-1), Nb-latencies, detectable in the patients without complete suppression of MLAEP, increased to median 60 ms. Haemodynamic parameters and cardiac function did not differ among the groups. The use of vasopressors was not increased even with the highest propofol dose used. CONCLUSION: The dose-response effect of propofol on auditory evoked potentials reveals that combining a loading dose of 2 mg kg-1 with a consecutive infusion of 3.5 mg kg(-1) h(-1) significantly suppresses MLAEP during cardiac surgery. Thus, auditory information may not be processed and awareness with recall becomes unlikely.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.