Search

Background: Endoscopic endonasal transphenoidal surgery has been recently proposed as a minimally invasive procedure for the treatment of pituitary adenomas. The main objective of the anaesthesiologist is to induce sufficient haemodynamic control together with rapid recovery at the end of surgery. The aim of this study was to examine recovery profile, surgical operative conditions and haemodynamic differences using remifentanil infusion with either propofol target controlled infusion system or sevoflurane. Method: Forty-four adult patients were enrolled in a prospective, randomized, single-blind, two-group study: Group P received propofol target controlled infusion system and remifentanil; Group S received sevoflurane and remifentanil for maintenance of anaesthesia. Results: No statistically significant differences between the two groups with regards to the haemodynamic changes, operative conditions as assessed by a four-step bleeding score (0-3), were obtained. Recovery times were considerably shorter after emifentanil-sevoflurane in comparison with remifentanil—propofol target controlled infusion system group (7.4 vs. 12.8 mm, P < 0.01). Conclusion: This study demonstrates that sevoflurane-remifentanil gives a faster recovery and equivalent intraoperative status compared with propofol target controlled infusion system with remifentanil for the endoscopic endonasal transphenoidal approach. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

A letter to the editor is presented in response to the article "Prolonged use of the ProSeal laryngeal mask in ICU: a case report."

Background: Sugammadex is a relatively new molecule that reverses neuromuscular block induced by rocuronium. The particular structure of sugammadex traps the cyclopentanoperhydrophenanthrene ring of rocuronium in its hydrophobic cavity. Dexamethasone shares the same steroidal structure with rocuronium. Studies in vitro have demonstrated that dexamethasone interacts with sugammadex, reducing its efficacy. In this study, we investigated the clinical relevance of this interaction and its influence on neuromuscular reversal., Methods: In this retrospective case-control study, we analyzed data from 45 patients divided into 3 groups: dexamethasone after induction group (15 patients) treated with 8 mg dexamethasone as an antiemetic drug shortly after induction of anesthesia; dexamethasone before reversal group (15 patients) treated with dexamethasone just before sugammadex injection; and control group (15 patients) treated with 8 mg ondansetron. All groups received 0.6 mg/kg rocuronium at induction, 0.15 mg/kg rocuronium at train-of-four ratio (TOF) 2 for neuromuscular relaxation, and 2 mg/kg sugammadex for reversal at the end of the procedure at TOF2. Neuromuscular relaxation was monitored with a TOF-Watch® system., Results: The control group had a recovery time of 154 ± 54 seconds (mean ± SD), the dexamethasone after induction group 134 ± 55 seconds, and the dexamethasone before reversal group 131 ± 68 seconds. The differences among groups were not statistically significant (P = 0.5141)., Conclusions: Our results show that the use of dexamethasone as an antiemetic drug for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting does not interfere with reversal of neuromuscular blockade with sugammadex in patients undergoing elective surgery with general anesthesia in contrast to in vitro studies that support this hypothesis.