Skip Navigation


BJA Advance Access originally published online on August 27, 2009
British Journal of Anaesthesia 2009 103(5):654-664; doi:10.1093/bja/aep238
This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Supplementary Data
Right arrow All Versions of this Article:
103/5/654    most recent
aep238v1
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
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 Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Andrews, D. T.
Right arrow Articles by Royse, C. F.
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Andrews, D. T.
Right arrow Articles by Royse, C. F.
Social Bookmarking
 Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?


© The Author [2009]. Published by Oxford University Press on behalf of the British Journal of Anaesthesia. All rights reserved. For Permissions, please email: journals.permissions@oxfordjournal.org

Functional comparison of anaesthetic agents during myocardial ischaemia–reperfusion using pressure–volume loops

D. T. Andrews1,3,*, A. G. Royse1,2 and C. F. Royse1,3,{dagger}

1 Cardiovascular and Therapeutics Unit, Department of Pharmacology, University of Melbourne, Melbourne, Australia
2 Department of Cardiac Surgery and
3 Department of Anaesthesia and Pain Management, The Royal Melbourne Hospital, Melbourne, Australia

* Corresponding author. E-mail: andrewsdt{at}me.com

Background: Left ventricular (LV) pressure–volume (PV) loops were used to compare the functional effects that accompany the cardioprotection seen with desflurane, sevoflurane, and propofol in a rabbit preparation of coronary ischaemia–reperfusion (IR).

Methods: Male New Zealand White rabbits (n=48) were anaesthetized with propofol (70 mg kg–1 h–1), desflurane (8.9%), or sevoflurane (3.8%) and randomized to receive IR or non-ischaemic time-matched (TC) perfusion protocol. IR groups (desIR, propIR, and sevIR) underwent 30 min of left anterior descending coronary artery occlusion and then 120 min of reperfusion. TC groups (desTC, propTC, and sevTC) were anaesthetized for 150 min without ischaemia. Haemodynamic endpoints included mean arterial pressure, heart rate, cardiac index, systemic vascular resistance index, preload-recruitable stroke-work, time constant of relaxation ({tau}), and end-diastolic PV relationship (EDPVR). Ventricles in the IR groups were excised and stained with 2,3,5-triphenyl-tetrazolium chloride in order to measure infarct size.

Results: Myocardial infarction size was greater in the propIR group [35.74 (SD 11.32)%] compared with the desIR [13.44 (3.09)%] and sevIR [17.96 (6.63)%] groups (P<0.001). EDPVR deteriorated in the sevIR and propIR groups compared with their TC groups, sevTC (P=0.03) and propTC (P=0.044), respectively. There was no difference in any haemodynamic endpoints for the desIR group compared with its TC control (desTC).

Conclusions: During ischaemia, all anaesthetics provide haemodynamic stability and preservation of LV contractility, whereas propofol and sevoflurane, but not desflurane, caused increased LV diastolic stiffness. Desflurane and sevoflurane provide superior cardioprotection compared with propofol.

Keywords: anaesthetics i.v., propofol; anaesthetics volatile; heart, ischaemia; research, anaesthesia


{dagger} Declaration of interest. C.F.R. is a member of an advisory board on quality of recovery after anaesthesia, which is funded by an unrestricted educational grant from Baxter Healthcare.


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?




Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.