Propofol does not affect the canine cardiac conduction system under autonomic blockade

Comparison of the effects of propofol and alfaxalone on the electrocardiogram of dogs, with particular reference to QT interval

Cardiac electrical activity is often altered by administration of anesthetic drugs. While the effects of propofol in this regard have previously been described in dogs, to date, there are no reports of the effect of alfaxalone. This study investigated the impact of both propofol and alfaxalone on the ECG of 60 dogs, after premedication with acepromazine and methadone. Heart rate increased significantly in both groups. The PR and QRS intervals were significantly increased following propofol while with alfaxalone the QRS duration was significantly increased and ST segment depression was observed. The QT and JT interval were significantly shorter following induction with alfaxalone, but, when corrected (c) for heart rate, QTc and JTc in both groups were significantly greater following induction. When comparing the magnitude of change between groups, the change in RR interval was greater in the alfaxalone group. The change in both QT and JT intervals were significantly greater following alfaxalone, but when QTc and JTc intervals were compared, there were no significant differences between the two drugs. The similarly increased QTc produced by both drugs may suggest comparable proarrhythmic effects.

Propofol in ICU Settings: Understanding and Managing Anti-Arrhythmic, Pro-Arrhythmic Effects, and Propofol Infusion Syndrome

Propofol has revolutionized anesthesia and intensive care medicine owing to its favorable pharmacokinetic characteristics, fast onset, and short duration of action. This drug has been shown to be remarkably effective in numerous clinical scenarios. In addition, propofol has maintained an overwhelmingly favorable safety profile; however, it has been associated with both antiarrhythmic and proarrhythmic effects. This review concisely summarizes the dual arrhythmic cardiovascular effects of propofol and a rare but serious complication, propofol infusion syndrome (PRIS). We also discuss the need for careful patient evaluation, compliance with recommended infusion rates, and vigilant monitoring.

Differential effects of sevoflurane and propofol on swine cardiac conduction system

OBJECTIVE

To compare the effects of sevoflurane and propofol on the porcine cardiac conduction system.

STUDY DESIGN

A prospective, comparative study of electrophysiological properties of anaesthetics agents in an experimental porcine model.

ANIMALS

A total of 36 hybrid Landrace-Large White pigs.

METHODS

After premedication with 20 mg kg^-1 of intramuscular ketamine, anaesthesia was induced with 4.5 mg kg^-1propofol intravenously. In 18 consecutive animals, anaesthesia was maintained with propofol (13 mg kg^-1 hour^-1) and in the remaining 18 animals with 2.66% sevoflurane. The femoral artery and vein were canalized for invasive monitoring, analytical blood gas sampling and intracardiac catheter insertion. Following instrumentation and after a period of stabilization, a customary electrophysiological evaluation was performed. We compared the electrophysiology of the sinus and atrioventricular node (AV) node under sevoflurane or propofol anaesthesia, and the effects of both anaesthetics on atrial and ventricular refractoriness.

RESULTS

There was a significant difference in sinus node recovery time between sevoflurane and propofol (907 ± 231 versus 753 ± 146 ms, p = 0.02). Sevoflurane in comparison with propofol significantly prolonged specialized AV conduction times, represented by an increased Wenckebach cycle length (272 ± 54 versus 235 ± 40 ms, p = 0.03) and AV nodal refractoriness (327 ± 34 versus 287 ± 30 ms, p = 0.002). In addition, sevoflurane prolonged ventricular refractoriness (298 ± 27 versus 255 ± 38 ms, p = 0.007) and the QT corrected interval (0.50 ± 0.05 versus 0.46 ± 0.09 ms, p = 0.005).

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Sevoflurane in comparison with propofol, depresses several parameters of sinus and AV nodal function and prolongs the ventricular refractoriness of the porcine cardiac conduction system. These findings should be taken into consideration for the choice of anaesthetic agents in clinical and experimental settings.

Conversion of supraventricular arrhythmia to normal rhythm by propofol and remifentanil: three cases report

We experienced conversion of supraventricular arrhythmia to normal sinus rhythm in three patients during general anesthesia using propofol and remifentanil. This may be related to direct inhibition of the cardiac conduction system or activation of the parasympathetic system. The literature review suggests that propofol and remifentanil have antiarrhythmic potential, reverting supraventricular arrhythmia during anesthesia.

Perioperative management of hereditary arrhythmogenic syndromes

Patients with inherited cardiac channel disorders are at high risk of perioperative lethal arrhythmias. Preoperative control of symptoms and a multidisciplinary approach are required for a well-planned management. Good haemodynamic monitoring, adequate anaesthesia and analgesia, perioperative maintenance of normocarbia, normothermia, and normovolaemia are important. In congenital long QT syndrome, torsades de pointes should be prevented with magnesium sulphate infusion and avoidance of drugs such as droperidol, succinylcholine, ketamine, and ondansetron. Propofol and epidural anaesthesia represent safe choices, while caution is needed with volatile agents. In Brugada syndrome, β-blockers, α-agonists, and cholinergic drugs should be avoided, while isoproterenol reverses the ECG changes. Propofol, thiopental, and volatiles have been used uneventfully. In congenital sick sinus syndrome, severe bradycardia resistant to atropine may require isoproterenol or epinephrine. Anaesthetics with vagolytic properties are preferable, while propofol and vecuronium should be given with caution due to risk of inducing bradyarrhythmias. Neuraxial anaesthesia should produce the least autonomic imbalance. Arrhythmogenic right ventricular dysplasia/cardiomyopathy induces ventricular tachyarrhythmias, which should be treated with β-blockers. Generally, β-adrenergic stimulation and catecholamine release should be avoided. Halothane and pancuronium are contraindicated, while large doses of local anaesthetics and epinephrine should be avoided in neuraxial blocks. In catecholaminergic polymorphic ventricular tachycardia, β-blocker treatment should be continued perioperatively. Catecholamine release and β-agonists, such as isoproterenol, should be avoided. Propofol and remifentanil are probably safe, while halothane and pancuronium are contraindicated. Regional anaesthesia, without epinephrine, is relatively safe. In suspicious cardiac deaths, postmortem examination and familial screening are recommended.

Propofol and arrhythmias: two sides of the coin

The hypnotic agent propofol is effective for the induction and maintenance of anesthesia. However, recent studies have shown that propofol administration is related to arrhythmias. Propofol displays both pro- and anti-arrhythmic effects in a concentration-dependent manner. Data indicate that propofol can convert supraventricular tachycardia and ventricular tachycardia and may inhibit the conduction system of the heart. The mechanism of the cardiac effects remains poorly defined and may involve ion channels, the autonomic nervous system and cardiac gap junctions. Specifically, sodium, calcium and potassium currents in cardiac cells are suppressed by clinically relevant concentrations of propofol. Propofol shortens the action potential duration (APD) but lessens the ischemia-induced decrease in the APD. Furthermore, propofol suppresses both sympathetic and parasympathetic tone and preserves gap junctions during ischemia. All of these effects cumulatively contribute to the antiarrhythmic and proarrhythmic properties of propofol.

Cardiovascular manifestations of sedatives and analgesics in the critical care unit

There are numerous sedatives and analgesics used in critical care medicine today; these medications are used on critically ill patients, many of whom have heart disease, including coronary artery disease or congestive heart failure. The purpose of this review is to recognize the effects of these medications on the heart. Studies that evaluated the effects of sedatives and analgesics on normal individuals or on those with heart disease were reviewed. Current choices for sustained sedation in the critically ill include the benzodiazepines, morphine, propofol, and etomidate. Each of these medications has their particular advantages and disadvantages. Benzodiazepines provide the greatest amnesia and cardiovascular safety but they can cause significant hypotension in the hemodynamically unstable patient. Morphine provides analgesia and cardioprotective activity after ischemia, although the large observational study CRUSADE showed increased mortality rate in those patients with non-ST segment elevation myocardial infarction who received morphine. Propofol is the most easily titratable drug with cardioprotective features, but its use must be accompanied with great attention to possible development of propofol infusion syndrome, which is a deadly disease, especially in patients with head injury and those with septic shock receiving vasopressors. Etomidate has a rapid onset effect and short period of action with great hemodynamic stability even in patients with shock and hypovolemia, but the incidence of adrenal insufficiency during infusion, not bolus doses, may cause deterioration in the circulatory stability. In conclusion, the sedatives and analgesics mentioned here have characteristics that give them a cardiovascular safety profile useful in critically ill patients. However, use of these drugs on an individual basis is dependent on each agent's safety and efficacy.

Propofol for electrical storm; a case report of cardioversion and suppression of ventricular tachycardia by propofol

PURPOSE

To present a case report where propofol abolished recurrent ventricular tachycardia (VT) and to suggest a mechanism by which this may have occurred.

CLINICAL FEATURES

A 65-yr-old male was admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU) with electrical storm. Recurrent episodes of VT persisted despite maximal anti-arrhythmic therapy and resulted in a prolonged ICU course and the need for intra-aortic balloon pump support. This was complicated by an ischemic limb, necessitating an anesthetic for femoral thrombectomy. On several occasions while in the ICU, episodes of VT had resolved with boluses of propofol prior to planned cardioversion. In the operating room, episodes of non-sustained VT resolved after a bolus of propofol and remained suppressed for the duration of the case with the use of a propofol infusion.

CONCLUSION

The effects of propofol on cardiac conduction and on the autonomic nervous system have been studied but its effects on arrhythmias are not well documented. In this case report, propofol was associated with the resolution and suppression of VT. Recent evidence suggests that sympathetic blockade may be an effective treatment for electrical storm. This may be the mechanism by which propofol can abolish this arrhythmia intraoperatively.