[Remifentanil for oocyte retrieval: A new single-agent monitored anaesthesia care technique]

General anesthesia with propofol during oocyte retrieval and in vitro fertilization outcomes: retrospective cohort study

General anesthesia is frequently administered during oocyte retrieval. Its effects on the outcomes of IVF cycles are uncertain. This study investigated whether administration of general anesthesia (specifically propofol) during oocyte retrieval affects IVF outcomes. A total of 245 women undergoing IVF cycles were included in this retrospective cohort study. IVF outcomes of 129 women who underwent oocyte retrieval under propofol anesthesia and 116 without anesthesia were compared. Data were adjusted for age, BMI, estradiol on triggering day and total gonadotropin dose. The primary outcomes were fertilization, pregnancy and live birth rates. A secondary outcome was the efficiency of follicle retrieval associated with the use of anesthesia. Fertilization rate was lower in retrievals under anesthesia compared to without (53.4% ± 34.8 vs. 63.7% ± 33.6, respectively; p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the ratio of expected to retrieved oocytes between retrievals with and without anesthesia (0.8 ± 0.4 vs. 0.8 ± 0.8, respectively, p = 0.96). The differences in pregnancy and live birth rates between the groups were not statistically significant. General anesthesia administered during oocyte retrieval may have adverse effects on the fertilization potential of oocytes. This impact on the developmental potential of oocytes may lead to negative IVF outcomes and should be investigated further.

Patient-Controlled Remifentanil Analgesia as Alternative for Pethidine with Midazolam During Oocyte Retrieval in IVF/ICSI Procedures: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Pethidine with midazolam-induced conscious sedation for pain relief during transvaginal oocyte retrieval for in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) procedures is associated with residual pain and oversedation. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with remifentanil may serve as an alternative for pethidine. We investigated whether PCA remifentanil with diclofenac was associated with improved periprocedural pain relief than pethidine analgesia during IVF/ICSI procedures, with sedation scores, safety profiles, and patient satisfaction as secondary endpoints.

METHODS

Seventy-six women were randomized to receive pethidine (2 mg/kg i.m.) and midazolam (7.5 mg)-induced conscious sedation (n = 40) or PCA with remifentanil and diclofenac (50 mg; n = 36). The Numeric Rating Scale, McGill Pain Questionnaire (MPQ), Ramsey Sedation Scale, and a 5-day pain-and-discomfort diary were used to evaluate pain and sedation levels.

RESULTS

There were no differences in baseline characteristics and reproductive outcomes between both groups. Periprocedural pain scores were comparable for remifentanil and pethidine groups (4 [3 to 7] vs. 6 [4 to 8]; P = 0.13). Pain scores in the pethidine group were significantly lower at 30 minutes after the procedure (1 [0 to 3] vs. 2 [1 to 5]; P = 0.016), but at cost of higher sedation levels when compared to remifentanil (4 [2 to 4] vs. 2 [2 to 2]; P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction was higher, and MPQ scores were lower in the remifentanil group. There were no differences in safety profiles between both analgesics.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-controlled analgesia with remifentanil showed a similar reduction in pain scores than pethidine with midazolam during oocyte retrieval, while pethidine induced the highest pain relief after the procedure. However, PCA remifentanil was associated with less sedation and a better patient satisfaction profile than pethidine.

[Analgesia with remifentanil in spontaneously breathing patients undergoing brief but painful radiological procedures]

INTRODUCTION

Percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and stenting are very painful procedures in interventional radiology and require potent analgesia; employing remifentanil in spontaneously breathing patients may be one possible strategy.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

The study group was composed of 18 men and 2 women with a mean age of 63+/-10 (mean+/-SD) years. Pain intensity was measured with a VAS score before the procedure, after local anesthesia on the rib cage, after stenting and after the radiology procedure.

RESULTS

Remifentanil infusion (dosage: 0.12-0.30 microg/kg body weight/min) was infused throughout the entire radiology procedure according to physical status, past medical history, individual pain, and clinical assessment. During insufflation of 10l O(2)/min via a venturi mask, oxygen saturation did not fall below 96% at any time-point during the procedure. In the VAS score, we noted a decrease after starting the remifentanil infusion towards the end of procedure. All patients were able to move into bed without help. Postoperatively, no analgesics and no antiemetics were needed.

CONCLUSIONS

Employing a remifentanil infusion for brief interventional radiology procedures in palliative treatment of patients resulted in high patient and radiologist comfort.

Propofol versus remifentanil for monitored anaesthesia care during colonoscopy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

We conducted an open, prospective, randomized study to compare the efficacy, safety and recovery characteristics of remifentanil or propofol during monitored anaesthesia care in patients undergoing colonoscopy.

METHODS

Forty patients were randomly assigned to receive either propofol (1 mg kg(-1) followed by 10 mg kg (-1) h(-1), n = 20) or remifentanil (0.5 microg kg(-1) followed by 0.2 microg kg(-1) min(-1), n = 20). The infusion rate was subsequently adapted to clinical needs.

RESULTS

In the propofol group, arterial pressure and heart rate decreased significantly from the baseline. These variables remained unchanged in the remifentanil group, but hypoventilation occurred in 55% of patients. Early recovery was delayed in the propofol group (P < 0.002). Recovery of cognitive and psychomotor functions was faster in the remifentanil group. Fifteen minutes after anaesthesia, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test score was 28.6 +/- 12.8 versus 36.2 +/- 9.4 and the Trieger Dot Test score was 25.6 +/- 8.1 versus 18.7 +/- 4.1 in the propofol and remifentanil groups, respectively (both P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction, using a visual analogue scale, was higher in the propofol group (96 +/- 7 versus 77 +/- 21, P < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Remifentanil proved efficient in reducing pain during colonoscopy. Emergence times were shorter and the recovery of cognitive function was faster with remifentanil compared with propofol. Remifentanil provided a smoother haemodynamic profile than propofol; however, the frequent occurrence of remifentanil-induced hypoventilation requires the cautious administration of this agent.

Use of remifentanil for awake fiberoptic intubation in a morbidly obese patient with severe inflammation of the neck

Impending upper airway obstruction due to odontogenic facial and cervical spreading infection is a potential fatal situation that requires urgent treatment. In particular, securing the threatened airway is a priority and a precondition to the pressing need for surgery. The best approach to establish the difficult airway is awake fiberoptic intubation or scheduled tracheotomy under local anesthesia. We report a critical case of severe swelling of the neck in a morbidly obese patient with no alternative to awake fiberoptic intubation. The primary goals of optimal safety for the patient and appropriate intubating conditions for the anesthesiologist made us to consider a new method of patient medication.

General anesthesia versus monitored anesthesia care with remifentanil for assisted reproductive technologies: effect on pregnancy rate

STUDY OBJECTIVES

To compare the outcome of assisted reproductive technology procedures in women who undergo monitored anesthesia care (MAC) with remifentanil versus general anesthesia.

DESIGN

Retrospective data analysis.

SETTING

University hospital.

PATIENTS

251 ASA physical status I and II women participating in an in vitro fertilization (IVF) or intracytoplasmic sperm injection (ICSI) program.

INTERVENTIONS

During the first phase of the study, all patients underwent general anesthesia induction with alfentanil, propofol, and nitrous oxide, which was maintained with isoflurane or propofol infusion. In the second phase of the study, all patients received a standardized MAC technique with a remifentanil infusion; local anesthetics were not used.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary endpoint was pregnancy rate per transfer. The number of oocytes collected, fertilized, and cleaved was recorded, as was the number of oocytes transferred.

MAIN RESULTS

Patients who underwent MAC had a greater pregnancy rate with IVF (28.2 vs. 16.3%), with ICSI (32.2% vs. 18.8%), and overall (30.6% vs. 17.9%).

CONCLUSIONS

Pregnancy rates in women undergoing transvaginal oocyte retrieval for assisted reproductive technologies were significantly higher with a remifentanil-based MAC technique than with a general anesthetic technique.

Remifentanil for gynaecological and obstetric procedures

Recently, with the introduction of the novel mu-opioid receptor agonist remifentanil, anaesthesiologists have acquired a unique tool to provide adequate, titratable and predictable analgesia throughout surgery, without the risk of opioid-related delay in postoperative recovery. This new compound will therefore mandate a change in anaesthesia practice from opioid-restricted to opioid-dominated anaesthesia. It is the first in the class of esterase-metabolized opioids within the 4-anilidopiperidine series of drugs, and it possesses an analgesic potency similar to that of fentanyl. The advantages of remifentanil are mainly related to its unique pharmacokinetics, whereas its pharmacodynamics are the same as those of fentanyl. Because of these characteristics, remifentanil-based anaesthesia allows profound opioid analgesia intraoperatively, with rapid and predictable awakening thereafter. Review of the recent literature reveals the potential of remifentanil for improving analgesia in gynaecological procedures and its theoretical advantage in obstetric procedures.