Reduced sevoflurane consumption in cirrhotic compared to non-cirrhotic patients undergoing major hepatic surgery

Monitoring the effects of automated gas control of sevoflurane versus target-guided propofol infusion on hemodynamics of liver patients during liver resection. A randomized controlled trial

Background and Aims

Cirrhotic patients are prone to hypotension during anesthesia. The primary aim of the study was to compare the effects of automated gas control (AGC) of sevoflurane and target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol on systemic and cardiac hemodynamics in hepatitis C cirrhotic patients undergoing surgery. The secondary aim was to compare the recovery, complications, and costs between the two groups.

Material and Methods

This was a randomized controlled trial in adults with hepatitis C cirrhosis (Child A) who underwent open liver resection and received AGC (n = 25) or TCI (n = 25). AGC was initially set at FiO2 40% and end-tidal sevoflurane (ET SEVO) at 2.0% with a fresh gas flow of 300 mL/min. TCI of propofol was given using Marsh pharmacokinetic mode with an initial propofol target concentration (Cpt) of 4 μg/mL. Bispectral index score (BIS) was maintained between 40 and 60. Invasive arterial blood pressure (IBP), electrical cardiometry (EC), cardiac output (CO), and systemic vascular resistance (SVR), Fi SEVO, ET SEVO, propofol Cpt, and effect-site concentration (Ce) were recorded.

Results

IBP and EC CO, and SVR were least affected by TCI propofol. Only one (4.00%) patient required vasopressors with TCI vs. 4 (16.00%) with AGC (χ2 (Y) (df = 1) = 0.88, P (Y) = 0.34). There was no delayed recovery, hypoxia, or awareness; however, ICU stay was shorter with TCI, (P = 0.006). BIS and EC guided median of ET SEVO was 1.90%, Fi SEVO was 2.10% with AGC, and propofol Cpt and Ce were 3.00 μg/dL with TCI. Only 0.14 [0.12-0.15] mL/min of SEVO was consumed with AGC and 0.87 [0.85-0.97] mL/min propofol with TCI. The cost was higher with TCI, P < 0.00.

Conclusions

Both techniques are well tolerated hemodynamically, but TCI-propofol was found to be hemodynamically better. The recovery and complications were comparable in both groups, but TCI Propofol infusion was costlier.

Multiparametric Monitoring of Hypnosis and Nociception-Antinociception Balance during General Anesthesia-A New Era in Patient Safety Standards and Healthcare Management

The development of general anesthesia techniques and anesthetic substances has opened new horizons for the expansion and improvement of surgical techniques. Nevertheless, more complex surgical procedures have brought a higher complexity and longer duration for general anesthesia, which has led to a series of adverse events such as hemodynamic instability, under- or overdosage of anesthetic drugs, and an increased number of post-anesthetic events. In order to adapt the anesthesia according to the particularities of each patient, the multimodal monitoring of these patients is highly recommended. Classically, general anesthesia monitoring consists of the analysis of vital functions and gas exchange. Multimodal monitoring refers to the concomitant monitoring of the degree of hypnosis and the nociceptive-antinociceptive balance. By titrating anesthetic drugs according to these parameters, clinical benefits can be obtained, such as hemodynamic stabilization, the reduction of awakening times, and the reduction of postoperative complications. Another important aspect is the impact on the status of inflammation and the redox balance. By minimizing inflammatory and oxidative impact, a faster recovery can be achieved that increases patient safety. The purpose of this literature review is to present the most modern multimodal monitoring techniques to discuss the particularities of each technique.