Chronic alcoholism increases the induction dose of propofol

Perioperative Concerns in the Patient with History of Alcohol Use

Alcohol use is common in patients presenting for surgery and can result in significant physiologic changes and postoperative complications. Anesthesia providers must be aware of the potential risks associated with alcohol consumption and take steps to minimize them. Perioperative management includes assessing patients for alcohol use, providing alcohol cessation interventions, adjusting the anesthetic plan according to the patient's alcohol use history, providing appropriate pain management strategies, and closely monitoring patients during and after surgery for signs of alcohol withdrawal.

Long-term high-risk drinking does not change effective doses of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope in Chinese male patients

Background

Available literature indicates that long-term drinkers demand a higher dose of propofol for induction of anesthesia than non-drinkers. However, there is no study having assessed the influence of long-term high-risk drinking (LTHRD) on the effective doses of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope with sedation. This study was designed to compare the effective doses of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope between LTHRD and non-drinking (ND) Chinese male patients.

Methods

Thirty-one LTHRD patients and 29 ND male patients undergoing elective gastroscopy with propofol sedation were enrolled. The modified Dixon’s up-and-down method was applied to determine the calculated median effective dose (ED₅₀) of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope. Furthermore, the isotonic regression analysis was used to establish the dose–response curve of propofol and assess the effective doses of propofol where 50% (ED₅₀) and 95% (ED₉₅) of gastroscope insertions were successful.

Results

The calculated ED₅₀ of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope was 1.55 ± 0.10 mg/kg and 1.44 ± 0.11 mg/kg in the LTHRD and ND patients. The isotonic regression analysis further showed that ED₅₀ and ED₉₅ of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope was 1.50 mg/kg (95%CI, 1.40–1.63) and 1.80 mg/kg (95%CI, 1.74–1.90) in the LTHRD patients, respectively; 1.40 mg/kg (95% CI, 1.27–1.57) and 1.60 mg/kg (95%CI, 1.56–1.65) in the ND patients. The ED₅₀ of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope was not significantly different between LTHRD and ND patients.

Conclusions

This study demonstrates that the difference in the estimated ED₅₀ of propofol for successful insertion of gastroscope between LTHRD and ND Chinese male patients was not statistically significant.

Trial registration

The study was registered on November 28, 2020 (ChiCTR2000040382) in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01725-2.

Low-dose midazolam and propofol use for conscious sedation during diagnostic endoscopy

To find the right sedation technique for different types of treatment methods and the right amount of sedatives so the chances of side effects happening can be reduced. This was a retrospective cohort analysis conducted on prospectively collected data. Patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy only (E group) were sub-divided into two subgroups: (a) Those who received 0.5 mg/kg of propofol (E-a), (b) Those who received 0.025 mg/kg of midazolam and 0.5 mg/kg of propofol (E-b). Patients who underwent esophagogastroduodenoscopy with colonoscopy (EC group) were also sub-divided into three subgroups: (a) Those who received 0.5 mg/kg of propofol (EC-a), (b) Those who received 0.025 mg/kg of midazolam and 0.5 mg/kg of propofol (EC-b), (c) Those who received 25 mg (12.5 mg if body weight < 50 kg or age > 70) of meperidine and 0.025 mg/kg of midazolam along with 0.5 mg/kg of propofol (EC-c). When the level of target was not reached, 10-20 mg of propofol was additionally injected. Sedation efficacy and safety were then compared among groups. E-b and EC-b decreased the overall amount of propofol and reduced side effect of temporary hypoxemia compared to E-a and EC-a. EC-b shortened patient recovery time compared to EC-c and reduced paradoxical reaction. In terms of the patient satisfaction and patient cooperation by endoscopists, there were no significant differences between EC-b and EC-c. Concomitant use of low dosages of both propofol and midazolam is found to be useful and safe when endoscopy needs to be performed.

Diagnosis and treatment of acute alcohol intoxication and alcohol withdrawal syndrome: position paper of the Italian Society on Alcohol

The chronic use of alcohol can lead to the onset of an alcohol use disorder (AUD). About 50% of subjects with an AUD may develop alcohol withdrawal syndrome (AWS) when they reduce or discontinue their alcohol consumption and, in 3-5% of them, convulsions and delirium tremens (DTs), representing life-threatening complications, may occur. Unfortunately, few physicians are adequately trained in identifying and treating AWS. The Italian Society on Alcohol has, therefore, implemented a task force of specialists to draw up recommendations for the treatment of AWS with the following main results: (1) while mild AWS may not require treatment, moderate and severe AWS need to be pharmacologically treated; (2) out-patient treatment is appropriate in patients with mild or moderate AWS, while patients with severe AWS need to be treated as in-patients; (3) benzodiazepines, BDZs are the "gold standard" for the treatment of AWS and DTs; (4) alpha-2-agonists, beta-blockers, and neuroleptics may be used in association when BDZs do not completely resolve specific persisting symptoms of AWS; (5) in the case of a refractory form of DTs, the use of anaesthetic drugs (propofol and phenobarbital) in an intensive care unit is appropriate; (6) alternatively to BDZs, sodium oxybate, clomethiazole, and tiapride approved in some European Countries for the treatment of AWS may be employed for the treatment of moderate AWS; (7) anti-convulsants are not sufficient to suppress AWS, and they may be used only in association with BDZs for the treatment of refractory forms of convulsions in the course of AWS.

Baclofen to prevent agitation in alcohol-addicted patients in the ICU: study protocol for a randomised controlled trial

Background

Alcohol is the leading psychoactive substance consumed in France, with about 15 million regular consumers. The National institute on Alcohol Abuse and Alcoholism (NIAAA) considers alcohol abuse to be more than 14 units of alcohol a week for men and 7 units for women. The specific complication of alcoholism is the alcohol withdrawal syndrome. Its incidence reaches up to 30 % and its main complications are delirium tremens, restlessness, extended hospital stay, higher morbidity, and psychiatric and cognitive impairment. Without appropriate treatment, delirium tremens can lead to death in up to 50 % of patients.

Methods/design

This prospective, double-blind, randomised controlled study versus placebo will be conducted in twelve French intensive care units (ICU). Patients with an alcohol intake level higher than the NIAAA threshold, who are under mechanical ventilation, will be included. The primary objective is to determine whether baclofen is more efficient than placebo in preventing restlessness-related side effects in the ICU. Secondary outcomes include mechanical ventilation duration, length of ICU stay, and cumulative doses of sedatives and painkillers received within 28 days of ICU admission. Restlessness-related side effects in the ICU are defined as unplanned extubation, medical disposal removal (such as urinary catheter, venous or arterial line or surgical drain), falling out of bed, ICU runaway (leaving ICU without physician's approval), immobilisation device removal, self-aggression or aggression towards medical staff. Daily doses of baclofen/placebo will be guided by daily creatinine clearance assessment.

Discussion

Restlessness in alcoholic patients is a life-threatening issue in ICUs. BACLOREA is a randomised study assessing the capacity of baclofen to prevent agitation in mechanically ventilated patients. Enrolment of 314 patients will begin in June 2016 and is expected to end in October 2018.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02723383, registered on 3 March 2016.

Electronic supplementary material

The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-016-1539-2) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.

Dexmedetomidine impairs success of patient-controlled sedation in alcoholics during ERCP: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study

BACKGROUND

There is a lack of studies about procedural sedation of alcoholics. Dexmedetomidine is recommended for procedural sedation and reported effective for alcohol withdrawal. We evaluated the suitability of dexmedetomidine for sedation of alcoholics during endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP).

METHODS

Fifty patients with chronic alcoholism scheduled for elective ERCP were randomized 1:1 to receive dexmedetomidine (Dex group) (loading dose 1 μg kg(-1) over 10 min, followed by constant intravenous infusion 0.7 μg kg(-1) h(-1)) or saline placebo (P group). Patient-controlled sedation with propofol-alfentanil was used by patients as a rescue method. Sedation was considered as successful if no intervention of an anesthesiologist was needed. Consumption of sedatives was registered, and sedation levels and vital signs were monitored.

RESULTS

Dexmedetomidine alone was insufficient in all patients. The mean ± SD consumption of propofol was 159 ± 72 mg in the P group, and 116 ± 61 mg in the Dex group (p = 0.028). Sedation was successful in 19 of 25 (76 %) patients in the Dex group and in all patients in the P group (p = 0.022). The incidence of sedation adverse events did not differ between the groups. Dexmedetomidine was associated with delayed recovery.

CONCLUSIONS

Patient-controlled sedation with propofol and alfentanil but not dexmedetomidine can be recommended for sedation of alcoholics during ERCP.