Efficacy of ephedrine in the prevention of vascular pain associated with different infusion rates of propofol

Efficacy and Safety of Ketamine Compared with Placebo and Other Medications for Preventing Propofol Injection Pain in Adults: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Purpose

To systematically evaluate the effectiveness and safety of ketamine in preventing propofol injection pain (PIP).

Patients and Methods

The electronic databases including PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, and Cochrane Library were searched from their inception until 2 August 2023. Randomized controlled trials (RCT) comparing ketamine with placebo or other interventions to alleviate PIP in adults were included. Fixed-effects or random-effects models were used to calculate pooled risk ratios (RR) and corresponding 95% confidence intervals (CI) based on the heterogeneity of the studies included.

Results

Thirteen RCTs involving 2105 patients were included. In terms of reducing the incidence of PIP, ketamine is more effective than placebo (RR = 0.43, 95% CI = [0.34, 0.55], P < 0.00001), lidocaine (RR = 0.70, 95% CI = [0.55, 0.90], P = 0.005), dexmedetomidine (RR = 0.52, 95% CI = [0.40, 0.66], P < 0.00001), and thiopental (RR = 0.25, 95% CI = [0.08, 0.83], P = 0.02). In reducing the incidence of severe PIP, ketamine is superior to placebo (RR = 0.12, 95% CI = [0.08, 0.19], P < 0.00001), and lidocaine (RR = 0.34, 95% CI = [0.21, 0.56], P < 0.0001), except dexmedetomidine (RR = 0.20, 95% CI = [0.04, 1.13], P = 0.07), and thiopental (RR = 0.33, 95% CI = [0.04, 3.10], P = 0.33). Compared with mixed injection, separate injection of ketamine and propofol showed no significant difference in the incidence of PIP (RR = 0.96, 95% CI = [0.31, 3.00], P = 0.95) and severe PIP (RR = 1.19, 95% CI = [0.07, 21.29], P = 0.90). Based solely on the reports from the studies included, subanesthetic doses of ketamine are generally safe in preventing PIP.

Conclusion

A subanesthetic dose of ketamine can effectively and safely reduce the incidence of PIP and severe PIP in adults, and is more effective than lidocaine, dexmedetomidine, and thiopental.

Registration

PROSPERO CRD42023455093.

A Prospective Study on the Predictability of Propofol Injection Pain

Introduction In this prospective study, we aimed to determine if there was a link between pain on propofol injection (POPI) and various hemogram parameters and ratios. Methods The study was designed to include 100 consecutive male patients undergoing surgery in a tertiary hospital in February 2017. Preoperatively collected data included patients' age, weight, height, hemogram parameters (white blood cell (WBC) count, neutrophil count, lymphocyte count, platelet count, mean platelet volume (MPV), platelet distribution width (PDW), plateletcrit (PCT), hemoglobin, and hematocrit). All patients' hemograms were performed using the same device. The neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio, platelet-lymphocyte ratio, and systemic immune inflammatory score (SII) were calculated from this data. Patients received prior information that pain would be questioned during propofol injection. The pain was grouped between 0 and 3 (0 no pain, 1 mild pain, 2 moderate pain, 3 severe pain). Patients were questioned by the anesthesiologist about their level of pain at five-second intervals until loss of consciousness occurred. The same anesthesiologist also used the McCririck and Hunter's verbal rating score (VRS) to evaluate pain. The patients' heart rate and blood pressure were also recorded after induction. Results An extremely significant correlation was found between the presence of POPI and neutrophil-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), platelet lymphocyte ratio (PLR) and SII ratios (p<0.001). All three parameters were found to be significant in predicting the presence of POPI. The higher area under the curve (AUC) was found for SII. The cutoff value for SII's prediction of POPI was calculated to be 479,000, with a sensitivity of 68% and a specificity of 68%. Patients with an NLR of >497000 had a 4.63 times higher risk of POPI (odds ratio: 4.63, 95% CI: 1.6714 - 12.7982). Conclusion Our study is the first to show that POPI can be predicted by using NLR, PLR, and SII. Our data also support other studies that have reported a relationship between the inflammatory biomarker NLR and pain perception.

The antimicrobial activity of ephedrine and admixture of ephedrine and propofol: an in vitro study

Introduction

Propofol and Ephedrine are commonly used during anesthesia maintenance, the former as a hypnotic agent and the later as a vasopressor. The addition of propofol to ephedrine or administration of ephedrine before propofol injection is useful for decreasing or preventing propofol related hemodynamic changes and vascular pain. This in vitro study evaluated the antibacterial effect on common hospital-acquired infection pathogens of ephedrine alone or combined with propofol.

Material and method

The study was performed in two stages. In the first, the Minimum Inhibitory Concentration of propofol and ephedrine alone and combined was calculated for Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecium, Staphylococcus aureus, Pseudomonas aeruginosa, and a clinical isolate of Acinetobacter spp. at 0, 6, 12 and 24 h, using the microdilution method. In the second stage, the same drugs and combination were used to determine their effect on bacterial growth. Bacterial solutions were prepared at 0.5 MacFarland in sterile 0.9% physiological saline and diluted at 1/100 concentration. Colony numbers were measured as colony forming units.mL⁻¹ at 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 and 12th hours.

Results

Ephedrine either alone or combined with propofol did not have an antimicrobial effect on Escherichia coli, Enterococcus faecium, or Pseudomonas aeruginosa and this was similar to propofol. However, ephedrine alone and combined with propofol was found to have an antimicrobial effect on Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter species at 512 mcg.mL⁻¹ concentration and significantly decreased bacterial growth rate.

Conclusion

Ephedrine has an antimicrobial activity on Staphylococcus aureus and Acinetobacter species which were frequently encountered pathogens as a cause of nosocomial infections.

Lipid composition and lidocaine effect on immediate and delayed injection pain following propofol administration

Background:

Propofol has been used for the induction and maintenance of anesthesia. However, patients experience vascular pain during its injection.

Aims:

The objective of this study was to compare the effect of the lipid type used in propofol preparations and that of lidocaine on the immediate and delayed vascular pain induced by propofol administration.

Materials and Methods:

In this double-blinded clinical study, 150 patients at American Society of Anesthesiologists level I-II were randomly divided into three equally sized groups. A propofol with medium and long-chain triglycerides (propofol-MCT/LCT) was administered to the first group. The second group received propofol containing propofol-LCT, and the third group received propofol-LCT and pretreatment lidocaine 20 mg. The incidence and the intensity of immediate (during injection) and delayed injection pain (after 20 s) were evaluated on a verbal analog scale (1–10) until patients’ unconsciousness.

Statistical Analysis:

Sample size was calculated with SigmaPlot version 12.5 software. Data were analyzed with Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) version 16, one-way analysis of variance, and post-hoc Tukey. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.

Results:

The demographic parameters of the three groups were similar. The lidocaine group experienced the least immediate vascular pain. The intensity of pain was highest in the propofol-LCT group (P = 0.04). Additionally, the intensity of delayed pain was lowest in the propofol-MCT/LCT group (P = 0.01). The incidence of pain associated with the propofol administration was 26.5, 44, and 18%, respectively, in propofol-MCT/LCT, propofol-LCT, and lidocaine and propofol-LCT groups.

Conclusion:

The results indicate an effect of the lipid type on delayed pain reduction, especially propofol-MCT/LCT. On the other hand, the lidocaine decreases immediate propofol-LCT vascular pain.