Clinical Trial
Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial
Research Support, Non-U.S. Gov't
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Adaptive feedback-controlled infusion versus repetitive injections of vecuronium in patients during isoflurane anesthesia.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare vecuronium requirements using repetitive injections and a model-based, closed-loop, feedback-controlled infusion during isoflurane anesthesia.

DESIGN: Randomized open study.

SETTING: Departments of Anesthesiology and Ear, Nose, and Throat Surgery at a university hospital.

PATIENTS: Twenty-two patients of ASA physical status I or II undergoing elective otolaryngological surgery requiring general anesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS: Vecuronium was used for muscle relaxation. The desired level of neuromuscular transmission was set to 10% of control. All patients received vecuronium 0.08 mg/kg for intubation. Thereafter, vecuronium was injected repetitively in 11 patients (Group 1) whenever spontaneous recovery had reached the 10% level. In the other group of 11 patients (Group 2), relaxation was maintained by an adaptive closed-loop feedback system, which was based on a pharmacokinetic-dynamic model.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Neuromuscular transmission was quantified by the evoked electromyogram of the hypothenar muscles. In Group 1, the first repetition of 0.02 mg/kg had to be administered after 27.0 +/- 5.5 minutes, followed by repetitions of the same dose every 16.3 +/- 3.0 minutes. The induced neuromuscular block ranged from 83% to 100%. The mean vecuronium demand was 0.123 +/- 0.018 mg/kg/h. In Group 2, stable relaxation of 90% +/- 2% was achieved within 19.2 +/- 7.5 minutes after a period of damped oscillations. The mean offset from the target value of 90% blockade was 0.65% +/- 0.32%. The average vecuronium requirement was 0.056 +/- 0.021 mg/kg/h during steady state. The difference between the groups in muscle relaxant demand was statistically significant.

CONCLUSIONS: The model-based adaptive feedback system proved to be useful in maintaining a stable degree of paralysis, adjusting relaxant input to individual demand, and minimizing drug requirement, as compared with repetitive injections.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.

By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.

Your Privacy Choices Toggle icon

You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now

Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app