Hostname: page-component-78c5997874-fbnjt Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-11-19T02:06:47.134Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Time course and train-of-four fade of mivacurium block during sevoflurane and intravenous anaesthesia

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  29 April 2005

J. Barrio ,
G. SanMiguel ,
I. Asensio ,
I. Molina ,
F. López  and
V. García
J. Barrio
Affiliation:
Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Department of Anaesthesiology, Valencia, Spain
G. SanMiguel
Affiliation:
Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Department of Anaesthesiology, Valencia, Spain
I. Asensio
Affiliation:
Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Department of Anaesthesiology, Valencia, Spain
I. Molina
Affiliation:
Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Department of Anaesthesiology, Valencia, Spain
F. López
Affiliation:
Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Department of Anaesthesiology, Valencia, Spain
V. García
Affiliation:
Hospital Arnau de Vilanova, Department of Anaesthesiology, Valencia, Spain
Get access

Abstract

Summary

Background and objective: Volatile anaesthetics inhibit nicotinic acetylcholine receptors at clinically relevant concentrations with higher affinity for the neuronal nicotinic receptor. The inhibitory effects of propofol on nicotinic receptors have only been documented at supraclinical concentrations. The aim of this study was to determine recovery properties and train-of-four (TOF) fade of mivacurium during sevoflurane and propofol anaesthesia, in order to examine any differences both in the enhancement of the neuromuscular block (postjunctional effects) and in TOF fade (prejunctional effects).

Methods: Twenty ASA I–II adult patients were randomly allocated to maintenance of anaesthesia with sevoflurane (end-tidal concentration 2%) or propofol. Neuromuscular block was assessed by acceleromyography and a single dose of mivacurium (0.15 mg kg−1) was administered (in the sevoflurane group after 30 min of exposure to sevoflurane). We measured time for recovery of the first twitch of the TOF (T1) from 25–75%, time from 25% recovery of T1 to achieving a TOF ratio (TOFR) of 0.8, TOFR at 50%, 75% and 90% recovery of T1, and height of T1 at TOFR of 0.7 and 0.9. Data were tested using t-test for independent samples.

Results: Recovery times (mean (95% confidence interval, CI)) of mivacurium in the sevoflurane group (T1 25–75%, 11.3 (8.1–14.5) min; T1 25%-TOFR0.8, 19.1 (15.7–22.5) min) were significantly longer (P < 0.05) than in the propofol group (T1 25–75%, 6.5 (5.2–7.7) min; T1 25%-TOFR0.8, 11.3 (7.8–10.3) min). No differences were found in the relations between TOFR and T1 or vice versa, between the groups.

Conclusions: Recovery times after a single dose of mivacurium were prolonged by sevoflurane compared with propofol but no differences in TOF fade were observed between the two anaesthetics.

Keywords

NEUROMUSCULAR BLOCKING AGENTS, mivacuriumANAESTHETICS, INHALATIONsevofluraneANAESTHETICS, INTRAVENOUS, propofolPHARMACOLOGY, drug interactionsRECEPTORS, nicotinic acetylcholine
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 22 , Issue 4 , April 2005 , pp. 303 - 306
Copyright
2005 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Cardoso RA, Yamakura T, Brozowski SJ, Chavez-Noriega LE, Harris RA. Human neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors expressed in Xenopus Oocytes predict efficacy of halogenated compounds that disobey the Meyer–Overton rule. Anesthesiology 1999; 91: 1370–1377.Google Scholar
Scheller M, Bufler J, Schneck H, Kochs E, Franke C. Isoflurane and sevoflurane interact with the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor channels in micromolar concentrations. Anesthesiology 1997; 86: 118–127.Google Scholar
Rada EM, Tharakan EC, Flood P. Volatile anesthetics reduce agonist affinity at nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the brain. Anesth Analg 2003; 96: 108–111.Google Scholar
Paul M, Fokt RM, Kindler CH, Dipp NC, Yost CS. Characterization of the interactions between volatile anesthetics and neuromuscular blockers at the muscle nicotinic acetylcholine receptor. Anesth Analg 2002; 95: 362–367.Google Scholar
Violet JM, Downie DL, Nakisa RC, Lieb WR, Franks NP. Differential sensitivities of mammalian neuronal and muscle nicotinic acetylcholine receptors to general anesthetics. Anesthesiology 1997; 86: 866–874.Google Scholar
Fururya R, Oka K, Watanabe I, Kamiya Y, Itoh H, Andoh T. The effects of ketamine and propofol on neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors and P2X purinoceptors in PC12 cells. Anesth Analg 1999; 88: 174–180.Google Scholar
Patten D, Foxon GR, Martan KE, Halliwell RF. An electrophysiological study of the effects of propofol on native neuronal ligand-gated ion channels. Clin Exp Pharmacol Physiol 2001; 28: 451–458.Google Scholar
Dilger JP. The effects of general anaesthetics on ligand-gated ion channels. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89: 41–51.Google Scholar
Temburni MK, Blitzblau RC, Jacob MH. Receptor targeting and heterogeneity at interneuronal nicotinic cholinergic synapses in vivo. J Physiol 2000; 525: 21–29.Google Scholar
Colquhoun LM, Patrick JW. Pharmacology of neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptor subtypes. Adv Pharmacol 1997; 39: 191–220.Google Scholar
Fu WM, Liu JJ. Regulation of acetylcholine release by presynaptic nicotinic receptors at developing neuromuscular synapses. Mol Pharmacol 1997; 51: 390–398.Google Scholar
McCoy EP, Connolly FM, Mirakhur RK, Loan PB, Paxton D. Nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking drugs and train-of-four fade. Can J Anaesth 1995; 42: 213–216.Google Scholar
Carroll MT, Mirakhur RK, Lowry DW, McCourt KC, Kerr C. Neuromuscular blocking effects and train-of-four fade with cisatracurium: comparison with other nondepolarising relaxants. Anaesthesia 1998; 53: 1169–1173.Google Scholar
Itoh H, Shibata K, Nitta S, Kobayashi T. Train-of-four fade and neuromuscular block in rats: a comparison between pancuronium, vecuronium and rocuronium. Can J Anaesth 2000; 47: 950–955.Google Scholar
Flood P, Ramirez-Latorre J, Role L. Alpha4 beta2 neuronal nicotinic acetylcholine receptors in the central nervous system are inhibited by isoflurane and propofol, but alpha7-type nicotinic acetylcholine receptors are unaffected. Anesthesiology 1997; 86: 859–865.Google Scholar
Lowry DW, Mirakhur RK, Carroll MT, McCarthy GJ, Hughes DA, O'Hare RA. Potency and time course of mivacurium block during sevoflurane, isoflurane and intravenous anesthesia. Can J Anaesth 1999; 46: 29–33.Google Scholar
Kaplan RF, Garcia M, Hannallah RS. Mivacurium-induced neuromuscular blockade during sevoflurane and halothane anaesthesia in children. Can J Anaesth 1995; 42: 16–20.Google Scholar
Wulf H, Hauschild S, Proppe D, Ledowski T. Verstarkung der neuromuskular-blockierenden wirkung von mivacurium wahrend inhalations-anästhesien mit desfluran, sevofluran und isofluran im vergleich zu totaler intravenöser anästhesie. Anaesthesiol Reanim 1998; 23: 88–92.Google Scholar
Meretoja OA, Wirtavuori K, Taivainen T, Olkkola KT. Time course of potentiation of mivacurium by halothane and isoflurane in children. Br J Anaesth 1996; 76: 235–238.Google Scholar
Jalkanen L, Meretoja OA. The influence of the duration of isoflurane anaesthesia on neuromuscular effects of mivacurium. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1997; 41: 248–251.Google Scholar
Motamed C, Donati F. Sevoflurane and isoflurane, but not propofol, decrease mivacurium requirements over time. Can J Anesth 2002; 49: 907–912.Google Scholar
Kopman AF, Klewicka M, Neuman GG. The relationship between acceleromyographic train-of-four fade and single twitch depression. Anesthesiology 2002; 96: 583–587.Google Scholar