[Propofol for induction and maintenance of anesthesia during heart surgery. Results of pharmacological studies in man].

Numerous reports have concluded that propofol is suitable for maintenance of anesthesia by continuous infusion. The aim of this study was to evaluate the use of propofol and fentanyl for coronary bypass surgery in patients with good left ventricular function. The effects of this anesthetic combination on quality of anesthesia, hemodynamic status, and endocrine and metabolic responses were assessed. Postoperative recovery and side effects were also noted. The effects were compared with those of a standard method using etomidate, midazolam, and fentanyl. METHODS. Twenty patients who presented for aortocoronary bypass surgery (NYHA class II-III) were randomly allocated to one of two groups: propofol-fentanyl (group A) or etomidate-midazolam-fentanyl (group B). In each patient the dosage of the drugs was adjusted to obtain the optimum responses during induction and maintenance. RESULTS. Propofol in combination with fentanyl diminished mean arterial pressure (-28.7%) and heart rate (-17.3%) when used for induction in patients with ischemic heart disease, even in low doses and with slow administration. In 5 of the 10 patients it was impossible to prevent a critical fall in coronary perfusion without active intervention. However, during maintenance anesthesia, stable circulatory parameters were obtained with both drug regimens. Clinical signs thought to reflect myocardial ischemia were not observed. In both groups reductions in basal and stimulated catecholamine secretion were demonstrated. Similarly, perioperative cortisol secretion was reduced with both techniques. Despite all the complicated metabolic inhibitory effects seen, preoperative hormonal levels were restored within 1 h of the end of anesthesia. The magnitude and duration of the metabolic changes were found to be related to the duration of surgery. There was no evidence of non-homogeneous tissue perfusion as assessed by increases in lactate concentration, cardiac ischemia, or liver dysfunction in any of the patients. There were no postoperative complications in either group, but the return of consciousness, adequate spontaneous ventilation, and psychomotor activity was more rapid in the propofol patients. CONCLUSION. In summary, it can be concluded that a propofol infusion technique positively enhances the recovery period after cardiac surgery and provides good control during anesthesia. However, the use of propofolfentanyl for induction of anesthesia in patients with limited coronary perfusion is not recommended because of its hypotensive effect.