Safaeian Reza, Hassani Valiollah, Mohseni Masood, Ahmadi Aslan, Ashraf Haleh, Movaseghi Gholamreza, Alimian Mahzad, Mohebi Elham, Koleini Zahra Sadat, Pourkand Shayesteh
Pain Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Rasoul Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
MD., Ear, Nose and Throat Department, Rasoul Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Anesth Pain Med. 2019 Aug 5;9(4):e88805. doi: 10.5812/aapm.88805. eCollection 2019 Aug.
Children with sensorineural hearing loss are at risk of cardiac electrophysiologic abnormalities. Inhalational Sevoflurane induction in these children can cause QT prolongation.
In order to evaluate the safety of inhalational induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane in children with sensorineural hearing loss, who are candidates for cochlear implant, its electrophysiologic effects was compared with intravenous induction of anesthesia with propofol.
In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 61 children aged between one and eighteen years old, who were candidates for cochlear implantation, were randomly allocated to groups receiving anesthesia with sevoflurane (n = 32) or propofol (n = 29) for induction of anesthesia. Two 12-leads ECG were taken from all of patients before and after induction and QTc, Tp-e interval, and JTc were measured and compared.
Two cases, who had pre-induction QTc longer than 500 ms were excluded from the study. Patients had similar age (102.58 ± 87 versus 101.46 ± 67 months, P = 0.95) and gender (males: 48.3% versus 56.3%, P = 0.53) distribution. The researchers observed significant post induction difference in QTc values between these groups (propofol 422.5 ± 40, sevoflurane 445.0 ± 29, P = 0.016). There was no significant difference in the percent QTc and Tp-e changes in propofol and sevoflurane groups. Greater percentage of patients with increased Tp-e interval (> 100 ms) in the sevoflurane group than the propofol group was also seen. There was no significant long QTc difference (QTc > 500 ms or more than 60 ms increase from baseline) after induction of anesthesia in the sevoflurane group compared to the propofol group (15.6% versus 13.8%, P = 0.84).
After electrophysiological evaluations in children with sensorineural hearing loss, in patients whose pre-induction QTc is not longer than 500 ms, propofol seems safer than inhalational sevoflurane for induction of anesthesia.
感音神经性听力损失儿童存在心脏电生理异常风险。这些儿童吸入七氟醚诱导麻醉可导致QT间期延长。
为评估七氟醚吸入诱导麻醉在拟行人工耳蜗植入的感音神经性听力损失儿童中的安全性,将其电生理效应与丙泊酚静脉诱导麻醉进行比较。
在这项双盲随机临床试验中,61名年龄在1至18岁之间、拟行人工耳蜗植入的儿童被随机分配至接受七氟醚麻醉(n = 32)或丙泊酚麻醉(n = 29)诱导麻醉的组中。在诱导麻醉前后从所有患者采集两份12导联心电图,测量并比较QTc、Tp-e间期和JTc。
两名诱导前QTc超过500毫秒的患者被排除在研究之外。患者年龄(102.58 ± 87对101.46 ± 67个月,P = 0.95)和性别(男性:48.3%对56.3%,P = 0.53)分布相似。研究人员观察到这些组之间诱导后QTc值存在显著差异(丙泊酚422.5 ± 40,七氟醚445.0 ± 29,P = 0.016)。丙泊酚组和七氟醚组的QTc百分比和Tp-e变化无显著差异。七氟醚组Tp-e间期增加(> 100毫秒)的患者百分比也高于丙泊酚组。与丙泊酚组相比,七氟醚组麻醉诱导后长QTc差异不显著(QTc > 500毫秒或较基线增加超过60毫秒)(15.6%对13.8%,P = 0.84)。
在对感音神经性听力损失儿童进行电生理评估后,对于诱导前QTc不超过500毫秒的患者,丙泊酚用于诱导麻醉似乎比吸入七氟醚更安全。