The pain caused by a 2% propofol target-controlled infusion during anesthesia induction in adults
Chul-Woo Jung, Jeong Rim Lee, Seung-Yeon Yoo, Jung‐Man Lee, Kook Hyun Lee
Abstract
Chul-Woo Jung, Jeong Rim Lee, Seung-Yeon Yoo, Jung‐Man Lee, Kook Hyun Lee
Abstract
Background: An increasing number of cases of target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol have substituted 2% propofol for 1% due to the concerns about lipid deposition and the practical convenience. However, 2% propofol may possess a higher proportion of free aqueous propofol because of the relatively decreased lipid-solvent ratio as compared to that for 1% propofol. We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial to evaluate the pain of 1% and 2% propofol TCI. The efficacy of lidocaine pretreatment to abolish the pain was also tested for each concentration of propofol. Methods: Two hundred adult patients were randomly allocated to 4 groups according to the pretreatment drugs and propofol concentrations; placebo (normal saline) and 1% propofol group (group 1), placebo and 2% propofol group (group 2), lidocaine and 1% propofol group (group 1L), and lidocaine and 2% propofol group (group 2L). Administration of pretreatment drug was followed by TCI with using each concentration of propofol. Pain was assessed using a four-point scale during propofol infusion. Results: Propofol pain was more frequent (82% vs. 63%, respectively, P = 0.026), and severe (P = 0.002) for the group 2 than for group 1. Pain was significantly reduced by lidocaine pretreatment in the group 2L (48%) and group 1L (19%), as compared with group 2 (82%) and group 1 (63%), respectively (P < 0.001, both). However, group 2L still showed considerable pain that was similar to the pain of group 1. Conclusions: TCI of 2% propofol caused more frequent and severe pain despite of lidocaine pretreatment. (Korean J Anesthesiol 2008; 55: 675~9)
OpenAlex reports 1 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Background: An increasing number of cases of target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol have substituted 2% propofol for 1% due to the concerns about lipid deposition and the practical convenience. However, 2% propofol may possess a higher proportion of free aqueous propofol because of the relatively decreased lipid-solvent ratio as compared to that for 1% propofol. We performed a prospective, randomized, double-blind trial to evaluate the pain of 1% and 2% propofol TCI. The efficacy of lidocaine pretreatment to abolish the pain was also tested for each concentration of propofol. Methods: Two hundred adult patients were randomly allocated to 4 groups according to the pretreatment drugs and propofol concentrations; placebo (normal saline) and 1% propofol group (group 1), placebo and 2% propofol group (group 2), lidocaine and 1% propofol group (group 1L), and lidocaine and 2% propofol group (group 2L). Administration of pretreatment drug was followed by TCI with using each concentration of propofol. Pain was assessed using a four-point scale during propofol infusion. Results: Propofol pain was more frequent (82% vs. 63%, respectively, P = 0.026), and severe (P = 0.002) for the group 2 than for group 1. Pain was significantly reduced by lidocaine pretreatment in the group 2L (48%) and group 1L (19%), as compared with group 2 (82%) and group 1 (63%), respectively (P < 0.001, both). However, group 2L still showed considerable pain that was similar to the pain of group 1. Conclusions: TCI of 2% propofol caused more frequent and severe pain despite of lidocaine pretreatment. (Korean J Anesthesiol 2008; 55: 675~9)
Key concepts: Propofol, Lidocaine, Anesthesia, Medicine, Saline, Placebo, Alternative medicine, Pathology