Intravenous lidocaine in high blood pressure and tachycardia prevention in intubated adult patients asa I and II under general anesthesia
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.main##
Introduction: laryngoscopy and endotracheal intubation (OTI) predispose to cardio-cerebral complications because of catecholamine release. Lidocaine, economic and widely available, has a controversial protective effect in low doses (< 1.5 mg/k body weight). It raises its effect in attenuating the increase in heart rate and blood pressure during these procedures by increasing the dose to 2 mg/k., taking advantage of its wide therapeutic window. Objective: to compare the hemodynamic changes during the IOT when applying lidocaine 1.5 mg/k vs 2 mg/k. Materials and methods: a randomized double-blind clinical trial with 30 patients in each group (alpha error = 0.05 and study power of 80%). The control group received lidocaine 1.5 mg/k, and the study group 2 mg/k during anesthetic induction. All patients received propofol, fentanyl and rocuronium. It was measured the heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) at baseline, during IOT and every minute until 5 min. It was analyzed in epi-info 3.2.1. Results: there was less hemodynamic changes in lidocaine group 2 mg/k, with no statistically significant differences for all outcomes: FC (74.6 vs. 75.7, p = 0.75), SBP (119.7 vs. 120.3, p = 0.78), TAM (85.7 vs. 87.1, p = 0.72) and DBP (68.7 vs. 68.8, p = 0.72). Conclusions: there were neither clinical hemodynamic nor statistically significant differences during orotracheal intubation in ASA I and II patients taken to surgery under general anesthesia using lidocaine 2 mg/k vs 1.5 mg/k.
Downloads
##plugins.themes.bootstrap3.article.details##
Russel WJ, Morris RG, et al. Changes in plasma catecholamine concentrations during endotracheal intubation. British Journal of Anesthesia 1981;53:837-839.
Shribman AJ, Smith G, Achola KJ. Cardiovascular and catecholamine responses to laringoscopy with and without tracheal intubation. British Journal of Anesthesia 1987;295-299.
Kindler et al. Effects of intravenous lidocaine and esmolol an hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 1996;8:491-496.
Helfman SM, Gold MI, De Lisser EA, et al. Which drug prevents tachycardia and hypertension associated with tracheal intubation: lidocaine, fentanyl, or esmolol. Anesthesia & Analgesia 1991;72:482-486.
Kindler CH, Schumacher PG, Schneider MC, Urwyler A. Effects of intravenous lidocaine and/or esmolol on hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and intubation: a double-blind, controlled clinical trial. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 1996;8:491-496.
Idit Matot, MD, J. Y. Sichel, MD. The Effect of Clonidine Premedication on Hemodynamic Responses to Microlaryngoscopy and Rigid Bronchoscopy. Anesthesia & Analgesia 2000;91:828-833.
Ministerio de la Protección Social. Resolución número 2378 de 2008 (junio 27). Págs. 1-93.
Ministerio de Salud. Resolución número 8430 de 1993 (octubre 4). Págs. 1-19.
Abou-Madi, et al. Cardiovascular reactions to laringoscopy and tracheal intubation.Canadian Anaesthetists’ Society journal 1977;24:12-19.
Hamaya Y, Dohi S. Differences in cardiovascular response to airway stimulation at different sites and blockade of the responses by lidocaine. Anesthesiollogy 2000;93-95.
Yukioka H. Intravenous Lidocaine as a Suppressant of Coughing during Tracheal Intubation. Anesthesia & Analgesia 1985;1189-1192.
Chraemmer-Jørgensen B. Lack of Effect of Intravenous Lidocaine on Hemodynamic Responses to Rapid Sequence Induction of General Anesthesia. Anesthesia & Analgesia 1986;65:1037-1041.
Villalonga Morales A, Lapena Bayo E. La respuesta refleja a la laringoscopia y la intubación traqueal. Revista española de anestesiología y reanimación 1990;37: 373-377.
Hidekazu Yukioka. Intravenous Lidocaine as a Suppressant of Coughing during Tracheal Intubation. Anesthesia & Analgesia 1985;1189-1192.
Abou-Madi, et al. Cardiovascular reactions to laringoscopy and tracheal intubation. Canadian Anaesthetists’ Society journal 1977;24:12-9.