Sedation with propofol and isoflurane differs in terms of microcirculatory parameters: A randomized animal study using dorsal skinfold chamber mouse model
Christine Kang , Ah-Reum Cho , Haekyu Kim , Jae-Young Kwon , Hyeon Jeong Lee , Eunsoo Kim
{"title":"Sedation with propofol and isoflurane differs in terms of microcirculatory parameters: A randomized animal study using dorsal skinfold chamber mouse model","authors":"Christine Kang , Ah-Reum Cho , Haekyu Kim , Jae-Young Kwon , Hyeon Jeong Lee , Eunsoo Kim","doi":"10.1016/j.mvr.2024.104655","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><p>This study aimed to explore the effects of sedative doses of propofol and isoflurane on microcirculation in septic mice compared to controls. Isoflurane, known for its potential as a sedation drug in bedside applications, lacks clarity regarding its impact on the microcirculation system. The hypothesis was that propofol would exert a more pronounced influence on the microvascular flow index, particularly amplified in septic conditions.</p></div><div><h3>Material and methods</h3><p>Randomized study was conducted from December 2020 to October 2021 involved 60 BALB/c mice, with 52 mice analyzed. Dorsal skinfold chambers were implanted, followed by intraperitoneal injections of either sterile 0.9 % saline or lipopolysaccharide for the control and sepsis groups, respectively. Both groups received propofol or isoflurane treatment for 120 min. Microcirculatory parameters were obtained via incident dark-field microscopy videos, along with the mean blood pressure and heart rate at three time points: before sedation (T0), 30 min after sedation (T30), and 120 min after sedation (T120). Endothelial glycocalyx thickness and syndecan-1 concentration were also analyzed.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>In healthy controls, both anesthetics reduced blood pressure. However, propofol maintained microvascular flow, differing significantly from isoflurane at T120 (propofol, 2.8 ± 0.3 vs. isoflurane, 1.6 ± 0.9; <em>P <</em> 0.001). In the sepsis group, a similar pattern occurred at T120 without statistical significance (propofol, 1.8 ± 1.1 vs. isoflurane, 1.2 ± 0.7; <em>P =</em> 0.023). Syndecan-1 levels did not differ between agents, but glycocalyx thickness index was significantly lower in the isoflurane-sepsis group than propofol (<em>P =</em> 0.001).</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>Propofol potentially offers protective action against microvascular flow deterioration compared to isoflurane, observed in control mice. Furthermore, a lower degree of sepsis-induced glycocalyx degradation was evident with propofol compared to isoflurane.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":18534,"journal":{"name":"Microvascular research","volume":"153 ","pages":"Article 104655"},"PeriodicalIF":2.9000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-15","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0026286224000049/pdfft?md5=9386c111a44d4fbaa0e5cc10863b0dfa&pid=1-s2.0-S0026286224000049-main.pdf","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Microvascular research","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0026286224000049","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"PERIPHERAL VASCULAR DISEASE","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
This study aimed to explore the effects of sedative doses of propofol and isoflurane on microcirculation in septic mice compared to controls. Isoflurane, known for its potential as a sedation drug in bedside applications, lacks clarity regarding its impact on the microcirculation system. The hypothesis was that propofol would exert a more pronounced influence on the microvascular flow index, particularly amplified in septic conditions.
Material and methods
Randomized study was conducted from December 2020 to October 2021 involved 60 BALB/c mice, with 52 mice analyzed. Dorsal skinfold chambers were implanted, followed by intraperitoneal injections of either sterile 0.9 % saline or lipopolysaccharide for the control and sepsis groups, respectively. Both groups received propofol or isoflurane treatment for 120 min. Microcirculatory parameters were obtained via incident dark-field microscopy videos, along with the mean blood pressure and heart rate at three time points: before sedation (T0), 30 min after sedation (T30), and 120 min after sedation (T120). Endothelial glycocalyx thickness and syndecan-1 concentration were also analyzed.
Results
In healthy controls, both anesthetics reduced blood pressure. However, propofol maintained microvascular flow, differing significantly from isoflurane at T120 (propofol, 2.8 ± 0.3 vs. isoflurane, 1.6 ± 0.9; P < 0.001). In the sepsis group, a similar pattern occurred at T120 without statistical significance (propofol, 1.8 ± 1.1 vs. isoflurane, 1.2 ± 0.7; P = 0.023). Syndecan-1 levels did not differ between agents, but glycocalyx thickness index was significantly lower in the isoflurane-sepsis group than propofol (P = 0.001).
Conclusions
Propofol potentially offers protective action against microvascular flow deterioration compared to isoflurane, observed in control mice. Furthermore, a lower degree of sepsis-induced glycocalyx degradation was evident with propofol compared to isoflurane.
期刊介绍:
Microvascular Research is dedicated to the dissemination of fundamental information related to the microvascular field. Full-length articles presenting the results of original research and brief communications are featured.
Research Areas include:
• Angiogenesis
• Biochemistry
• Bioengineering
• Biomathematics
• Biophysics
• Cancer
• Circulatory homeostasis
• Comparative physiology
• Drug delivery
• Neuropharmacology
• Microvascular pathology
• Rheology
• Tissue Engineering.