靶控输注与挥发性吸入麻醉对大鼠心率、呼吸频率和恢复时间的影响比较。

Sander O Hacker, Charles E White, Ian H Black
{"title":"靶控输注与挥发性吸入麻醉对大鼠心率、呼吸频率和恢复时间的影响比较。","authors":"Sander O Hacker,&nbsp;Charles E White,&nbsp;Ian H Black","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>We conducted this study to determine whether heart rate, respiratory rate, and recovery time differed significantly between rats receiving target-controlled infusion (TCI) and those under volatile inhalant anesthesia. TCI rats received intravenous propofol at an average effect site concentration of 11.3 microg/ml or propofol plus ketamine (5 mg/ml of propofol) at an average effect site concentration of 8.7 microg/ml. Inhalant anesthesia rats received isoflurane (average, 1.8%) delivered in medical-grade air. We used a tail-clamp response test to determine when a surgical plane of anesthesia was attained. Anesthesia was continued for 1 h from the first negative tail-clamp test. During this time the test was repeated every 10 min to confirm that a surgical plane of anesthesia was being maintained. Anesthesia then was discontinued, and the animals were monitored continuously until they recovered. Average heart rate was higher for rats during anesthesia with isoflurane compared with TCI propofol-ketamine (P =0.0053). Average respiratory rate was higher for TCI regimens compared with isoflurane anesthesia, with male rats having consistently faster respiratory rates than females (P <0.001). Recovery time was longer for both TCI regimens compared with isoflurane (P <0.001). Once venous access was accomplished, TCI anesthesia with propofol or propofol combined with a low dose of ketamine was comparable to an isoflurane inhalant regimen in ease of administration and control of the anesthetic event when used in rats for procedures of 1-h duration. Respiratory rate was increased and recovery time was longer for rats receiving the TCI regimens.</p>","PeriodicalId":80269,"journal":{"name":"Contemporary topics in laboratory animal science","volume":"44 5","pages":"7-12"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2005-09-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"A comparison of target-controlled infusion versus volatile inhalant anesthesia for heart rate, respiratory rate, and recovery time in a rat model.\",\"authors\":\"Sander O Hacker,&nbsp;Charles E White,&nbsp;Ian H Black\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><p>We conducted this study to determine whether heart rate, respiratory rate, and recovery time differed significantly between rats receiving target-controlled infusion (TCI) and those under volatile inhalant anesthesia. TCI rats received intravenous propofol at an average effect site concentration of 11.3 microg/ml or propofol plus ketamine (5 mg/ml of propofol) at an average effect site concentration of 8.7 microg/ml. Inhalant anesthesia rats received isoflurane (average, 1.8%) delivered in medical-grade air. We used a tail-clamp response test to determine when a surgical plane of anesthesia was attained. Anesthesia was continued for 1 h from the first negative tail-clamp test. During this time the test was repeated every 10 min to confirm that a surgical plane of anesthesia was being maintained. Anesthesia then was discontinued, and the animals were monitored continuously until they recovered. Average heart rate was higher for rats during anesthesia with isoflurane compared with TCI propofol-ketamine (P =0.0053). Average respiratory rate was higher for TCI regimens compared with isoflurane anesthesia, with male rats having consistently faster respiratory rates than females (P <0.001). Recovery time was longer for both TCI regimens compared with isoflurane (P <0.001). Once venous access was accomplished, TCI anesthesia with propofol or propofol combined with a low dose of ketamine was comparable to an isoflurane inhalant regimen in ease of administration and control of the anesthetic event when used in rats for procedures of 1-h duration. Respiratory rate was increased and recovery time was longer for rats receiving the TCI regimens.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":80269,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Contemporary topics in laboratory animal science\",\"volume\":\"44 5\",\"pages\":\"7-12\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2005-09-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Contemporary topics in laboratory animal science\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Contemporary topics in laboratory animal science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

我们进行了这项研究,以确定接受靶控输注(TCI)和挥发性吸入麻醉的大鼠的心率、呼吸频率和恢复时间是否有显著差异。TCI大鼠静脉注射异丙酚,平均效应位点浓度为11.3微克/毫升,或异丙酚加氯胺酮(5毫克/毫升异丙酚),平均效应位点浓度为8.7微克/毫升。吸入麻醉大鼠接受异氟醚(平均1.8%)在医疗级空气中输送。我们使用尾钳反应试验来确定何时达到手术麻醉平面。从第一次尾钳试验阴性开始持续麻醉1小时。在此期间,每10分钟重复一次测试,以确认手术麻醉平面是否维持。然后停止麻醉,持续监测动物直到它们恢复。异氟醚麻醉大鼠的平均心率高于TCI异丙酚氯胺酮(P =0.0053)。与异氟醚麻醉相比,TCI方案的平均呼吸速率更高,雄性大鼠的呼吸速率始终高于雌性大鼠(P
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
A comparison of target-controlled infusion versus volatile inhalant anesthesia for heart rate, respiratory rate, and recovery time in a rat model.

We conducted this study to determine whether heart rate, respiratory rate, and recovery time differed significantly between rats receiving target-controlled infusion (TCI) and those under volatile inhalant anesthesia. TCI rats received intravenous propofol at an average effect site concentration of 11.3 microg/ml or propofol plus ketamine (5 mg/ml of propofol) at an average effect site concentration of 8.7 microg/ml. Inhalant anesthesia rats received isoflurane (average, 1.8%) delivered in medical-grade air. We used a tail-clamp response test to determine when a surgical plane of anesthesia was attained. Anesthesia was continued for 1 h from the first negative tail-clamp test. During this time the test was repeated every 10 min to confirm that a surgical plane of anesthesia was being maintained. Anesthesia then was discontinued, and the animals were monitored continuously until they recovered. Average heart rate was higher for rats during anesthesia with isoflurane compared with TCI propofol-ketamine (P =0.0053). Average respiratory rate was higher for TCI regimens compared with isoflurane anesthesia, with male rats having consistently faster respiratory rates than females (P <0.001). Recovery time was longer for both TCI regimens compared with isoflurane (P <0.001). Once venous access was accomplished, TCI anesthesia with propofol or propofol combined with a low dose of ketamine was comparable to an isoflurane inhalant regimen in ease of administration and control of the anesthetic event when used in rats for procedures of 1-h duration. Respiratory rate was increased and recovery time was longer for rats receiving the TCI regimens.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effects of altered enclosure size and substrates on squirrel monkey (Saimiri sciureus sciureus) behavior. Intraperitoneal administration of an iodine-based contrast agent to improve abdominal micro-computed tomography imaging in mice. Transfusion via the carotid artery in the hamster. Thyroparathyroidectomy procedures and thyroxine levels in the chinchilla. Lack of correlation of vaginal impedance measurements with hormone levels in the rat.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1