J Anesth Perioper Med. 2018;5(4):275-280. https://doi.org/10.24015/ebcmed.japm.2018.0115
From the 1Department of Anesthesiology, West China Hospital, Sichuan University, Chengdu, China; 2The Thomas C. Jenkins Department of Biophysics, Johns Hopkins University, Baltimore, MD, USA.
Correspondence to Dr. Chan Chen at xychenchan@gmail. com or Dr. Jin Liu at scujinliu@gmail.com.
EBCMED ID: ebcmed.japm.2018.0115 DOI: 10.24015/ebcmed.japm.2018.0115
Background
Whether intravenous infusion of ropivacaine at a constant rate can affect the minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane in rats and different concentration can produce different effects.
Methods
We used the Dixon “up-and-down” method to determine the MAC of sevoflurane in three groups (20 subjects per group). After a 30-minute equilibration, the medications (saline, 0.5% ropivacaine or 1.0% ropivacaine) were continuously infused at a rate of 0.5 mL/h/kg for 30 minutes, and the response to the supramaximal noxious stimulus was recorded (movement versus no movement).
Results
The MAC was 2.34 ± 0.26% (95% confidence interval [CI], 2.22-2.46) in the saline group, 1.22 ± 0.31% (95%CI, 1.07-1.37) in the 0.5% ropivacaine group, and 1.06 ± 0.42% (95%CI, 0.86-1.26) in the 1.0% ropivacaine group. The MAC of the 0.5% ropivacaine (mean difference of 1.12% sevoflurane [95% adjusted CI, 0.86-1.38]; P < 0.01) and 1.0% ropivacaine groups (mean difference of 1.28% sevoflurane [95% adjusted CI, 1.02-1.54]; P < 0.01) were significantly lower than that of the saline group.
Conclusion
Intravenous administration of 0.5% and 1.0% ropivacaine both decreased the MAC of sevoflurane in rats, and 1.0% ropivacaine showed more decline. (Funded by the Distinguished Professorships Awards from the China Medical Board.)
Article Type
Original Article
Declaration of Interests
The authors have no other potential conflicts of interest for this work.
Acknowledgements
This study was supported by the Distinguished Professorships Awards (0082827601157, to Dr. Jin Liu) from the China Medical Board.
This is an open-access article, published by Evidence Based Communications (EBC). This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium or format for any lawful purpose. To view a copy of this license, visit http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/.