No Cover Image

Journal article 743 views

Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.

John Dingley

Anaesthesia, Volume: 56, Issue: 9, Pages: 829 - 835

Swansea University Author: John Dingley

Abstract

Xenon anaesthesia is thought to have minimal haemodynamic side-effects. It is, however, expensive and requires special delivery systems for economic use. In this randomised cross-over study, we: (i) investigated the haemodynamic profile and recovery characteristics of xenon compared with propofol se...

Full description

Published in: Anaesthesia
Published: 2001
URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa27501
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2016-04-28T01:13:17Z
last_indexed 2018-02-09T05:10:39Z
id cronfa27501
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2016-04-27T22:03:49.5062374</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>27501</id><entry>2016-04-27</entry><title>Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>1283ffdd09b091ec57ec3e235a48cfcc</sid><firstname>John</firstname><surname>Dingley</surname><name>John Dingley</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2016-04-27</date><deptcode>PMSC</deptcode><abstract>Xenon anaesthesia is thought to have minimal haemodynamic side-effects. It is, however, expensive and requires special delivery systems for economic use. In this randomised cross-over study, we: (i) investigated the haemodynamic profile and recovery characteristics of xenon compared with propofol sedation in postoperative cardiac surgery patients, and (ii) evaluated a fully closed breathing system to minimise xenon consumption. We demonstrated a significantly faster recovery from xenon (3 min 11 s) than propofol sedation (25 min 23 s). Relative to propofol, xenon sedation produced no change in heart rate or mean arterial pressure and there were significantly higher mean values for central venous pressure (10.6 vs. 8.9 mmHg), pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (11.2 vs. 9.5 mmHg), mean pulmonary artery pressure (20.1 vs. 18.3 mmHg) and systemic vascular resistance index (2170 vs. 1896 dyn.s.cm-5.m-2). The haemodynamic profile seen with propofol reflected its known vasodilator effects. This was supported by the almost identical left ventricular stroke work indexes seen with both methods of sedation.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Anaesthesia</journal><volume>56</volume><journalNumber>9</journalNumber><paginationStart>829</paginationStart><paginationEnd>835</paginationEnd><publisher/><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint/><issnElectronic/><keywords/><publishedDay>30</publishedDay><publishedMonth>9</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2001</publishedYear><publishedDate>2001-09-30</publishedDate><doi/><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Medicine</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>PMSC</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2016-04-27T22:03:49.5062374</lastEdited><Created>2016-04-27T22:03:49.5062374</Created><path><level id="1">Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences</level><level id="2">Swansea University Medical School - Medicine</level></path><authors><author><firstname>John</firstname><surname>Dingley</surname><order>1</order></author></authors><documents/><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2016-04-27T22:03:49.5062374 v2 27501 2016-04-27 Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery. 1283ffdd09b091ec57ec3e235a48cfcc John Dingley John Dingley true false 2016-04-27 PMSC Xenon anaesthesia is thought to have minimal haemodynamic side-effects. It is, however, expensive and requires special delivery systems for economic use. In this randomised cross-over study, we: (i) investigated the haemodynamic profile and recovery characteristics of xenon compared with propofol sedation in postoperative cardiac surgery patients, and (ii) evaluated a fully closed breathing system to minimise xenon consumption. We demonstrated a significantly faster recovery from xenon (3 min 11 s) than propofol sedation (25 min 23 s). Relative to propofol, xenon sedation produced no change in heart rate or mean arterial pressure and there were significantly higher mean values for central venous pressure (10.6 vs. 8.9 mmHg), pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (11.2 vs. 9.5 mmHg), mean pulmonary artery pressure (20.1 vs. 18.3 mmHg) and systemic vascular resistance index (2170 vs. 1896 dyn.s.cm-5.m-2). The haemodynamic profile seen with propofol reflected its known vasodilator effects. This was supported by the almost identical left ventricular stroke work indexes seen with both methods of sedation. Journal Article Anaesthesia 56 9 829 835 30 9 2001 2001-09-30 COLLEGE NANME Medicine COLLEGE CODE PMSC Swansea University 2016-04-27T22:03:49.5062374 2016-04-27T22:03:49.5062374 Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences Swansea University Medical School - Medicine John Dingley 1
title Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.
spellingShingle Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.
John Dingley
title_short Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.
title_full Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.
title_fullStr Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.
title_full_unstemmed Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.
title_sort Exploration of xenon as a potential cardiostable sedative: a comparison with propofol after cardiac surgery.
author_id_str_mv 1283ffdd09b091ec57ec3e235a48cfcc
author_id_fullname_str_mv 1283ffdd09b091ec57ec3e235a48cfcc_***_John Dingley
author John Dingley
author2 John Dingley
format Journal article
container_title Anaesthesia
container_volume 56
container_issue 9
container_start_page 829
publishDate 2001
institution Swansea University
college_str Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_top_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
hierarchy_parent_id facultyofmedicinehealthandlifesciences
hierarchy_parent_title Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences
department_str Swansea University Medical School - Medicine{{{_:::_}}}Faculty of Medicine, Health and Life Sciences{{{_:::_}}}Swansea University Medical School - Medicine
document_store_str 0
active_str 0
description Xenon anaesthesia is thought to have minimal haemodynamic side-effects. It is, however, expensive and requires special delivery systems for economic use. In this randomised cross-over study, we: (i) investigated the haemodynamic profile and recovery characteristics of xenon compared with propofol sedation in postoperative cardiac surgery patients, and (ii) evaluated a fully closed breathing system to minimise xenon consumption. We demonstrated a significantly faster recovery from xenon (3 min 11 s) than propofol sedation (25 min 23 s). Relative to propofol, xenon sedation produced no change in heart rate or mean arterial pressure and there were significantly higher mean values for central venous pressure (10.6 vs. 8.9 mmHg), pulmonary artery occlusion pressure (11.2 vs. 9.5 mmHg), mean pulmonary artery pressure (20.1 vs. 18.3 mmHg) and systemic vascular resistance index (2170 vs. 1896 dyn.s.cm-5.m-2). The haemodynamic profile seen with propofol reflected its known vasodilator effects. This was supported by the almost identical left ventricular stroke work indexes seen with both methods of sedation.
published_date 2001-09-30T03:33:20Z
_version_ 1763751389609066496
score 11.036553

Similar Items