Clinical trial NCT03214653: Comparison Between Target-controlled Infusion of Propofol and Sevoflurane as Maintenance of Anesthesia to Hemodynamic Profile of Renal Transplant Recipient
Official title: Comparison Between the Effect of Target-controlled Infusion of Propofol and Sevoflurane as Maintenance of Anesthesia to Intraoperative Hemodynamic Profile of Renal Transplant Recipient
Study type: INTERVENTIONAL
Overall status: COMPLETED
Phase: NA
Conditions: Renal Transplant Recipient Patients
Lead sponsor: Indonesia University
Sponsor class: OTHER
First posted: 2017-07-11
Enrollment: 23
Sex: ALL
Minimum age (years): 16
Maximum age (years): 65
Standard ages: CHILD
ADULT
OLDER_ADULT
Accepts healthy volunteers: no
Allocation: RANDOMIZED
Intervention model: PARALLEL
Primary purpose: SUPPORTIVE_CARE

Brief summary: This study aimed to compare the effect of target-controlled infusion of propofol and sevoflurane as maintenance of anesthesia to intraoperative hemodynamic profile of renal transplant recipient

Detailed description: Approval from Ethical Committee of Faculty of Medicine Universitas Indonesia was acquired prior conducting the study. Subjects were given informed consent before enrolling the study. Subjects were randomized into two groups which are target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol and sevoflurane. Electrocardiography, pulse oximetry, and non-invasive blood pressure were set on subjects in the operating room. Subjects were given intravenous ranitidine 50 mg, intravenous ondansetron 4 mg, intravenous methylprednisolone 500 mg, intravenous cefoperazone-sulbactam 2 gram, intravenous fentanyl 1 mkg/kg body weight (BW), and intravenous midazolam 1,5-2 mg as premedication. Arterial cannula was placed on radial artery to monitor arterial pressure. Epidural catheter was set and epidural test dosage was administered using epinephrine: lidocaine 2% = 1: 200.000 with 3ml volume. Central venous catheter was set using ultrasonography guidance with central venous cannula connected to EV1000TM monitor using monitoring kit to obtain hemodynamic profile before induction. Bispectral index probe was set on subjects. Induction was done using intravenous fentanyl 3 mkg/kg BW bolus 30 seconds and intravenous propofol 1-1,5 mg/kg BW bolus 60-90 seconds while endotracheal tube intubation was facilitated using intravenous atracurium 0.5 mg/kg BW. After subjects were intubated, sevoflurane 1,5-2% was used as maintenance agent for sevoflurane group while TCI of propofol was used using Schinder technique effect mode for propofol group. The administration of maintenance agent was adjusted by the depth of sedation using bispectral index monitor with target of 45-50. After completion of induction, hemodynamic profile was recorded once. Intravenous atracuriom 0,2 mg/kg BW was given repeatedly as muscle relaxant every 30 minutes after intubation. Fentanyl was given continuously as intraoperative analgesic with dosage 2mkg/kgBW/hour. If pulse rate was increased\> 20% intraoperatively, an additional intravenous fentanyl 1 mkg/kgBW bolus was given. After first incision by operator, hemodynamic profile were recorded through screen capture of EV1000TM monitor, data will be saved in flash disc and manually on paper. Incision data will be recorded 3 times with 1 minute interval. Hemodynamic profile at incision is the average of all three recorded times. Further data will then be recorded every 15 minutes. After operator has finished preparing new kidney field, mannitol will be administered by drip slowly with dosage 0.5-1 gram/kg BW. After donor kidney placed on recipient field and renal vein connected, 40 mg intravenous furosemide was given. Hemodynamic profile was recorded 1 minute after clamp for renal artery has been opened and 15 minutes after. Vasoactive and inotropic drug were titrated if necessary to achieve mean arterial pressure before induction.

Eligibility criteria: Inclusion Criteria:

* Patients aged 16-65 years old who is renal transplant recipient with body mass index of 21-30 kg/m2 and Charlson Comorbidity Index 1-4. Patients agreed to enroll and have signed the informed consent form.

Exclusion Criteria:

* Subjects with body mass index \<21 or \>30 and Charlson Comorbidity Index \>4

Primary outcomes:
measure: Cardiac index
timeFrame: 1 minute after incision
measure: Mean arterial pressure
timeFrame: 1 minute after incision
measure: Stroke volume index
timeFrame: 1 minute after incision
measure: Systemic vascular resistance index
timeFrame: 1 minute after incision
Secondary outcomes:
Other outcomes:
Locations:
city: Jakarta
country: Indonesia
facility: Cipto Mangunkusumo Central National Hospital
state: DKI Jakarta
Study officials:
References:
citation: SarinKapoor H, Kaur R, Kaur H. Anaesthesia for renal transplant surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2007 Nov;51(10):1354-67. doi: 10.1111/j.1399-6576.2007.01447.x.
citation: Park JH, Lee JH, Joo DJ, Song KJ, Kim YS, Koo BN. Effect of sevoflurane on grafted kidney function in renal transplantation. Korean J Anesthesiol. 2012 Jun;62(6):529-35. doi: 10.4097/kjae.2012.62.6.529. Epub 2012 Jun 19.
citation: Amir-Zargar MA, Gholyaf M, Kashkouli AI, Moradi A, Torabian S. Comparison of safety and efficacy of general and spinal anesthesia in kidney transplantation: Evaluation of the peri-operative outcome. Saudi J Kidney Dis Transpl. 2015 May-Jun;26(3):447-52. doi: 10.4103/1319-2442.157300.
citation: Baxi V, Jain A, Dasgupta D. Anaesthesia for renal transplantation: an update. Indian J Anaesth. 2009 Apr;53(2):139-47.
citation: Grosso G, Corona D, Mistretta A, Zerbo D, Sinagra N, Giaquinta A, Tallarita T, Ekser B, Leonardi A, Gula R, Veroux P, Veroux M. Predictive value of the Charlson comorbidity index in kidney transplantation. Transplant Proc. 2012 Sep;44(7):1859-63. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2012.06.042.
citation: Soga T, Kawahito S, Oi R, Kakuta N, Katayama T, Wakamatsu N, Takaishi K, Yamaguchi K, Izaki H, Kanayama HO, Kitahata H, Oshita S. Recent less-invasive circulatory monitoring during renal transplantation. J Med Invest. 2013;60(1-2):159-63. doi: 10.2152/jmi.60.159.
citation: Teixeira S, Costa G, Costa F, da Silva Viana J, Mota A. Sevoflurane versus isoflurane: does it matter in renal transplantation? Transplant Proc. 2007 Oct;39(8):2486-8. doi: 10.1016/j.transproceed.2007.07.038.
citation: Witkowska M, Karwacki Z, Rzaska M, Niewiadomski S, Sloniewski P. Comparison of target controlled infusion and total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil for lumbar microdiscectomy. Anaesthesiol Intensive Ther. 2012 Jul-Sep;44(3):138-44.
citation: Husedzinovic I, Tonkovic D, Barisin S, Bradic N, Gasparovic S. Hemodynamic differences in sevoflurane versus propofol anesthesia. Coll Antropol. 2003 Jun;27(1):205-12.
citation: Schmid S, Jungwirth B. Anaesthesia for renal transplant surgery: an update. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2012 Dec;29(12):552-8. doi: 10.1097/EJA.0b013e32835925fc.
citation: Monnet X, Marik PE, Teboul JL. Prediction of fluid responsiveness: an update. Ann Intensive Care. 2016 Dec;6(1):111. doi: 10.1186/s13613-016-0216-7. Epub 2016 Nov 17.
citation: Huang YQ, Gou R, Diao YS, Yin QH, Fan WX, Liang YP, Chen Y, Wu M, Zang L, Li L, Zang J, Cheng L, Fu P, Liu F. Charlson comorbidity index helps predict the risk of mortality for patients with type 2 diabetic nephropathy. J Zhejiang Univ Sci B. 2014 Jan;15(1):58-66. doi: 10.1631/jzus.B1300109.
citation: Li F, Yuan Y. Meta-analysis of the cardioprotective effect of sevoflurane versus propofol during cardiac surgery. BMC Anesthesiol. 2015 Sep 24;15:128. doi: 10.1186/s12871-015-0107-8.