Effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol on lower esophageal sphincter and gastroesophageal pressure gradient in healthy volunteers

Alparslan Turan, John Wo, Yusuke Kasuya, Raghavendra Govinda, Ozan Akça, Jarrod E. Dalton, Daniel I. Sessler, Stefan Rauch

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

12 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Background: Many anesthetics reduce lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP). Reduced pressure and consequent reduction in the gastroesophageal pressure gradient (GEPG) thus promotes gastroesophageal reflux and may contribute to aspiration pneumonia and associated morbidity. Therefore, the authors compared LESP and GEPG during dexmedetomidine and propofol sedation. Methods: Using a randomized, double-blind, crossover design, 11 healthy volunteers were sedated on 2 separate days. Baseline LESP and GEPG were recorded each day. Subsequently, on each day volunteers received three 40-min-long sedative infusions of increasing doses of 0.6, 1.2, and 2.4 ng/ml dexmedetomidine or 1, 2, and 4 μg/ml propofol. LESP and GEPG were recorded during inhalation and expiration at 20 and 40 min after starting each infusion phase, and these measurements were averaged. Results are presented as mean (95% confidence interval). Results: Two subjects did not return for the dexmedetomidine study day, and the dexmedetomidine Results were unusable in another; propofol Results in these volunteers were nonetheless retained for analysis. There were no significant differences in LESP and GEPG as a function of drug. However, there was a small but significant 7.4 (-1.6 to-13.2) mmHg (approximately 25%) dose-dependent decrease in LESP over the range of targeted low to high blood levels of each drug. Conclusions: Both dexmedetomidine and propofol have similar effects on LESP and GEPG. Although both of the drugs cause some decrease in LESP at high concentrations, it is unlikely that this effect would promote gastroesophageal reflux during sedation.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)19-24
Number of pages6
JournalAnesthesiology
Volume112
Issue number1
DOIs
StatePublished - Jan 2010
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Dexmedetomidine
Lower Esophageal Sphincter
Propofol
Healthy Volunteers
Pressure
Gastroesophageal Reflux
Volunteers
Pharmaceutical Preparations
Aspiration Pneumonia

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine

Cite this

Effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol on lower esophageal sphincter and gastroesophageal pressure gradient in healthy volunteers. / Turan, Alparslan; Wo, John; Kasuya, Yusuke; Govinda, Raghavendra; Akça, Ozan; Dalton, Jarrod E.; Sessler, Daniel I.; Rauch, Stefan.

In: Anesthesiology, Vol. 112, No. 1, 01.2010, p. 19-24.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

Turan, Alparslan ; Wo, John ; Kasuya, Yusuke ; Govinda, Raghavendra ; Akça, Ozan ; Dalton, Jarrod E. ; Sessler, Daniel I. ; Rauch, Stefan. / Effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol on lower esophageal sphincter and gastroesophageal pressure gradient in healthy volunteers. In: Anesthesiology. 2010 ; Vol. 112, No. 1. pp. 19-24.
@article{89a38d8a7e394c3cb48eca976ecd2454,
title = "Effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol on lower esophageal sphincter and gastroesophageal pressure gradient in healthy volunteers",
abstract = "Background: Many anesthetics reduce lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP). Reduced pressure and consequent reduction in the gastroesophageal pressure gradient (GEPG) thus promotes gastroesophageal reflux and may contribute to aspiration pneumonia and associated morbidity. Therefore, the authors compared LESP and GEPG during dexmedetomidine and propofol sedation. Methods: Using a randomized, double-blind, crossover design, 11 healthy volunteers were sedated on 2 separate days. Baseline LESP and GEPG were recorded each day. Subsequently, on each day volunteers received three 40-min-long sedative infusions of increasing doses of 0.6, 1.2, and 2.4 ng/ml dexmedetomidine or 1, 2, and 4 μg/ml propofol. LESP and GEPG were recorded during inhalation and expiration at 20 and 40 min after starting each infusion phase, and these measurements were averaged. Results are presented as mean (95{\%} confidence interval). Results: Two subjects did not return for the dexmedetomidine study day, and the dexmedetomidine Results were unusable in another; propofol Results in these volunteers were nonetheless retained for analysis. There were no significant differences in LESP and GEPG as a function of drug. However, there was a small but significant 7.4 (-1.6 to-13.2) mmHg (approximately 25{\%}) dose-dependent decrease in LESP over the range of targeted low to high blood levels of each drug. Conclusions: Both dexmedetomidine and propofol have similar effects on LESP and GEPG. Although both of the drugs cause some decrease in LESP at high concentrations, it is unlikely that this effect would promote gastroesophageal reflux during sedation.",
author = "Alparslan Turan and John Wo and Yusuke Kasuya and Raghavendra Govinda and Ozan Ak{\cc}a and Dalton, {Jarrod E.} and Sessler, {Daniel I.} and Stefan Rauch",
year = "2010",
month = "1",
doi = "10.1097/01.anes.0000365963.97138.54",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "112",
pages = "19--24",
journal = "Anesthesiology",
issn = "0003-3022",
publisher = "Lippincott Williams and Wilkins",
number = "1",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Effects of dexmedetomidine and propofol on lower esophageal sphincter and gastroesophageal pressure gradient in healthy volunteers

AU - Turan, Alparslan

AU - Wo, John

AU - Kasuya, Yusuke

AU - Govinda, Raghavendra

AU - Akça, Ozan

AU - Dalton, Jarrod E.

AU - Sessler, Daniel I.

AU - Rauch, Stefan

PY - 2010/1

Y1 - 2010/1

N2 - Background: Many anesthetics reduce lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP). Reduced pressure and consequent reduction in the gastroesophageal pressure gradient (GEPG) thus promotes gastroesophageal reflux and may contribute to aspiration pneumonia and associated morbidity. Therefore, the authors compared LESP and GEPG during dexmedetomidine and propofol sedation. Methods: Using a randomized, double-blind, crossover design, 11 healthy volunteers were sedated on 2 separate days. Baseline LESP and GEPG were recorded each day. Subsequently, on each day volunteers received three 40-min-long sedative infusions of increasing doses of 0.6, 1.2, and 2.4 ng/ml dexmedetomidine or 1, 2, and 4 μg/ml propofol. LESP and GEPG were recorded during inhalation and expiration at 20 and 40 min after starting each infusion phase, and these measurements were averaged. Results are presented as mean (95% confidence interval). Results: Two subjects did not return for the dexmedetomidine study day, and the dexmedetomidine Results were unusable in another; propofol Results in these volunteers were nonetheless retained for analysis. There were no significant differences in LESP and GEPG as a function of drug. However, there was a small but significant 7.4 (-1.6 to-13.2) mmHg (approximately 25%) dose-dependent decrease in LESP over the range of targeted low to high blood levels of each drug. Conclusions: Both dexmedetomidine and propofol have similar effects on LESP and GEPG. Although both of the drugs cause some decrease in LESP at high concentrations, it is unlikely that this effect would promote gastroesophageal reflux during sedation.

AB - Background: Many anesthetics reduce lower esophageal sphincter pressure (LESP). Reduced pressure and consequent reduction in the gastroesophageal pressure gradient (GEPG) thus promotes gastroesophageal reflux and may contribute to aspiration pneumonia and associated morbidity. Therefore, the authors compared LESP and GEPG during dexmedetomidine and propofol sedation. Methods: Using a randomized, double-blind, crossover design, 11 healthy volunteers were sedated on 2 separate days. Baseline LESP and GEPG were recorded each day. Subsequently, on each day volunteers received three 40-min-long sedative infusions of increasing doses of 0.6, 1.2, and 2.4 ng/ml dexmedetomidine or 1, 2, and 4 μg/ml propofol. LESP and GEPG were recorded during inhalation and expiration at 20 and 40 min after starting each infusion phase, and these measurements were averaged. Results are presented as mean (95% confidence interval). Results: Two subjects did not return for the dexmedetomidine study day, and the dexmedetomidine Results were unusable in another; propofol Results in these volunteers were nonetheless retained for analysis. There were no significant differences in LESP and GEPG as a function of drug. However, there was a small but significant 7.4 (-1.6 to-13.2) mmHg (approximately 25%) dose-dependent decrease in LESP over the range of targeted low to high blood levels of each drug. Conclusions: Both dexmedetomidine and propofol have similar effects on LESP and GEPG. Although both of the drugs cause some decrease in LESP at high concentrations, it is unlikely that this effect would promote gastroesophageal reflux during sedation.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=74049149900&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=74049149900&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1097/01.anes.0000365963.97138.54

DO - 10.1097/01.anes.0000365963.97138.54

M3 - Article

C2 - 20032699

AN - SCOPUS:74049149900

VL - 112

SP - 19

EP - 24

JO - Anesthesiology

JF - Anesthesiology

SN - 0003-3022

IS - 1

ER -