Aims and Background: PROPOFOL is one of the newest and the most common drugs in anesthesia and intensive care unit which is used to produce sedative effects. One of its complications is the pain produced at the time of injection. The aim of this study is to compare the pain of PROPOFOL injection with two techniques: PROPOFOL mixed with lidocaine and PROPOFOL injection after lidocaine.Materials and methods: This study is a randomized double-blind clinical trial, in which 172 patients undergoing elective surgery with ASA class one and two were enrolled. Three groups of patients had injections as follows: In the first group 40 mg PROPOFOL mixed with 2% lidocaine, in the second one purified one percent PROPOFOL, and in the third group PROPOFOL following injection of 40 mg lidocaine 2%, were injected. Venous catheter 20 gauge was used in all cases for injection, and pain intensity was measured by VRS (Verbal Rating Scale) criteria. The data were analyzed by SPSS V.18.Findings: Pain intensity in the second group (PROPOFOL injection after lidocaine injection) was less than the first group (mixed injection) and there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups (P<0.05). The hemodynamic changes were similar in both groups, and there was no significant difference (P>0. 05). Conclusions: Pre-treatment by injecting 40 mg of lidocaine2% to reduce pain due to PROPOFOL injection is more effective than mixed method of injecting 40 mg of PROPOFOL with lidocaine 2%.

Background: This study compares the impact of Medium chain-long chain triglyceride (MCT-LCT) PROPOFOL and Long Chain TriglyceridePROPOFOL on blood triglyceride (TG) levels in patients undergoing brachial plexus repair surgery. The study also investigates the effects of these drugs on postoperative recovery and overall patient well-being. Methods: The study included fifty patients aged 18-60 scheduled for brachial plexus repair between July 2016 and July 2018. Patients were randomly assigned to two sets: Set LP received 1% LCT PROPOFOL, while Set MP was given MCT-LCT PROPOFOL using TCI-pumps. Blood samples for TG level determination were collected before anesthesia induction, after concluding the infusion, 4 hours after stopping infusionand on day 1 post surgery. Results: Both sets showed a significant increase in TG levels above baseline, with a higher increase observed in the LCT PROPOFOL set (Pvalue= 0. 014). After 4th hr of infusion, TG levels significantly decreased only in the MCT-LCT PROPOFOL set (Pvalue= 0. 001), with levels lower than those in the LCT PROPOFOL set (Pvalue= 0. 021). Conclusion: Prolonged infusion of LCT and MCT-LCT PROPOFOL (1%) resulted in elevated TG levels. However, the increase in TG levels was lower with MCT-LCT PROPOFOL. No significant ill effects were observed

Background & Aim: General anesthesia remains the most widely used anesthetic technique for managing ambulatoy surgery. The ability to deliver a safe and cost effective general anesthetic with minimal side effects and rapid recovery is critical in outpatient surgery unit. Questions regarding the optimal anesthetic technique, remain to be answered. This study was designed to compare the difference between the effects of PROPOFOL-ketamine and PROPOFOL-fentanyl total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA); on hemodyamic, respiratory and recovery profiles. Materials & Methods: Sixty patients, ASA class I-II undergoing outpatient surgery were randomly assigned to one of two groups (n=30 each). After premeditation with midazolam (0/02 mg/kg), the first group received 1 µg/kg fentanyl followed by 1mgjkg PROPOFOL; while 0/3 mg/kg ketamin replaced fentanyl in the second group. Anesthesia was maintained with PROPOFOL infusion (50 µg/kg/min) both groups. Results: Incidence of hypotension (k: 3/3%, F: 70%), bradycardia (K: 4/3%, F: 43/3%) and mean apnea duration (k: 37/7 s, F: 184/5s) was significantly lower in the ketamine-PROPOFOL group (p<0.0001). Recovery, time was similar in two groups. Psychomimetic side effect was not seen in each of the groups. Discussion: TIVA with ketamine (as analgesic with subhypnotic dose) and PROPOFOL is comparable to the most commonly used combination of PROPOFOL-fentanyl, and may be an appropriate choice when hemodynamic stability is of great importance.

Background and purpose: General anesthesia for oocyte retrieval may interfere with outcomes and success rate of assisted reproductive technology. This study was performed to compare the outcomes of assisted reproductive technology in women regarding recovery time, patient satisfaction and postoperative side effects using remifentanil-PROPOFOL and alfentanil-PROPOFOL.Materials and methods: We studied 102 women who were scheduled for oocyte retrieval. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups. General anesthesia was performed with remifentanilPROPOFOL (group I) or alfentanil-PROPOFOL (group II). The numbers of oocytes collated, fertilized, transferal and pregnancy rate were recorded. Hemodynamic variables, patient satisfaction, recovery time and side effects were also recorded.Results: There were no significant differences in oocytes collected and pregnancy rates between the two groups. But fertilization was significantly higher in remifentanil-PROPOFOL group (P=0.01). The recovery of patients in remifentanil-PROPOFOL was significantly rapid (P=0.01). Intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, postoperative satisfaction and side effects were found to be similar in both groups.Conclusion: Remifentanil-PROPOFOL is of great benefit in providing an earlier recovery, however, both remifentanil-PROPOFOL and alfentanil-PROPOFOL regimens are suitable for oocyte retrieval.

Introduction: Various methods have been recommended to prevent hemodynamic instability caused by PROPOFOL induction. Current study evaluates hemodynamic effects of ketamine and PROPOFOL in comparison to etomidate and PROPOFOL during anesthesia induction.Methods: Sixty-two patients over 50 years old undergoing elective surgeries were randomly assigned to ketamine + PROPOFOL (ketofol) (n=30) and etomidate + PROPOFOL (etofol) (n=32) groups. Patients in ketofol group were induced with ketamine 0.75 mg/ kg and PROPOFOL 1 mg/kg. In etofol group, induction was performed with etomidate 0.2 mg/kg and PROPOFOL 1 mg/kg. Hemodynamic states before and after induction, first, third and sixth minutes after intubation were measured and compared between groups.Results: There was no difference between groups in systolic (SAP), diastolic (DAP) and mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR) and blood oxygen saturation (SaO2). There was significant decrease in SAP, DAP and MAP after induction and 6 minutes after intubation and in HR after induction than values before induction. There was significant increase in SaO2 in all evaluated periods than before induction in etofol group; however, the difference in ketofol group was not significant.Conclusion: Both methods of induction -ketamine + PROPOFOL and etomidate + PROPOFOLare effective in maintaining hemodynamic stability and preventing hemodynamic changes due to PROPOFOL administration.

Background: Selection of the best sedative regimen during pediatric endoscopy with greater stability in hemodynamic parameters and fewer side effects is very important. The aim of this study was to compare the clinical efficacy and safety of PROPOFOL – ketamine versus PROPOFOL – fentanyl in pediatric undergoing diagnostic upper gastrointestinal endoscopy (UGIE).Methods: In this clinical trial, 130 children aged 2 to 12 years (ASA physical status I or II) were examined. Children were divided into two groups. PROPOFOL (1.2 mg/kg) plus ketamine (1 mg/kg) was prescribed for the first group (Group PK). The second group received PROPOFOL (1.2 mg/kg) plus fentanyl (1 mg/kg) (Group PF). Hemodynamic variables and sedation scale of patients were compared between two groups.Results: The mean age of the children was 98.3±6.96 months and 97.15±3.56 months in group PK and group PF, respectively. Heart rate and respiratory rate values after induction in group PF were significantly lower than in group PK (p<0.05). Coughing, nausea and vomiting and Ramsey sedation score were significantly higher in group PK (p<0.05).Conclusion: Both combinations provided effective sedation in pediatric patients undergoing UGIE, but the PROPOFOL-ketamine combination resulted in stable hemodynamics and deeper sedation although with more side effects.

Background- Hemodynamic instability during anesthesia can affect circulation and ‎oxygenation of vital organs (e.g. brain, heart, kidney and liver). Each of the anesthetic ‎drugs has various hemodynamic effects, and the interaction of these drugs may cause ‎critical changes in‏ ‏patients hemodynamics‏.‏‎‎ PROPOFOL is the most recent intravenous anesthetic to be introduced into clinical ‎practice. This drug has negative inotropic effects on the heart. Based on the ‎cardiovascular effects of PROPOFOL and to maintain hemodynamic stability during ‎anesthesia with this drug, it seems that selection of a muscle relaxant with positive ‎effects on the heart rate and especially blood pressure, such as pancuronium, is better ‎than atracurium. Therefore, we performed a study of the effects of pancuronium and ‎atracurium on hemodynamic parameters of patients undergoing CABG surgery, in ‎which these muscle relaxants are used in conjunction with PROPOFOL-sufentanil‏.‏‎ ‎ Methods- A prospective randomized clinical trial analysis was performed on 100 ‎patients undergoing coronary artery bypass graft surgery in Shaheed Rajaei Heart ‎Center. Fifty of the patients received PROPOFOL -pancuronium and 50 of them received ‎PROPOFOL - atracurium. The selection of type and dose of premedication drugs and ‎intraoperative opioid use in the two groups was the same. Maintenance of anesthesia ‎in the two groups was achieved by the infusion of specific doses of these drugs‏.‏‎ ‎ Results- Hemodynamic changes in the two groups were almost the same. There was ‎no statistically significant difference (p>0.05) in the two groups (Iranian Heart ‎Journal 2002, 2003; 3(4)&4(1): 25-28).‎