Sedation with midazolam worsens the diaphragm function than dexmedetomidine and propofol during mechanical ventilation in rats - 30/11/19
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
| pages | 9 |
| Iconographies | 12 |
| Vidéos | 0 |
| Autres | 0 |
Abstract |
Background |
Mechanical ventilation (MV) is identified as an independent contributor to diaphragmatic atrophy and contractile dysfunction. Appropriate sedation is also essential during MV, and anesthetics may have direct adverse effects on the diaphragm. However, there is a lack of research into the effects of different anesthetics on diaphragm function during MV.
Objectives |
In the present study, we aim to examine the effect of midazolam, dexmedetomidine, and propofol on diaphragm function during MV.
Design |
Animal study.
Setting |
University research laboratory.
Subjects |
Male Wistar rats.
Interventions |
Animals were experienced 12 h of MV or spontaneous breathing (SB) with continuous anesthetics infusion. Diaphragm contractile properties, cross-sectional areas, microcirculation, oxidative stress, and proteolysis were examined.
Measurements and main results |
Diaphragmatic specific force was markedly reduced in the midazolam group compared with the dexmedetomidine (−60.4 ± 3.01%, p < 0.001) and propofol group (−58.3 ± 2.60%, p < 0.001) after MV. MV sedated with midazolam induced more atrophy of type II fibers compared with dexmedetomidine (−21.8 ± 2.11%, p = 0.0001) and propofol (−8.2 ± 1.53%, p = 0.003). No significant differences of these indices were found in the midazolam, dexmedetomidine, and propofol groups under SB condition (all p > 0.05, respectively). Twelve hours of MV resulted in a time dependent reduction in diaphragmatic functional capillary density (PB −25.1%, p = 0.0001; MZ −21.6%, p = 0.0003; DD −15.2%, p = 0.022; PP −24.8%, p = 0.0001, respectively), which did not occur in the gastrocnemius muscle. The diaphragmatic lipid peroxidation adducts 4-HNE and HIF-1α levels were significantly lower in dexmedetomidine group and propofol group compared to midazolam group (p < 0.05, respectively). Meanwhile, the catalase and SOD levels were also relatively lower (p < 0.05, respectively) in midazolam group compared to dexmedetomidine group and propofol group.
Conclusions |
Twelve hours of mechanical ventilation during midazolam sedation led to a more severe diaphragm dysfunction than dexmedetomidine and propofol, possibly caused by its relative weaker antioxidant capacity.
Le texte complet de cet article est disponible en PDF.Abbreviations : MV, SB, PB, MZ, DD, PP, ROS, VIDD, PIP, MAP, PaO2, PaCO2, TVD, MFI, HI, FCD, VILI, RVD, SDF
Keywords : Mechanical ventilation, Diaphragm dysfunction, Midazolam, Dexmedetomidine, Propofol
Plan
Vol 121
Article 109405- janvier 2020 Retour au numéro
Article précédent
- DFSG, a novel herbal cocktail with anti-asthma activity, suppressed MUC5AC in A549 cells and alleviated allergic airway hypersensitivity and inflammatory cell infiltration in a chronic asthma mouse model
- Li-Jen Lin, Hui Ying Huang
- LncRNA GAS5 exacerbates renal tubular epithelial fibrosis by acting as a competing endogenous RNA of miR-96-5p
- Wei Wang, Yi-jie Jia, Yan-ling Yang, Meng Xue, Zong-ji Zheng, Ling Wang, Yao-ming Xue
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’accès au texte intégral de cet article nécessite un abonnement.
Bienvenue sur EM-consulte, la référence des professionnels de santé.
L’achat d’article à l’unité est indisponible à l’heure actuelle.
Déjà abonné à cette revue ?