Tehran University of Medical Sciences

Science Communicator Platform

Stay connected! Follow us on X network (Twitter):
Share this content! On (X network) By
Comparison of the Effects of Propofol and Sevoflurane on Qt Interval in Pediatrics Undergoing Cochlear Implantation: A Randomized Clinical Trial Study Publisher



Safaeian R1 ; Hassani V1 ; Mohseni M1 ; Ahmadi A2 ; Ashraf H3 ; Movaseghi G1 ; Alimian M1 ; Mohebi E1 ; Koleini ZS1 ; Pourkand S1
Authors
Show Affiliations
Authors Affiliations
  1. 1. Pain Research Center, Department of Anesthesiology, Rasoul Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  2. 2. Ear Nose and Throat Department, Rasoul Akram Hospital, Iran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran
  3. 3. Department of Cardiology, Tehran University of Medical sciences, Tehran, Iran

Source: Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine Published:2019


Abstract

Background: Children with sensorineural hearing loss are at risk of cardiac electrophysiologic abnormalities. Inhalational Sevoflurane induction in these children can cause QT prolongation. Objectives: In order to evaluate the safety of inhalational induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane in children with sensorineural hearing loss, who are candidates for cochlear implant, its electrophysiologic effects was compared with intravenous induction of anesthesia with propofol. Methods: In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 61 children aged between one and eighteen years old, who were candidates for cochlear implantation, were randomly allocated to groups receiving anesthesia with sevoflurane (n = 32) or propofol (n = 29) for induction of anesthesia. Two 12-leads ECG were taken from all of patients before and after induction and QTc, Tp-e interval, and JTc were measured and compared. Results: Two cases, who had pre-induction QTc longer than 500 ms were excluded from the study. Patients had similar age (102.58 ± 87 versus 101.46 ± 67 months, P = 0.95) and gender (males: 48.3% versus 56.3%, P = 0.53) distribution. The researchers observed significant post induction difference in QTc values between these groups (propofol 422.5 ± 40, sevoflurane 445.0 ± 29, P = 0.016). There was no significant difference in the percent QTc and Tp-e changes in propofol and sevoflurane groups. Greater percentage of patients with increased Tp-e interval (> 100 ms) in the sevoflurane group than the propofol group was also seen. There was no significant long QTc difference (QTc > 500 ms or more than 60 ms increase from baseline) after induction of anesthesia in the sevoflurane group compared to the propofol group (15.6% versus 13.8%, P = 0.84). Conclusions: After electrophysiological evaluations in children with sensorineural hearing loss, in patients whose pre-induction QTc is not longer than 500 ms, propofol seems safer than inhalational sevoflurane for induction of anesthesia. © 2019, Author(s).