Why the study?
Does verapamil increase the epinephrine arrhythmogenic dose and affect cardiovascular function in dogs under halothane anesthesia?
Does verapamil increase the epinephrine arrhythmogenic dose and affect cardiovascular function in dogs under halothane anesthesia?
Verapamil cumulatively increases the threshold for epinephrine-induced ventricular arrhythmias during halothane anesthesia in dogs, while causing transient cardiovascular depression.
Verapamil may raise epinephrine arrhythmia threshold under halothane in dogs; leaves open translation to human perioperative use.
The antiarrhythmic and cardiovascular effects of the slow channel inhibitor, verapamil, were studied during 1.1 MAC halothane anesthesia in the dog. The control epinephrine arrhythmogenic dose to induce ventricular arrhythmias was 2.58 +/- 0.77 microgram . kg-1 . min-1 (mean +/- SEM). Three consecutive doses of 0.2 mg/kg verapamil each elevated the dose of epinephrine required to produce a ventricular arrhythmia to 5.17 +/- 1.27, 8.07 +/- 1.85, and 12.03 +/- 2.76 microgram . kg-1 . min-1, respectively, all of which were significantly elevated above the control value of the preceding values. A second group of dogs, unperturbed by epinephrine, received the same sequence of verapamil doses at similar time intervals for evaluation of effects on cardiovascular function and atrioventricular conduction. Heart rate remained unchanged. Mean arterial pressure decreased maximally by 37 per cent of control, left ventricular dP/dt by 24 per cent, and systemic vascular resistance by 51 per cent. These effects were transient with recovery times up to one hour. Central venous pressure increased by 44 per cent and left ventricular end diastolic pressure by 27 per cent, while PR interval was prolonged by 40 per cent. Thus, verapamil raised the dose of epinephrine required to elicit a ventricular arrhythmia during halothane anesthesia promptly and cumulatively. At the same time verapamil produced transient peripheral vasodilation, direct depression of myocardial contractility, and prolongation of atrioventricular conduction time that was not cumulative at the intervals studied.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Kapur et al. (1981) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: