Key result
Esmolol infusion resulted in greater spinal cord perfusion pressure (17 ± 11 mmHg) compared to sodium nitroprusside (2 ± 4 mmHg) during thoracic aortic cross-clamping in dogs.
Why the study?
Does esmolol improve spinal cord perfusion pressure compared to sodium nitroprusside in dogs during thoracic aortic cross-clamping?
Does esmolol improve spinal cord perfusion pressure compared to sodium nitroprusside in dogs during thoracic aortic cross-clamping?
Esmolol maintains higher spinal cord perfusion pressure than sodium nitroprusside during thoracic aortic cross-clamping in dogs, though it is associated with adverse hemodynamic effects.
May warrant testing esmolol for spinal cord protection in aortic procedures; leaves open translation from canine models to clinical outcomes.
BACKGROUND: Spinal cord perfusion pressure may be reduced when sodium nitroprusside is used to control proximal aortic hypertension during thoracic aortic clamping. The effect of esmolol infusion on spinal cord perfusion pressure during thoracic aortic clamping is unknown. This study compares spinal cord perfusion pressure following control of proximal hypertension with either sodium nitroprusside or esmolol during thoracic aortic clamping. METHODS: The thoracic aorta was cross-clamped for 30 min in 18 dogs anesthetized with halothane. A control group (n = 6) received no treatment of proximal hypertension during cross-clamping. In two other groups, proximal arterial pressure was controlled (100 mmHg) by infusion of either sodium nitroprusside (n = 6) or esmolol (n = 6). Brachial and femoral arterial pressures, spinal cord perfusion pressure, pulmonary artery occlusion, central venous pressures, and cardiac output were monitored. Neurologic assessment was performed 24 h following surgery. RESULTS: Femoral arterial pressure was lower with nitroprusside (14 +/- 3 mmHg) compared to esmolol (24 +/- 4 mmHg) after 15 min of aortic cross-clamping. Cerebrospinal fluid pressure increased during aortic cross-clamping in the sodium nitroprusside group (from 7 +/- 5 to 16 +/- 6 mmHg) but not in esmolol or control groups. Spinal cord perfusion pressure was lower with nitroprusside at 15 min of aortic cross-clamping (2 +/- 4 mmHg) compared to control (15 +/- 7 mmHg) and esmolol groups (17 +/- 11 mmHg). Esmolol infusion reduced cardiac output and increased ventricular filling pressures compared to control and nitroprusside groups. CONCLUSIONS: Esmolol was associated with greater spinal cord perfusion pressure, but adverse hemodynamic effects, when compared with nitroprusside during thoracic aortic cross-clamping. When only surviving dogs (4 control, 5 esmolol, 6 nitroprusside) are considered, the incidence of neurologic deficit was greater in nitroprusside-treated dogs than in either control or esmolol-treated dogs. No difference in outcome was present when all dogs are considered.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ryan et al. (1993) studied Proximal aortic hypertension during thoracic aortic cross-clamping (n=18). Esmolol vs. Sodium nitroprusside and no treatment (control) was evaluated on Spinal cord perfusion pressure at 15 min of aortic cross-clamping. Esmolol infusion resulted in greater spinal cord perfusion pressure (17 ± 11 mmHg) compared to sodium nitroprusside (2 ± 4 mmHg) during thoracic aortic cross-clamping in dogs.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: