↓ Skip to main content

Effect of propofol and remifentanil on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation in pigs: a systematic review

Overview of attention for article published in Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, June 2016
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Citations

dimensions_citation
13 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
45 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Effect of propofol and remifentanil on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation in pigs: a systematic review
Published in
Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica, June 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13028-016-0223-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Mai Louise Grandsgaard Mikkelsen, Rikard Ambrus, James Edward Miles, Helle Harding Poulsen, Finn Borgbjerg Moltke, Thomas Eriksen

Abstract

The objective of this review is to evaluate the existing literature with regard to the influence of propofol and remifentanil total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation in healthy pigs. Anaesthesia has influence on cerebral haemodynamics and it is important not only in human but also in veterinary anaesthesia to preserve optimal regulation of cerebral haemodynamics. Propofol and remifentanil are widely used in neuroanaesthesia and are increasingly used in experimental animal studies. In translational models, the pig has advantages compared to small laboratory animals because of brain anatomy, metabolism, neurophysiological maturation, and cerebral haemodynamics. However, reported effects of propofol and remifentanil on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation in pigs have not been reviewed. An electronic search identified 99 articles in English. Title and abstract screening selected 29 articles for full-text evaluation of which 19 were excluded with reasons. Of the 10 peer-reviewed articles included for review, only three had propofol or remifentanil anaesthesia as the primary study objective and only two directly investigated the effect of anaesthesia on cerebral perfusion and oxygenation (CPO). The evidence evaluated in this systematic review is limited, not focused on propofol and remifentanil and possibly influenced by factors of potential importance for CPO assessment. In one study of healthy pigs, CPO measures were within normal ranges following propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia, and addition of a single remifentanil bolus did not affect regional cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO2). Even though the pool of evidence suggests that propofol and remifentanil alone or in combination have limited effects on CPO in healthy pigs, confirmative evidence is lacking.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 45 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 45 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Master 8 18%
Researcher 7 16%
Student > Bachelor 5 11%
Student > Postgraduate 4 9%
Student > Ph. D. Student 3 7%
Other 7 16%
Unknown 11 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 9 20%
Medicine and Dentistry 5 11%
Nursing and Health Professions 4 9%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 3 7%
Pharmacology, Toxicology and Pharmaceutical Science 2 4%
Other 10 22%
Unknown 12 27%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 23 June 2016.
All research outputs
#20,657,128
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#552
of 837 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#284,105
of 368,615 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Acta Veterinaria Scandinavica
#10
of 17 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 837 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.4. This one is in the 17th percentile – i.e., 17% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 368,615 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 12th percentile – i.e., 12% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 17 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 23rd percentile – i.e., 23% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.