Effects of propofol and sevoflurane on the excitability of rat spinal motoneurones and nociceptive reflexes in vitro.


BACKGROUND Spinal actions of halogenated ethers are widely recognized, whereas spinal actions of intravenous anaesthetics like propofol are less clear. The aim of this study was to compare the spinal effects of propofol and sevoflurane. METHODS We used an isolated spinal cord in vitro preparation from rat pups and superfused the anaesthetics at known concentrations. Responses of motoneurones to single and repetitive C-fibre intensity stimulation (trains of 20 stimuli at 1 Hz) of a lumbar dorsal root were recorded from the corresponding ventral root via a suction electrode. RESULTS Stimulation trains produced a wind-up of action potentials in motoneurones. Both propofol and sevoflurane produced a significant concentration-dependent depression of the evoked wind-up, although at clinically relevant concentrations sevoflurane exhibited a larger intrinsic efficacy. Applied at anaesthetic concentrations, sevoflurane 250 micro M abolished action potentials whereas propofol 1 micro M only produced a reduction close to 50%. At these concentrations, sevoflurane produced a large depressant effect on the monosynaptic reflex whereas propofol was ineffective. CONCLUSIONS Sevoflurane produces large inhibitory effects on nociceptive and non-nociceptive reflexes which are likely to contribute to immobility during surgery. Compared with sevoflurane, propofol appears to have much weaker effects on spinal reflexes such as those recorded in an isolated preparation.

4 Figures and Tables


Citations per Year

84 Citations

Semantic Scholar estimates that this publication has 84 citations based on the available data.

See our FAQ for additional information.

Cite this paper

@article{Matute2004EffectsOP, title={Effects of propofol and sevoflurane on the excitability of rat spinal motoneurones and nociceptive reflexes in vitro.}, author={Eduardo Matute and Iv{\'a}n Rivera-Arconada and Jos{\'e} Antonio L{\'o}pez-Garc{\'i}a}, journal={British journal of anaesthesia}, year={2004}, volume={93 3}, pages={422-7} }