SEVOFLURANE FOR OUTPATIENT ANESTHESIA - A COMPARISON WITH PROPOFOL

被引:121
作者
FREDMAN, B [1 ]
NATHANSON, MH [1 ]
SMITH, I [1 ]
WANG, J [1 ]
KLEIN, K [1 ]
WHITE, PF [1 ]
机构
[1] UNIV TEXAS,SW MED CTR,DEPT ANESTHESIOL & PAIN MANAGEMENT,DALLAS,TX 75235
关键词
D O I
10.1097/00000539-199510000-00028
中图分类号
R614 [麻醉学];
学科分类号
100217 ;
摘要
Three different anesthetic techniques were compared in 146 healthy outpatients undergoing ambulatory surgery. In Groups I and II, anesthesia was induced with propofol (1.5-2.0 mg/kg, intravenously [iv]) and maintained with nitrous oxide (N2O) 60% in oxygen and either a propofol infusion, 75-160 mu g . kg(-1). min(-1) IV, or sevoflurane, 1%-2% end-tidal, respectively. In Group III, anesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane, 1%-4% end-tidal and N2O 60% in oxygen. In addition to 60% N2O in oxygen at a total gas flow of 3 L/min, all patients received fentanyl, 2-3 mu g/kg IV, and vecuronium, 0.1 mg/kg IV. IV induction of anesthesia with propofol (90 +/- 53 s and 94 +/- 48 s in Groups I and II, respectively) was significantly faster than inhalation induction with sevoflurane (153 +/- 100 s). There were no significant differences in the incidence of coughing, airway irritation, or laryngospasm during induction of anesthesia. Although the mean arterial blood pressure values were similar in all three groups, the use of sevoflurane was associated with consistently lower heart rate values during the early maintenance period. Early and intermediate recovery times were the same in all three treatment groups. The use of sevoflurane for induction and/or maintenance of anesthesia was associated with a higher incidence of postoperative emetic sequelae compared with propofol. Finally, the times at which patients were considered ''fit for discharge'' and the actual discharge times were similar in all three groups. Sevoflurane is an acceptable alternative to propofol for induction and maintenance of out-patient anesthesia.
引用
收藏
页码:823 / 828
页数:6
相关论文
共 12 条
[1]   EFFECTS OF SEVOFLURANE AND ISOFLURANE ON CARDIAC AND CORONARY DYNAMICS IN CHRONICALLY INSTRUMENTED DOGS [J].
BERNARD, JM ;
WOUTERS, PF ;
DOURSOUT, MF ;
FLORENCE, B ;
CHELLY, JE ;
MERIN, RG .
ANESTHESIOLOGY, 1990, 72 (04) :659-662
[2]  
BORGEAT A, 1992, ANESTH ANALG, V74, P359
[3]   RECOVERY FOLLOWING OUTPATIENT ANESTHESIA - USE OF ENFLURANE VERSUS PROPOFOL [J].
DING, YF ;
FREDMAN, B ;
WHITE, PF .
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, 1993, 5 (06) :447-450
[4]  
DOZE VA, 1986, ANESTH ANALG, V65, P1189
[5]  
Kazama T, 1988, J Anesth, V2, P63, DOI 10.1007/s0054080020063
[6]  
Randel G I, 1992, J Clin Anesth, V4, P185, DOI 10.1016/0952-8180(92)90062-6
[7]  
SANUKI M, 1994, ANESTH ANALG, V79, P466
[8]  
SMITH I, 1994, ANESTHESIOLOGY, V81, P1005
[9]   COMPARISON OF INDUCTION, MAINTENANCE, AND RECOVERY CHARACTERISTICS OF SEVOFLURANE-N2O AND PROPOFOL-SEVOFLURANE-N2O WITH PROPOFOL-ISOFLURANE-N2O ANESTHESIA [J].
SMITH, I ;
DING, YF ;
WHITE, PF .
ANESTHESIA AND ANALGESIA, 1992, 74 (02) :253-259
[10]  
STRUM DP, 1987, ANESTH ANALG, V66, P654