A randomized, Comparative Study of Propofol Infusion and Sevoflurane as the Sole Maintenance Agent in Laparoscopic Surgery. | [Anaesthesia, Pain and Intensive Care • 2017]

Author(s):

1. Khushali R Tilvawala: Department of Anesthesiology, NHL Municipal Medical College, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

2. ParulR Panchotiya: Department of Anesthesiology, NHL Municipal Medical College, Ahmedabad, Gujarat, India

Abstract:

Background and objective: Laparoscopic techniques have rapidly increased in popularity because of associated benefits. Although the most commonly performed surgery still remains laparoscopic cholecystectomy, many other surgical procedures have been included in the list. Our aim of this study was to compare the hemodynamic changes and emergence characteristics during maintenance of anesthesia either with sevoflurane or propofol infusion in laparoscopic surgeries. Methodology: Fifty patients of ASA physical status I or II, aged between 18-60 years, of either sex, scheduled for various elective laparoscopic surgeries of around 2 hours duration under general anesthesia were selected for this study. All the patients were given premedications; inj glycopyrrolate 0.004 mg/kg, inj ondansetron 0.08 mg/kg and inj fentanyl 1.0 g/kg IV. Induction was done with inj thiopentone sodium 5 mg/kg and inj succinylcholine 2 mg/kg, followed by intubation. Muscle relaxation was achieved with inj vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg loading dose followed by 0.02 mg/kg IV 20-45min post initial PRN. Patients were then randomly divided into 2 groups: Group S (Sevoflurane group) was maintained on sevoflurane 1-1.5% + O2:N2O (50:50). Group P received inj propofol 1 mg/kg bolus followed by 100-300 µg/kg/min infusion + O2:N2O (50:50). Mean arterial pressure, mean heart rate, and emergence characteristics were recorded. All the quantitative data were analyzed using unpaired T test. Results: Mean heart rate after pneumoperitonium was 93.32 ± 6.29 vs. 91.00 ± 4.46 per min for Group S and Group P respectively. Mean blood pressure after pneumoperitonium for Group S was 101.72 ± 6.32 and for Group P was 98.00 ± 7.69 mmHg. There was no significant difference in EtCO2, and SpO2 was maintained at 99-100% throughout the surgery in both groups. Time for spontaneous respiration, time to spontaneous eye opening, following verbal command and telling own name by the patient were significantly lower in Group S than Group P. Conclusion: We conclude that maintenance of general anesthesia with sevoflurane is associated with faster emergence from anesthesia when compared with propofol, while propofol is associated with lower incidence of PONV in laparoscopic surgical procedures.

Page(s): 154-158

DOI: DOI not available

Published: Journal: Anaesthesia, Pain and Intensive Care, Volume: 21, Issue: 2, Year: 2017

Keywords:

Keywords are not available for this article.

References:

[1] SoodJ,KumraVP, 2003.Anaesthesia for laparoscopic surgery,Indian J Surg 65 232 -40

[2] ClaeysMA,GeptsE, 1983.hemodynamic changes in anaesthesia induced and maintained with propofol,Br J Anesth 60 3 -9

[3] MSKhanna,VSarha, 2002.A comparative evaluation of 1% and 2% propofol as sole intravenous anesthetic agent for short surgical procedure,J Anesth Clin. Pharmacol 18 87 -90

[4] JellishWS,LienCA,FontenelHJ,HallR.., 1996.The comparative effects of sevoflurane versus propofol in the induction and maintenance of anesthesia in adult patients,Anesth Analg 82 479 -85

[5] OzkoseZ,EecanB,UnalY,YardeemS,KaymazM,DoguluF, .Inhalational versus total intravenous anaesthesia for lumbar disc herniation: comparison of hemodynamic effects, recovery characteristics and cost,J Neuro Surg Anestehsiol 13 296 -302

[6] SinghSK,KumarA,MahajanR,KatyalS,MannS., 2013.Comparison of recovery profile for propofol and sevoflurane a n e s t h e s i a i n c a s e s o f o p e n cholecystectomy,Anaesth Essays Res 10 123259 -1162

[7] GuptaA,StiererT,ZuckermanR,SakimaN,ParkerD,FleisherLA, 2004.Comparison of recovery profile after ambulatory anaesthesia with propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane: a systemic review,Anesth Analg 98 632 -41

[8] EbertTJ,MuziM,BerensR,GoffD,KampineJP, .Sympathetic responses to induction of anesthesia in humans with propofol or etomidate,Anesthesiology 76 725 -33

[9] RobinsonBJ,EbertTJ,O'BrienTJ,ColincoMD,MuziM., .Mechanisms whereby propofol mediates peripheral v a s o d i l a t i o n i n h u m a n s . Sympathoinhibition or direct vascular relaxation?,Anesthesiology 86 64 -72

[10] CoatsDP,MonkCr,Prys RobertsC,TurtleM., 1987.Hemodynamic effects of the infusion of the emulsion formulation of propofol during nitrous oxide anesthesia in humans,Anesth Analg 66 64 -70

[11] LarsenB,SeitzA,LarsenR, 2000.Recovery of cognitive function after remifentanylpropofol anaesthesia: a comparison with desflurane and sevoflurane anesthesia,Anaesth Analg 90 168 -74

[12] WandelC,NeffS,BöhrerH,BrowneA,MotschJ,MartinE., 1995.Recovery characteristics following anaesthesia with sevoflurane or propofol in adults undergoing out-patient surgery,Eur J Clin Pharmacol 48 185 -8

[13] SamantarayA,RaoM, 2006.Comparative effects of propofol infusion versus sevoflurane for maintenance of anesthesia for spine surgery,Int J Anesth 11 -

[14] SinghSK,KumarA,MahajanR,KatyalS,MannS., 2013.Comparison of recovery profile for propofol and sevoflurane a n e s t h e s i a i n c a s e s o f o p e n cholecystectomy,Anaesth Essays Res 10 123259 -1162

[15] ApfelCC,KrankeP,KatzMH,GoepfertC,PapenfussT,RauchS, 2002.Volatile anesthetics may be the main cause of early but not delayed postoperative vomiting: a randomized control trial of factorial design,Br J Aneasth 88 659 -68

Citations

Downloads

Views