Comparison of induction and recovery characteristics of propofol and sevoflurane in day care adult tonsillectomies
Keywords:
sevoflurane, propofol, haemodynamic, elective proceduresAbstract
Ambulatory anaesthesia is a rapidly growing subspecialty. Although its history is as old as the history of general anesthesia itself, it has emerged as a recognized concept and is evolving over the past couple of decades. Propofol and Sevoflurane have increased the ability of the anaesthesiologist to provide a successful day-care experience. The aim of the study was to compare the induction and recovery characteristics of Propofol and Sevoflurane when they are used as single induction and maintenance anaesthetic agent in adult day care tonsillectomies. This was a randomized prospective study carried out after obtaining ethical committee and institutional approval. 60 patients were randomly allocated to either the Propofol or the Sevoflurane group by lots. Each group had 30 patients and was named ‘P’ for Propofol and ‘S’ for Sevoflurane. Their age ranged from 13 to 40 years. All the patients were assessed and those with normal clinical, biochemical, radiological and haematological parameters were selected. Despite the low blood gas solubility of Sevoflurane, inhalation induction of anaesthesia was slower than intravenous induction with Propofol. Though the incidence of induction complications was more with Sevoflurane group, it did not compromise tracheal intubation or haemodynamics except for bradycardia observed in three patients.
Downloads
References
Ronald D. Miller. Intravenous AnestheticsJaapVuyk, ElskeSitsen, and MarijeReekers: 2020: 6 (1, 2), 7452.
Sahinovic MM, Struys MMRF, Absalom AR. Clinical Pharmacokinetics and Pharmacodynamics of Propofol. ClinPharmacokinet. 2018; 57(12):1539-1558.
Clinical comparison of “single agent” anaesthesia with sevoflurane versus target controlled infusion of propofol: K.R. Watson and M.V. Shaw: BJA: 2000; 85/4/541-546.
Ghatge S, Lee J, Smith I. Sevoflurane: an ideal agent for adult day-case anesthesia? ActaAnaesthesiol Scand. 2003 Sep;47(8):917-31.
Kulkarni S, Harsoor SS, Chandrasekar M, et al. Consensus statement on anaesthesia for day care surgeries. Indian J Anaesth. 2017;61(2):110-124.
Delgado-Herrera L, Ostroff RD, Rogers SA. Sevoflurance: approaching the ideal inhalational anesthetic. a pharmacologic, pharmacoeconomic, and clinical review. CNS Drug Rev. 2001;7(1):48-120.
Ghatge S, Lee J, Smith I. Sevoflurane: an ideal agent for adult day-case anesthesia? ActaAnaesthesiol Scand. 2003 Sep;47(8):917-31.
Ebert TJ, Muzi M, Lopatka CW. Neurocirculatory responses to sevoflurane in humans. A comparison to desflurane. Anesthesiology. 1995;83(1):88–95.
Kulkarni S, Harsoor SS, Chandrasekar M, et al. Consensus statement on anaesthesia for day care surgeries. Indian J Anaesth. 2017;61(2):110-124.
Guidelines for Ambulatory Anesthesia (Approved by the ASA House of Delegates on October 15, 2003, last amended on October 22, 2008, and reaffirmed on October 17, 2018)
.Bangera A. Anaesthesia for adenotonsillectomy: An update. Indian J Anaesth. 2017; 61(2):103-109.
Hoddeson, E. K. and Gourin, C. G: Adult tonsillectomy: Current indications and outcomes’, Otolaryngology–Head and Neck Surgery, 2009:140(1), pp. 19–22.
Wong HT, Sien Hui T, Chong AW. Is Daycare Tonsillectomy Safe?. Iran J Otorhinolaryngol. 2016;28(86):183-188.
Intravenous or inhaled induction of anaesthesia in adults? An audit of preoperative patient preferences: Anton A van den Berg FRCA, Dudley A. Chitty, MD, Ramoun D. Jones, MD, Mir S. Sohel, MD and Ali Shahen MD : Anaesthesia & analgesia: 2005; 100:1422-1424.
A. Thwaites S. Edmends and I. Smith : Inhalation induction with sevoflurane: a double blind comparison with propofol: BJA, 1997; Issue 4: 356-361.
Brian Fredman. Michael H. Nathanson, Ian Smith, Junkewang, Kevin Klein,and Paul F. White:Sevoflurane for outpatient anesthesia: A comparison with propofol: Anesthesia& Analgesia: 1995;81:823-8.
W. Scott Jellish, Cynthia A Lien, H.Jerrel Fontenot, and Richard Hall, . :The comparative effects of sevoflurane versus propofol in the induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in adult patients:– Anesthesia& Analgesia: 1996: 82, 479 -485.
J. K. Moore, E.W. Moore, R.A. Elliott, A.S.St. Leger, K. Payne and J. Kerr Propofol and halothane versus sevoflurane in paediatric day - case surgery: induction and recovery characteristics:: BJA: 2003; 461-466.
Bharti N, Chari P, Kumar P. Effect of sevoflurane versus propofol-based anesthesia on the hemodynamic response and recovery characteristics in patients undergoing microlaryngeal surgery. Saudi J Anaesth. 2012;6(4):380-384.
Husedzinović I, Tonković D, Barisin S, Bradić N, Gasparović S. Hemodynamic differences in sevoflurane versus propofolanesthesia. CollAntropol. 2003 Jun;27(1):205-12.
. J, Gupta. A, Pedersen. F.M, :Recovery characteristics of sevoflurane or propofol based anaesthesia for day - care surgery: ReaderActaanaesthesiologica Scandinavia: 1997; 41: 988-984.
Hanna Viitanen, PekkaTarkkila, Susanna Mennander. MattiViltanen, PaiviAnnila, : sevoflurane - maintained anaesthesia induced with propofol or sevoflurane in small children: induction and recovery characteristics - Canadian Journal of Anaesthesia, 1999/46:1/ pp 21-28.
Picard, L. Dumont and M. Pellegrini : Quality of recovery in children: Sevoflurane versus propofol: VActaAnaesthesiologica Scandinavia 2000; 44: 307- 310.
.Joo HS, Perks WJ. Sevoflurane versus propofol for anesthetic induction: a meta- analysis. AnesthAnalg. 2000 Jul;91(1):213-9.
Sahar M. Siddik - Sayyid, Marie T. Aouad, Samar K. Taha,Dima G. Daaboul, Patricia G. Deeb. Faraj M. Massouh. Marie Rose A. Muallem. and Anis S. Baraka. A comparison of sevoflurane - propofol versus sevoflurane or propofol for Laryngeal mask airway insertion in adults:: Anesthesia& Analgesia: 2005; 100: 1204-09.
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
Copyright (c) 2022 International journal of health sciences
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
Articles published in the International Journal of Health Sciences (IJHS) are available under Creative Commons Attribution Non-Commercial No Derivatives Licence (CC BY-NC-ND 4.0). Authors retain copyright in their work and grant IJHS right of first publication under CC BY-NC-ND 4.0. Users have the right to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles in this journal, and to use them for any other lawful purpose.
Articles published in IJHS can be copied, communicated and shared in their published form for non-commercial purposes provided full attribution is given to the author and the journal. Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgment of its initial publication in this journal.
This copyright notice applies to articles published in IJHS volumes 4 onwards. Please read about the copyright notices for previous volumes under Journal History.
