학술논문

A Comparative Study of Induction and Recovery Characteristics of Propofol and Sevoflurane in Daycare Fibroadenoma Surgeries.
Document Type
Article
Source
European Journal of Cardiovascular Medicine. 2023, Vol. 13 Issue 1, p27-33. 7p.
Subject
*AMBULATORY surgery
*PROPOFOL
*SEVOFLURANE
*INHALATION anesthesia
*ADULT day care
*HOSPITAL admission & discharge
*LOSS of consciousness
Language
ISSN
2042-4884
Abstract
Introduction: Day-care procedures has now becoming a popular modality of treatment throughout the world. Day-care procedures means that patient gets admitted, undergoes interventional procedure and gets discharged from the hospital on the same day of the procedure.[1] Anaesthetic agents available now-a-days play an important role in achieving specific criteria for ambulatory anaesthesia. Anaesthestic agents like, propofol and sevoflurane favors the anaesthesiologist to perform successful day case surgeries. Propofol has become the drug of choice for induction of anesthesia in the day care procedures due to its favorable recovery profile and low incidence of side effects.[2] Newer inhaled anaesthetics like desflurane and sevoflurane with low blood gas partition coefficient facilitates rapid induction of anaesthesia and rapid recovery and less adverse effect at the end of anaesthesia, leading to their use in day care surgery.[3] Materials and Methods: One hundred female patients with ASA and MPC grade 1 undergoing fibroadenoma surgery were selected for the study. Each patient was randomly allocated to either the propofol or the sevoflurane group. The groups were named „P? for propofol and „S? for sevoflurane. All the patients in the study were premedicated with inj.Glycopyrrolate 5µg/kg and Fentanyl 2 µg/kg just prior to induction of anaesthesia. Group P Induction with propofol 2mg/kg IV with nitrous oxide and oxygen 4L: 2L ratio. Group S Induction with sevoflurane 4% in nitrous oxide and oxygen 4L: 2L ratio in a closed circuit. Parameters studied, time to loss of consciousness, induction complications,incidence of apnoea, time of Phase 1 and Phase 2 recovery. Results: The mean time to LOC with intravenous propofol induction was significantly shorter when compared to inhalation induction with sevoflurane. Equal incidence of apnoea in both groups. Induction complications were more with sevoflurane group. The time to Phase I and Phase II recovery was comparable in both groups. Incidence of PONV was significantly less in propofol group,postoperative pain was comparable in both groups. Conclusion: The smoother induction and less post operative PONV and pain with propofol make it more ideal for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia in adult day care surgeries. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]