Propofol/remifentanil vs sevoflurane/remifentanil for long lasting surgical procedures: a randomised controlled trial.

Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine, University Hospital Schleswig-Holstein, Campus Kiel, Schwanenweg 21, D-24105, Kiel, Germany.
Anaesthesia (Impact Factor: 3.85). 08/2006; 61(8):752-7. DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.2006.04715.x
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We compared the haemodynamics, emergence and recovery characteristics of total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol/remifentanil with sevoflurane/remifentanil anaesthesia, under bispectral index guidance, in 103 patients undergoing surgical procedures lasting > 3.5 h. Time to tracheal extubation was significantly shorter in the propofol group than in the sevoflurane group (mean (SD) 8.3 (3.5) min vs 10.8 (4.6) min, respectively; p = 0.0024), but further recovery was comparable in both groups. There were no significant differences in haemodynamic parameters, intensity of pain or postoperative nausea and vomiting. During and after anaesthesia of comparable depth for long lasting surgical procedures, both propofol/remifentanil and sevoflurane/remifentanil enable haemodynamic stability and fast emergence. The shorter time to extubation in the propofol group does not offer a relevant clinical advantage.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: A classic general anesthesia is performed by induction with an intravenous hypnotic (such as propofol) and maintenance with a volatile anesthetic (such as sevoflurane). The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of a propofol/sevoflurane maintenance regimen with that of a sevoflurane regimen on recovery profiles. One hundred and sixty patients, who were ASA 1 or 2, 45-65 years of age, and scheduled for elective gastrointestinal surgery under combined general/epidural anesthesia, were allocated randomly to receive the sevoflurane maintenance regimen (group S, n = 80) or sevoflurane/propofol regimen (group SP, n = 80). After induction, anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane in group S and sevoflurane with propofol (1.2 μg/ml target plasma concentration) in group SP. Bispectral index (BIS) values were maintained within 40-60 during the maintenance. Time to extubation, incidence of serious coughing and agitation, and other recovery characteristics were evaluated during emergence. The time to awakening and extubation in group SP were 7.2 ± 2 min and 8.0 ± 1.8 min, respectively, which were shorter than those results in group S (12.3 ± 1.5 and 12.8 ± 1.6 min, respectively) (P < 0.05). The incidence of serious coughing and agitation in SP (30 % and 25 %) was lower than that of group S (68 % and 53 %) (P < 0.05). BIS value, pain score, requirements of analgesics and antiemetics in the PACU, and length of stay in the PACU were similar in the two groups. Compared to sevoflurane maintenance, coadministration of propofol and sevoflurane provides faster awakening and extubation with a low incidence of emergence coughing and agitation.
    Journal of Anesthesia 02/2014; · 1.12 Impact Factor
  • Source
    [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: We evaluated the incidence and risk factors of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients with fentanyl-based intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) and single antiemetic prophylaxis of 5-hydroxytryptamine type 3 (5 HT₃)-receptor antagonist after the general anesthesia.
    Yonsei Medical Journal 09/2014; 55(5):1430-5. · 1.26 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: INTRODUCTION:: Rapid recovery after supratentorial tumors (STT) removal is important. Short-acting anesthetics, such as propofol and remifentanil might favor this objective. The aim of this study was to compare the recovery of 2 Bispectral index (BIS)-guided anesthesia protocols combining sevoflurane-sufentanil (SS) or propofol-remifentanil (PR) administered during craniotomy for STT. MATERIALS AND METHODS:: After IRB approval and written consent, patients scheduled for surgical removal of STT were randomized to receive PR or SS. Anesthesia was adjusted to maintain BIS values between 45 and 55. The primary outcome was the time from discontinuation of anesthetics to extubation. Secondary endpoints were: time to respond to a simple order, and to achieve spontaneous ventilation, agitation score at emergence, postoperative Mini Mental State, postoperative Aldrete score, pain Visual Analogical Score, simplified sedation score, Glasgow Coma Scale, and surgical complications. Statistical analyses were performed using analysis of variance. RESULTS:: Thirty-five and 31 were included in the SS and PR groups, respectively. Times to extubation was not different between the 2 groups (11.8±6.9 vs. 13.0±8.1 min in PR and SS groups, respectively, P=0.577). Although times to achieve an Aldrete score to 10, a Glasgow Coma Scale to 15, and a MMS to 30 significantly were lower in SS group, no significant difference was found when analyzing time course of these 3 factors over the first postoperative day. All other secondary endpoints were not different between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION:: During craniotomy for STT, we could not demonstrate a reduction in the time to extubation when comparing a BIS-guided anesthesia associating PR to a BIS-guided anesthesia associating SS ( identifier: NCT00389883).
    Journal of neurosurgical anesthesiology 06/2013; · 2.41 Impact Factor