Remifentanil vs alfentanil in the total intravenous anaesthesia for paediatric abdominal surgery

BACKGROUNDS: Our aim was to investigate whether total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with remifentanil and alfentanil would ensure appropriate analgesia and recovery conditions in anaesthesia for children undergoing abdominal surgery. METHODS: Sixty children, scheduled for abdominal operations were randomized to receive, in a double-blind manner, either remifentanil (loading dose 1 microg x kg(-1); maintenance infusion, 0.25 microg x kg(-1) min(-1)) or alfentanil (loading dose 50 microg x kg(-1); maintenance infusion, 1 microg x kg(-1) min(-1)) as the analgesic component of TIVA. They were combined with propofol (loading dose, 2 mg x kg(-1); step 1 maintenance infusion, 10 mg x kg(-1) h(-1); step 2 maintenance infusion, 8 mg x kg(-1) h(-1); step 3 maintenance infusion, 6 mg x kg(-1) h(-1)) neuromuscular blockade was with mivacurium. Dose changes of the drugs, the times from cessation of anaesthesia to extubation, verbal responses, recovery of ventilation, orientation, and qualification for discharge from the postanaesthetic care unit (PACU) were recorded. RESULTS: Demographics, duration of surgery and anaesthesia were similar between the two groups. Times to extubation and stay in the PACU were significantly shorter in the remifentanil group compared with the alfentanil group. Quality of emergence (QE) from anaesthesia scale scores were higher in the remifentanil group compared with the alfentanil group. CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil provides a more rapid recovery and adequate postoperative analgesia after TIVA for paediatric abdominal surgery, compared with alfentanil.     

Early recovery after remifentanil-pronounced compared with propofol-pronounced total intravenous anaesthesia for short painful procedures

Background. We compared recovery from high-dose propofol/low-doseremifentanil (‘propofol-pronounced’) compared withhigh-dose remifentanil/low-dose propofol (‘remifentanil-pronounced’)anaesthesia. Methods. Adult patients having panendoscopy, microlaryngoscopy,or tonsillectomy were randomly assigned to receive either propofol-pronounced(propofol 100 µg kg^–1 min^–1; remifentanil0.15 µg kg^–1 min^–1) or remifentanil-pronounced(propofol 50 µg kg^–1 min^–1; remifentanil 0.45µg kg^–1 min^–1) anaesthesia. In both groups,the procedure was started with remifentanil 0.4 µg kg^–1,propofol 2 mg kg^–1, and mivacurium 0.2 mg kg^–1.Cardiovascular measurements and EEG bispectral index (BIS) wererecorded. To maintain comparable anaesthetic depth, additionalpropofol (0.5 mg kg^–1) was given if BIS values were greaterthan 55 and remifentanil (0.4 µg kg^–1) if heartrate or arterial pressure was greater than 110% of pre-anaestheticvalues. Results. Patient and surgical characteristics, cardiovascularmeasurements, and BIS values were similar in both groups. Therewere no differences in recovery times between the groups (timeto extubation: 12.7 (4.5) vs 12.0 (3.6) min, readiness for transferto the recovery ward: 14.4 (4.4) vs. 13.7 (3.6) min, mean (SD)). Conclusions. In patients having short painful surgery, lesspropofol does not give faster recovery as long as the same anaestheticlevel (as indicated by BIS and clinical signs) is maintainedby more remifentanil. However, recovery times were less variablefollowing remifentanil-pronounced anaesthesia suggesting a morepredictable recovery. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 580–2     

Recovery profile and side effects of remifentanil-based anaesthesia with desflurane or propofol for laparoscopic cholecystectomy

BACKGROUND: Nitrous oxide (N2O) has been suggested to contribute to bowel distension, resulting in worsened operating conditions for laparoscopic surgery, and to increase incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Therefore, our objective was to assess the feasibility of two remifentanil-based anaesthetic regimens free from N2O with special regard to recovery profile, postoperative analgesic demand and side effects in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Fifty patients (ASA I-II, 23-65 yr) were randomly assigned to receive remifentanil-based anaesthesia in conjunction with propofol (group R/P) or desflurane (group R/D). After standardised induction of anaesthesia, analgesia was continued with remifentanil in all patients. For maintenance of hypnosis, propofol or desflurane were used in concentrations to ensure loss of consciousness, lack of awareness, and maintenance of heart rate and blood pressure within +/- 25% of initial values. At the end of surgery all anaesthetics were discontinued without tapering and early emergence and recovery were recorded. Pain scores were assessed by using a visual analogue scale. Patient-controlled analgesia with i.v. piritramide was used for treatment of postoperative pain and recorded for 90 min in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU). In addition, side effects were noted. RESULTS: Early emergence from anaesthesia did not differ between the groups. In group R/P, time to eye opening, spontaneous respiration and extubation was 4.4 +/- 2.9 min, 5.2 +/- 3.4 min and 5.5 +/- 3.3 min respectively, compared with 4.7 +/- 2.7 min, 5.3 +/- 2.4 min and 5.7 +/- 2.5 min in group R/D. While pain scores did not differ between both groups on admission to the PACU, patients receiving desflurane required more i.v. piritramide as compared to those receiving propofol, 22.0 +/- 6.5 mg and 17.9 +/- 7.0 mg, respectively (P<0.05). Nausea was less frequent after propofol (16% vs. 48%, P<0.05). CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, remifentanil-based anaesthetic regimens in conjunction with propofol or desflurane are suitable and allow for rapid recovery from anaesthesia. However, the use of propofol results in less postoperative analgesic consumption and nausea as compared to desflurane.     

Emergence and early cognitive function in the elderly after xenon or desflurane anaesthesia: a double-blinded randomized controlled trial

Background: Postoperative cognitive impairment after general anaesthesia,especially in the elderly, is a well-recognized problem. Xenon,known to be an N-methyl-D-aspartate antagonist, may be advantageous.In this study, the early cognitive function in the elderly aftergeneral anaesthesia with xenon was compared with that afterdesflurane. Methods: After approval by the local ethical committee and after obtainingwritten informed consent, patients were enrolled in this randomized,double-blinded, controlled study. Thirty-eight patients (65–75yr old, ASA status I–III) undergoing an elective surgerywith a planned duration of 60–180 min were allocated toeither the xenon (n = 18) or the desflurane (n = 20) anaesthesiagroup. The primary outcome was the cognitive Test for AttentionalPerformance (TAP) with its subtests Alertness, Divided Attention,and Working Memory. After baseline assessment 12–24 hbefore operation, patients were followed-up 6–12 and 66–72h after operation. Secondary outcomes were emergence times fromanaesthesia and the modified Aldrete score. Results: No difference was found between the groups in the TAP at 6–12and 66–72 h after operation. In the xenon group, emergencetime was significantly faster for the following parameters:time to open eyes (P = 0.001), to react on demand (P = 0.001),to extubation (P = 0.001), and for time and spatial orientation(P = 0.007). The modified Aldrete score was significantly higherafter 30, 45 and 60 min in the xenon group. Conclusions: There was no difference in the postoperative cognitive testingat 6–12 and 66–72 h. Xenon was associated in theelderly with a faster emergence from general anaesthesia thandesflurane.     

Anaesthesia, recovery and postoperative nausea and vomiting after breast surgery. A comparison between desflurane, sevoflurane and isoflurane anaesthesia

BACKGROUND: Whereas induction and recovery will occur more rapidly with the new low soluble anaesthetics than with isoflurane, the quality of anaesthesia and recovery with special emphasis on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is not well known. METHODS: In an open (peroperatively), double-blinded (postoperatively), randomised controlled study, we assessed anaesthesia characteristics, recovery and 24 h PONV after breast surgery comparing isoflurane, desflurane and sevoflurane. RESULTS: There were no significant quality differences between the three agents during anaesthesia and recovery except for the incidence of PONV in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU). The PONV rate (24 h in PACU and ward) was higher in the desflurane group (67%) than in the isoflurane group (22%), (P<0.01). The corresponding PONV rate for sevoflurane was 36%. CONCLUSION: The quality of anaesthesia, time to opening of eyes and influence on respiration was similar with all three anaesthetics. As the emergence from anaesthesia did not differ significantly between the three agents, the choice of agent could be based on PONV rate and price. Desflurane had a significantly higher 24 h PONV rate than isoflurane. Early PACU PONV rate was significantly (P<0.05) lower for the more soluble isoflurane (4%) than for the low soluble gases, desflurane and sevoflurane together (28%). The result of this study does not give a rationale for a transition to the new low soluble agents in breast cancer surgery.     

Comparison of sevoflurane and total intravenous anaesthesia for daycase urological surgery

Target-controlled total intravenous anaesthesia using propofol and remifentanil was compared with inhalational anaesthesia using sevoflurane and alfentanil in patients undergoing daycase urological surgery. Seventy-one patients were randomly allocated to receive either a target-controlled infusion of an admixture of propofol and remifentanil (125 microg of remifentanil added to 500 mg of propofol), or inhalational anaesthesia with sevoflurane and intra-operative alfentanil. There was no difference in time to fitness for discharge, time to fitness for transfer from primary to secondary recovery, time to first oral intake or adverse anaesthetic induction occurrences. Patient satisfaction assessed at 24 h post-discharge was high in both groups with no significant difference between groups. The incidence of nausea and vomiting was low in both groups. We conclude that, for ultra-short stay surgery, both the techniques we describe offer satisfactory anaesthesia with very early resumption of street fitness.     

Early and late recovery after major abdominal surgery. Comparison between propofol anaesthesia with and without nitrous oxide and isoflurane anaesthesia

A comparison was made between early and late recovery after major abdominal surgery under intravenous anaesthesia with propofol (with and without nitrous oxide) or inhalational anaesthesia with isoflurane. Sixty patients were randomly allocated to one of three forms of anaesthesia: propofol, propofol/nitrous oxide, or isoflurane/nitrous oxide anaesthesia. All received fentanyl and vecuronium. Recovery was monitored during the first 2 h after extubation and on days 1, 2, 3, 7 and 30 after surgery. Every 30 min during the first 2 postoperative hours, the Steward recovery scale, sedation, orientation, collaboration, and comprehension were assessed by a blinded observer. Psychomotor function was evaluated by computerised simple reaction time and finger tapping speed in 32 patients. A scale of symptoms and mood check list were filled in by 35 patients on days 1, 2, 3, 7 and 30. The preoperative values for all tests were collected 1–4 days before surgery. The time between end of surgery and extubation was longer in the propofol group, but early and late recovery of psychomotor function were similar in the three groups. Patients anaethetised with isoflurane reported more vegetative symptoms than those who received propofol (P < 0.03). The addition of nitrous oxide to propofol did not change the reported degree of symptoms. The difference in vegetative symptoms between groups was most obvious on day 7. Patients anaesthetised with propofol reported better subjective control (P < 0.02) and were more socially oriented (P < 0.05) than patients anaesthetised with isoflurane. We conclude that early recovery was similar in the three groups. Patients anaesthetised with propofol reported fewer late symptoms and better mood after operation than those anaesthetised with isoflurane. The addition of nitrous oxide did not affect the results.     

Influence of thiopental and propofol on postoperative cognitive recovery in the elderly patient undergoing general anesthesia

Study Objective: To assess mental and psychomotor recovery following induction of anesthesia with thiopental or propofol in elderly patients undergoing general anesthesia.

Design: Randomized, prospective, double-blind study.

Setting: Large referral hospital.

Patients: 40 elderly patients ASA physical status I-III (>65 years) undergoing abdomino-pelvic surgery with an estimated surgical time of at least 90 minutes.

Interventions: All patients received combined epidural-general anesthesia. After establishing a T₆ sensory blockade, patients were randomized to receive either thiopental or propofol for induction of general anesthesia. The induction drug was slowly titrated until loss of eyelash reflex was noted. Thereafter, all patients received desflurane (2% to 3% end-tidal) and 70% nitrous oxide (N₂O) in oxygen for maintenance of general anesthesia. To facilitate tracheal intubation, intravenous alfentanil 10 μg/kg and atracurium 0.4 mg/kg were administered. Perioperative analgesia was maintained with epidural bupivacaine.

Measurements and Main Results: A digit substitution test (DSST) and shape-sorter test, as well as patient-generated 100-mm visual analog score (VAS; 0 = minimal and 100 = maximal) for anxiety, sleepiness, and coordination, were performed during the preanesthetic interview, on postanesthesia care unit admission, and at 15, 45, 90, and 120 minutes thereafter. To induce loss of consciousness, either thiopental 2.5 ± 1.0 mg/kg or propofol 1.6 ± 0.6 mg/kg was administered. The mean anesthetic time was 109 ± 30 minutes and 114 ± 38 minutes for the thiopental and propofol groups, respectively. Emergence, extubation, and orientation times, as well as time to follow commands, were unaffected by patient randomization. Similarly, the DSST and shape-sorter tests, in addition to the patient-generated VAS for pain, anxiety, and coordination, were similar among groups. However, irrespective of treatment modality, return to baseline digit substitution and shape-sorter scores were significantly delayed (p < 0.01).

Conclusion: When compared to thiopental, propofol does not facilitate improved cognitive recovery in geriatric patients undergoing prolonged surgery.     

Sevoflurane--nitrous oxide anaesthesia supplemented with remifentanil: effect on recovery and cognitive function

The aim of this study was to compare recovery and psychomotor performance after maintenance of anaesthesia with sevoflurane or sevoflurane supplemented with remifentanil. Sixty-six per cent nitrous oxide was used in all patients. Twenty patients each were randomly allocated to maintenance of anaesthesia with sevoflurane only in concentrations necessary to maintain adequate anaesthesia or with 1.5, 1.0 or 0.5 MAC (end-tidal) of sevoflurane supplemented with remifentanil. The median dosage of remifentanil required in the last three groups was 0.21, 0.25 and 0.34 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1), respectively (p < 0.05). The median times to eye opening were 10.3, 12.7, 11.0 and 6.5 min in the four groups (p < 0.05 between the 0.5 MAC and the other groups) and for orientation 12.1, 14.9, 12.3 and 8.3 min, respectively (p < 0.05 between 0.5 and 1.5 MAC groups). There was no significant difference in the mini-mental state assessment scores or the actual discharge times from the recovery ward among the groups. Significantly greater numbers of patients could perform the critical flicker fusion test at 15 min in the group receiving the lowest concentration of sevoflurane and the highest dosage of remifentanil (p < 0.05). Patients in this group also showed the highest incidence of chest wall rigidity (p < 0.003). We conclude that, while the use of remifentanil with lower concentrations of sevoflurane facilitates early recovery, it does not influence discharge time from recovery ward and may be associated with side-effects such as chest wall rigidity.     

Emergence and recovery in children after desflurane and isoflurane anaesthesia: effect of anaesthetic duration

Background. We hypothesized that increasing duration of inhalationanaesthesia is associated with slower emergence and recoveryin children, and that this effect would be less marked withdesflurane in comparison with isoflurane. Methods. Fifty-four infants and children assigned in groupsaccording to age and expected length of operation were prospectivelyrandomized to receive either isoflurane (I) or desflurane (D)for anaesthesia. After standard induction, the anaesthesia wasmaintained using an age-related 1.0 minimum alveolar concentration(MAC) equivalent for either agent in air and oxygen. Local analgesiawas used as appropriate. End-tidal volatile agent concentrationwas recorded until extubation. Clinical evaluation of recoverywas made by observers, blinded to group allocation. Results. For patients <4 yr of age, the median (95% CI) timesin minutes to first movement [5.27 (D), 9.22 (I)], eye opening[9.42(D), 13.3(I)] and extubation [7.18 (D), 12.5 (I)] weresignificantly shorter (P<0.05) for desflurane. In the group>4 yr of age, the median (95% CI) times in minutes to firstmovement [4.42 (D), 11.6 (I)], eye opening [8.55(D), 18.0(I)]and extubation [7.08 (D), 16.7 (I)] were significantly shorter(P<0.001) for desflurane. Times to leave recovery were notsignificantly different for the group <4 yr of age, but weresignificantly shorter for desflurane in the group >4 yr ofage (P<0.01). The isoflurane, but not desflurane, had a time-dependenteffect on arousal. There were no significant differences inincidence of airway irritation or emergence delirium betweenthe two agents. Conclusions. The rate of recovery in children after exposureto desflurane was faster than those patients receiving isoflurane;recovery from desflurane, but not isoflurane, was relativelyunaffected by the duration of anaesthesia.     

Induction and recovery characteristics of desflurane and halothane anaesthesia in paediatric outpatients *

This study compares induction and recovery characteristics of desflurane and halothane in children undergoing elective outpatient surgery (hernia repair, circumcision and orchidopexy). Fifty-six patients one month to 12 years of age were randomly assigned to one of three study groups. In addition to nitrous oxide, group I received desflurane (D) for induction and maintenance; group II received halothane (H) for induction and desflurane for maintenance; and group III received halothane for induction and maintenance. All patients received caudal blocks at the end of surgery. There was no significant difference in induction time (mean ± SD) among the three groups (1.7 ± 0.5, 1.7 ± 0.5 and 1.0 ± 0.5 min for groups I, II and III respectively). Airway complications (coughing, breath holding, and laryngospasm) were significantly higher among the children induced with desflurane than among either of the halothane induction groups. Premedication had no effect on reducing the number of airway complications. Emergence and recovery times (mean ± SD) were significantly shorter among both desflurane maintenance groups (3.6 ± 1.7 and 11 ± 8 min) than among the group maintained on halothane (7.9 ± 3.5 and 29.9 ± 10.6 min respectively). A brief halothane induction did not compromise the fast recovery characteristics of desflurane. There was no difference among the groups in time to discharge home (approx. 3 h). This study confirms the value of desflurane as a maintenance agent in paediatric anaesthesia. In our patients, a brief halothane induction did not compromise the fast recovery characteristics of desflurane.     

Cost-effectiveness of inhalational, balanced and total intravenous anaesthesia for ambulatory knee surgery

Purpose

A randomized, blinded clinical trial was undeitaken to compare recovery charactenstics and cost-benefits associated with three general anaesthetic techniques for arthroscopic knee surgery in an ambulatory care setting.

Methods

Ninety three. ASA Physical Status l-ll patients were randomly allocated to receive one of three types of general anaesthesia: isoflurane /fentanyl/N₂O (Group INH); alfentanil/N₂O (Group BAL); or propofol/alfentanil/O₂ (Group TIVA). Postoperative recovery profiles were evaluated at 30, 60, 90 and 120 min after emergence from anaesthesia, and direct and indirect costs of each anaesthetic were compared.

Results

The most rapid emergence was observed in Group BAL (2.2 ± 1.5 min, P< 0.000l compared with groups INH and TIVA), although the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting was also highest in this group (P = 0.02 compared with groups INH and TIVA). However, overall patient satisfaction, and mean times to discharge from the Post Anaesthesia Recovery Unit and hospital, were rapid and similar in all three groups. During anaesthesia which lasted 40–45 min, nearly a four-fold difference was observed in the direct costs of anaesthetic drugs: $16.4 ± 4.4 (Group INH). $45.3 ± 11.4 (Group BAL) and $63.4 ± 17.9 (Group TIVA, P < 0.001 between groups): while indirect costs were similar.

Conclusions

For arthroscopic knee surgery. INH anaesthesia with isoflurane/fentanyl/N₂O is associated with similar hospital discharge times, and comparable levels of patient satisfaction as either BAL or TIVA. While indirect costs were similar, lower direct costs suggest that there may be a pharmacoeconomic benefit associated with the use of a “standard” isoflurane/fentanyl/N₂O anaesthetic in certain day care surgery procedures.     

Incidence of nausea and vomiting in children after strabismus surgery following desflurane anaesthesia

In a prospective, randomized parallel study, 60 ASA I-III children aged 1-17 years, scheduled for elective strabismus surgery, were anaesthetized with desflurane without prophylactic antiemetic medication. The objective of the study was to determine the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting after general anaesthesia with desflurane. To decide whether nitrous oxide further influences these symptoms, the patients were randomly assigned to two groups of 30 patients each. One group received desflurane in oxygen/air and a second group received desflurane in oxygen/nitrous oxide. In all children, after intravenous induction and tracheal intubation, anaesthesia was administered as minimal flow anaesthesia with oxygen and nitrous oxide or air according to the random plan. The patients were observed for 48 postoperative hours until their discharge from the ward. The overall incidence of nausea was found to be 37%, and vomiting was seen in 32% of all patients. No statistical correlation was found between the incidence of postoperative emesis and the administration of nitrous oxide or the duration of general anaesthesia. Instead, the incidence of vomiting was 2.5-fold higher when surgery was performed on both eyes compared with one eye. The relatively low incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, as well as the quick recovery from anaesthesia, permitting an early discharge from the postoperative care unit to the ward, show desflurane to be a suitable volatile anaesthetic in strabismus surgery in children.     

加速康复外科策略对肝切除术患者术后早期认知功能的影响

目的探讨加速康复外科(ERAS)策略对肝切除术患者术后早期认知功能的影响。方法筛选96例原发性肝癌择期行肝部分切除术患者,随机分为两组,每组48例。C组实施常规围术期处理及麻醉方法,ERAS组实施ERAS策略对围术期处理及麻醉方法进行优化。于术前1d(T0)、术后1d(T4)、3d(T5)、7d(T6)应用简易智能量表(MMSE)评估两组患者认知功能,于T0、术后30min(T1)、6h(T2)、12h(T3)、T4取患者静脉血检测血清S100β蛋白、神经元特异性烯醇化酶(NSE)含量和IL-1β、IL-6及TNF-α表达量。结果与C组比较,T4、T5时ERAS组MMSE评分明显升高,T1、T2时S100β蛋白、IL-1β、IL-6明显降低,T2、T3时NSE明显降低,T1~T3时TNF-α明显降低(P0.05)。与T0时比较,T4、T5时C组患者MMSE评分明显降低,T4时ERAS组MMSE评分明显降低(P0.05)。两组T1~T3时S100β蛋白明显升高,T2~T4时NSE含量明显升高,T1~T4时IL-1β、IL-6、TNF-α表达量均明显升高(P0.05)。结论 ERAS策略应用于肝癌肝切除术患者可改善患者术后认知功能,其机制可能与降低患者术后血清中S100β蛋白、NSE、IL-1β、IL-6及TNF-α的含量有关。     

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil in paediatric patients: a comparison with a desflurane-nitrous oxide inhalation anaesthesia

Background : Remifentanil is a new rapid-acting and ultra-short-acting μ-opioid receptor agonist with few reports from use in children. Therefore, we compared a propofol-remifentanil-anaesthesia (TIVA) with a desflurane-N₂O-anaesthesia (DN) with particular regard to the recovery characteristics in children.
Methods : 50 children (4–11 yr) scheduled for ENT surgery were randomly assigned to receive TIVA (n=25) or DN (n=25). After standardised i.v. induction of anaesthesia in both groups with remifentanil, propofol and cisatracurium, TIVA was maintained with infusions of propofol and remifentanil. Ventilation was with oxygen in air. DN was maintained with desflurane in 50% N₂O. The administration of volatile and intravenous anaesthetics was adjusted to maintain a surgical plane of anaesthesia. At the end of surgery all anaesthetics were terminated without tapering and early emergence and recovery were assessed. In addition, side effects were noted.
Results : Both anaesthesia methods resulted in stable haemodynamics but significantly higher heart rate with desflurane. Recovery did not differ between the groups except for delayed spontaneous respiration after TIVA. Spontaneous ventilation occurred after 11±3.7 min versus 7.2±2.8 min (mean±SD, TIVA versus DN), extubation after 11±3.7 min versus 9.4±2.9 min, eye opening after 11 ±3.9 min versus 14±7.6 min and Aldrete score ≥9 after 17±6.8 min versus 17±7.5 min. Postoperatively, there was a significant higher incidence of agitation in the DN-group (80% vs. 44%) but a low incidence (<10%) of nausea and vomiting in both groups.
Conclusion : In children, TIVA with remifentanil and propofol is a well-tolerated anaesthesia method, with a lower peroperative heart rate and less postoperative agitation compared with a des-flurane-N₂O based anaesthesia.     

Propofol and alfentanil total intravenous anaesthesia: a comparison of techniques for major thoracic surgery

Background : Previous work has highlighted the disadvantages of propofol as a sole agent for total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA). This randomised study investigated three combinations of propofol and alfentanil as TIVA for major thoracic surgery.
Methods : In 73 patients undergoing elective thoracic surgery, anaesthesia was conducted either with sodium thiopentone induction and inhalational maintenance (incorporating isoflurane) or with TIVA using propofol with alfentanil (by infusion at one of two rates or in incremental doses). Vital signs and recovery characteristics were recorded.
Results : There were no significant differences in heart rate or blood pressure between groups during either induction or maintenance. Depth of anaesthesia was controlled satisfactorily in all groups. Recovery characteristics were similar between treatment groups, although there was a trend towards earlier orientation
Conclusion : Continuous infusions of propofol and alfentanil provide safe and reliable TIVA for major thoracic surgery. TIVA was found to be a satisfactory technique in more elderly patients than previously described. The higher of the two alfentanil infusion rates may result in a better combination of propofol and alfentanil with respect to recovery times than the lower.     

A randomised controlled trial of propofol vs. thiopentone and desflurane for fatigue after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Fatigue may delay functional recovery after day surgery and may be more common after propofol anaesthesia. We randomly allocated 123 participants scheduled for ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy to induction and maintenance of general anaesthesia with propofol or thiopentone and desflurane. Postoperative fatigue was unaffected by the allocated anaesthetic. The combined mean (SD) Identity‐Consequences Fatigue Scale of 34.3 (15.1) before surgery increased in the first postoperative week: to 60.4 (21.1) on day 1, p < 0.001; to 51.1 (17.2) on day 2, p < 0.001; and to 37.5 (16.3) on day 6, p = 0.028. The mean (SD) fatigue reduced at one postoperative month to 22.4 (12.6), 35% less than the combined pre‐operative level, p < 0.001. Rates of nausea, vomiting and rescue antie‐mesis during the first week after propofol, compared with thiopentone and desflurane, were: 23/63 vs. 32/60, p = 0.27; 8/63 vs. 9/60, p = 0.71; and 12/63 vs. 28/60, p = 0.001, respectively. There were no differences in postoperative pain. In conclusion, fatigue after scheduled laparoscopic cholecystectomy was unaffected by anaesthesia with propofol vs. thiopentone and desflurane.