Comparison of propofol and methohexital for dental and maxillofacial surgery

A prospective study has been undertaken to compare a new intravenous anaesthetic agent, propofol, to methohexitone in 40 ASA I or II patients aged between 18 and 50 years undergoing maxillo-facial surgery and divided into two groups. Intramuscular premedication was standardized for all patients. In group I, propofol 2 mg X kg-1 was injected over 1 min in a peripheral venous line with fentanyl 0.86 microgram X kg-1, followed by an infusion of propofol 5 mg X kg-1 X h-1 and fentanyl 3 micrograms X kg-1 X h-1. In group II, the fentanyl dosage was the same as in group I, whilst methohexitone 3 mg X kg-1 was given for induction and 4.5 mg X kg-1 X h-1 for maintenance of anaesthesia. The following were recorded during induction, maintenance and recovery; haemodynamic parameters using a non invasive method; respiratory parameters; quality of anaesthesia; side-effects. Statistical analysis was performed using the Student t test and qualitative analysis using the Schwartz comparison test at 2%. The following results were found: the quality of anaesthesia with propofol was superior to that of methohexitone during the three stages of anaesthesia. The duration of induction was similar in both groups, but the quality of induction (occurrence of more minor side-effects; p less than 0.05) and intubation was in favour of propofol (p less than 0.05). During maintenance, stability of anaesthesia and a lesser incidence of side-effects were again in favour of the propofol group, in which a slower rate was also found (p less than 0.001).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Comparison of propofol and propanidid administered at a constant rate

So as to compare the anaesthesia obtained using propofol with that obtained using propanidid, 40 ASA I patients, aged between 18 and 50 years, who were to undergo elective orthopaedic or plastic surgery lasting more than 60 min, were randomly divided into two equal groups, one receiving propofol (PF) and the other propanidid (PD). All the patients received 0.5 mg atropine, 100 mg pethidine and 7.5 mg droperidol (10 mg if weight greater than 60 kg) intramuscularly 45 min before induction. Patients in group PF were then given 2 mg.kg-1 propofol over 1 min and 0.9 microgram.kg-1 fentanyl over 3 min, followed by a constant rate infusion of 5 mg.kg-1.h-1 propofol and 3 micrograms.kg-1.h-1 fentanyl. For PD patients, the doses of fentanyl were identical; they were given 10.6 mg.kg-1 propanidid over 3 min for induction, and 37 mg.kg-1.h-1 for maintenance. All the patients were intubated and ventilated mechanically. The usual anaesthetic parameters were monitored at induction, during surgery, and during recovery. Consciousness was lost more quickly with propofol (p less than 0.05), but the corneal reflex returned more rapidly in group PD (p less than 0.02). The time required for a full return to normal consciousness was identical in both groups. The fall, during induction, and the increase, during recovery, of Pasys were greater in group PD (p less than 0.05 and less than 0.001 respectively). Padia and heart rate were lower in group PF after the 30th min (p less than 0.05 and less than 0.01 respectively).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

The effect of pre-induction glycopyrronium on the haemodynamic response of elderly patients to anaesthesia with propofol

This study investigated whether pretreatment with glycopyrronium can attenuate the hypotension caused by anaesthesia of the elderly with propofol. Twenty elderly patients (77.1 +/- 2.44 years, mean +/- SEM) of ASA physical status 2 or 3 scheduled for elective urological procedures were given glycopyrronium 0 (n = 10) or 5 micrograms.kg-1 (n = 10) in a randomised, double-blind manner, 5 min before induction of anaesthesia with propofol infused at 600 ml.h-1 (average induction dose 1.7 +/- 0.06 mg.kg-1, mean +/- SEM) followed by maintenance with a propofol infusion at 10 mg.kg-1.h-1. Although glycopyrronium significantly increased heart rate (p less than 0.01, ANOVA), the decrease in blood pressure 2 and 5 min after induction was similar in both groups. The study had a power of 80% to detect a 20 mmHg difference in systolic arterial pressure between treatment groups with p less than 0.05.     

Randomized comparison of recovery after propofol-nitrous oxide versus thiopentone-isoflurane-nitrous oxide anaesthesia in patients undergoing ambulatory surgery

A randomized, prospective study was performed to compare recovery characteristics in 41 ASA physical status I-II patients scheduled for ambulatory surgery with either propofol or thiopentone-isoflurane anaesthesia. Particular attention was focused on the recovery time needed to meet discharge criteria. The propofol group received propofol 2 mg.kg-1 for induction followed by propofol infusion (6-9 mg.kg-1.h-1) 1 min after intubation. The thiopentone-isoflurane group received thiopentone 4 mg.kg-1 for induction followed by isoflurane (0.5-2%) 1 min after endotracheal intubation. Other drugs administered during or after anaesthesia were similar between the groups. The propofol group had significantly (P less than 0.05) faster clinical recovery than the isoflurane group with respect to times to response to commands, eye opening, orientation, ability to stand and void, tolerance to oral fluids, "home-readiness", and recovery of perceptual speed. Patients in the propofol group had significantly less (P less than or equal to 0.05) emesis than the patients given isoflurane. We conclude that in patients undergoing ambulatory surgery propofol infusion is preferable to thiopentone-isoflurane anaesthesia, because it may allow faster discharge home.     

Propofol versus etomidate in short-time urologic surgery]

Thirty patients, scheduled for short urological surgical procedures and ranked ASA 1 or 2, were randomly assigned to two homogenous groups. In group P, they were given a 2 mg.kg-1 bolus of propofol and 10 micrograms.kg-1 of alfentanil, followed by a continuous infusion of propofol (5 mg.kg-1.h-1) and 5 micrograms.kg-1 doses of alfentanil. In group E, they were given a 0.3 mg.kg-1 bolus of etomidate, followed by an infusion (1.5 mg.kg-1.h-1). The doses of alfentanil were the same as in group P. Further doses of either propofol (0.5 mg.kg-1) or etomidate (0.2 mg.kg-1) were used should anaesthesia prove not to be deep enough. The patients were not intubated, and breathed spontaneously. Surgery lasted a mean of 18.3 +/- 11.8 min (group P) and 18.8 +/- 9.4 min (group E). The following parameters were studied: the amount of each agent required for maintenance of anaesthesia, the duration of apnoea at induction, the quality of anaesthesia and of muscle relaxation, adverse effects (coughing, trismus, restlessness, nausea, vomiting), the time required for recovery, and its quality. In group P, there was a 27% decrease in arterial pressure, without any tachycardia or hypoxia, together with a quick recovery of excellent quality. On the other hand, in group E, there was little or no haemodynamic alteration, but there often was a trismus at induction. Hypoxia also occurred during induction with etomidate, being severe enough in one case to require tracheal intubation and artificial ventilation. The reasons for this hypoxia seemed to be the apnoea and the trismus, which tends to hinder assisted ventilation.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol or etomidate

In combination with fentanyl, propofol was compared with etomidate for total intravenous anaesthesia in 21 women (ASA Grades I-II) admitted for elective hysterectomy. They received either propofol (bolus 1.5 mg kg-1, infusion 9 mg kg-1 h-1 for 10 min thereafter 6 mg kg-1 h-1) or etomidate (bolus 0.10 mg kg-1, infusion 3 mg kg-1 h-1 reduced to 0.6 mg kg-1 h-1). Fentanyl 10 micrograms kg-1 was given for induction followed by an infusion of 30 micrograms kg-1 h-1 for 10 min reduced to 6 micrograms kg-1 h-1 for the first hour and successively reduced over time. Induction was smooth and maintenance easy to manage in both groups. There was no difference in time from end of infusion until extubation, but the time until the patients could report their date of birth was significantly shorter in the propofol group. Nausea and vomiting were more pronounced in the etomidate group, and mental side-effects were only seen after etomidate. After 3 months, more patients in the etomidate group complained of reduced power of concentration. We conclude that total intravenous anaesthesia with either propofol or etomidate is equally easy to manage, but in the recovery situation propofol was advantageous in time and quality.     

Haemodynamic comparison of propofol-fentanyl anaesthesia with midazolam-fentanyl anaesthesia in CABG patients without preoperative heart failure

This study was designed to compare prebypass haemodynamics under total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) using midazolam-fentanyl (group M) and propofol-fentanyl (group P) combinations. Sixteen adult patients undergoing CABG were studied with patients in group M and P (n = 8 each) given intravenous midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1.h-1 and propofol 4 mg.kg-1.h-1 with fentanyl 25 micrograms.kg-1 until sternotomy, respectively. Following induction of anaesthesia, cardiac index and heart rate decreased significantly (30% and 20% in both groups, p < 0.05) these variables returned to baseline on completion of sternotomy. In addition, in group P mean arterial pressure decreased significantly (about 15%) following induction and there were no ischaemic signs. Overall for MAP there was no significant difference between the two groups. LVSWI and RVSWI were reduced by around 25% in both groups. Only the change in LVSWI reached statistical significance (p < 0.05). This reduction may have exert a caridioprotectant action by decreasing myocardial oxygen consumption. We conclude that both TIVA techniques represent an acceptable anaesthetic regimen for use in cardiac anaesthesia.     

Recovery and discharge of patients after long propofol infusion vs isoflurane anaesthesia for ambulatory surgery

Fifty unpremedicated patients scheduled for outpatient restorative dentistry and/or oral surgery lasting 2 to 4 h were anaesthetized with either propofol infusion or isoflurane inhalation. Before induction of anaesthesia with propofol (2.5 mg.kg-1), all patients were given 75 mg of diclofenac and 0.01 mg.kg-1 vecuronium intravenously. Intubation was facilitated with suxamethonium (1.5 mg.kg-1) and anaesthesia was maintained in random order either with propofol infusion (12 mg.kg-1.h-1 for the first 20 min, 9 mg.kg-1.h-1 for the next 20 min, and 6 mg.kg-1.h-1 for the rest of the anaesthesia) or with isoflurane (inspired concentration 1-2.5%), both with nitrous oxide and oxygen (30%). The patients breathed spontaneously using a non-rebreathing circuit. Patients given propofol infusion became re-orientated faster (11.0 +/- 5.5 min vs. 16.5 +/- 7.5 min; P less than 0.01) and at 30 min walked along a straight line better (P less than 0.01). At 60 min, none of the propofol patients displayed an unsteady gait, whereas 11 of the 25 isoflurane patients did (P less than 0.001). None of the patients receiving propofol had emesis at the clinic, compared with 10 of the 25 patients receiving isoflurane (P less than 0.001). The overall incidence of emesis was 2 of 25 and 14 of 25 in the propofol and isoflurane groups, respectively (P less than 0.01). Patients receiving propofol were discharged home earlier than patients receiving isoflurane (80 +/- 14 min and 102 +/- 32 min, respectively; P less than 0.01). It is concluded that propofol allows early discharge of patients, even after long anaesthesias.     

Randomized comparison of outcome after propofol-nitrous oxide or enflurane-nitrous oxide anaesthesia in operations of long duration

A randomized, prospective, comparative study was performed to evaluate induction characteristics, haemodynamic changes and recovery in 60 ASA I-II patients undergoing mainly gynaecological laparotomies with either propofol or thiopentone-enflurane anaesthesia. The propofol group (n = 30) received 2 mg.kg-1 propofol for induction of anaesthesia followed by propofol infusion. The thiopentone-enflurane group (n = 30) received thiopentone 4 mg.kg-1 for induction followed by enflurane (0.5-2 per cent). All patients received nitrous oxide (66 per cent] in oxygen begun one minute after tracheal intubation, and fentanyl (1.5 micrograms.kg-1) four minutes prior to induction. Other drugs administered during or after anaesthesia were similar among the groups. Haemodynamic measurements were similar between propofol and enflurane groups except after tracheal intubation when the mean arterial pressure was lower in the propofol group (P less than 0.05). The propofol group had significantly less (P less than 0.01) emesis in the recovery room than the enflurane group. The propofol group experienced significantly less (P less than 0.05) dizziness, depression/sadness and hunger than the enflurane group in the postoperative period as assessed with a visual analogue questionnaire. We conclude that propofol provided better outcome than enflurane in terms of these nonvital but annoying outcome measures after relatively long intra-abdominal operations.     

Propofol anaesthesia and metabolic acidosis in children

BACKGROUND: We aimed to investigate the effect of propofol infusion anaesthesia on acid-base status and liver and myocardial enzyme levels of children during short-term anaesthesia. METHODS: Thirty-six children, aged 3-12 years, were randomized into two groups. In group P (n = 18), induction and maintenance were performed with propofol, 3 mg x kg-1 and 20, 15 and 10 mg x kg-1 x h-1, respectively. In group H (n = 18) following induction with 5 mg x kg-1 thiopenthal, anaesthesia was maintained with 2-3% halothane. Blood samples were obtained following anaesthesia induction and 30, 60 and 120 min after discontinuation of anaesthesia. RESULTS: There was no difference in lactate dehydrogenase, myocardial creatininephosphokinase, aspartate aminotransferase, alanine aminotransferase and cholesterol levels between and within the groups. All postoperative triglyceride levels were higher and pH levels were lower in group P than group H (P < 0.05) and there was no difference within the groups. CONCLUSIONS: In these healthy patients, short-term use of propofol did not result in significant acidaemia, nor alterations in hepatic or myocardial enzyme levels.     

Recovery after anesthesia with propofol in otorhinolaryngologic surgery of brief duration

This study was designed to assess recovery from total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol for short ENT procedures. Twenty-six patients (ASA I and II) were assigned to two groups of thirteen: one breathed air (Laser laryngeal microsurgery), the second N2O-O2 (FIO2 : 0.5) (various ENT procedures). The induction sequence was exactly the same for both groups: oral premedication with 10 mg diazepam one hour before surgery, I mg pancuronium bromide, 2 micrograms X kg-1 fentanyl, denitrogenation within 3 min, after which propofol was delivered (2.5 mg X kg-1). When the eye-lash reflex had disappeared (time recorded), 1.5 mg X kg-1 suxamethonium was given and laryngotracheal intubation carried out. A continuous infusion of propofol (9 mg X kg-1 X h-1) was started. Surgery began 5 +/- 2 min after the start of propofol infusion. The durations of anaesthesia, surgery and propofol infusion were similar in both groups. To have good surgical conditions, it was necessary to give repeated doses of propofol for 15 patients. Thus, the total dose of propofol was significatively different between the two groups: 24.5 +/- 6.7 mg X kg-1 X h-1 in group "air" versus 16 +/- 3.6 mg X kg-1 X h-1 in group "N2O-O2" (p less than 0.001). Extubation occurred within 16 +/- 8 min in group "air", being more rapid in group "N2O-O2" (11 +/- 9 min; no significant difference). Recovery was assessed with two psychomotor tests: choice reaction time (CRT) and tracing test (TT).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

A comparison of the myocardial metabolic and haemodynamic changes produced by propofol-sufentanil and enflurane-sufentanil anaesthesia for patients having coronary artery bypass graft surgery

The purpose of this study was to compare propofol-sufentanil with enflurane-sufentanil anaesthesia for patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft (CABG) surgery with respect to changes in (1) haemodynamic variables; (2) myocardial blood flow and metabolism; (3) serum cortisol, triglyceride, lipoprotein concentrations and liver function; and (4) recovery characteristics. Forty-seven patients with preserved ventricular function (ejection fraction greater than 40%, left ventricular end diastolic pressure less than or equal to 16 mmHg) were studied. Patients in Group A (n = 24) received sufentanil 0.2 microgram.kg-1 and propofol 1-2 mg.kg-1 for induction of anaesthesia which was maintained with a variable rate propofol (50-200 micrograms.kg-1.min-1) infusion and supplemental sufentanil (maximum total 5 micrograms.kg-1). Patients in Group B (n = 23) received sufentanil 5 micrograms.kg-1 for induction of anaesthesia which was maintained with enflurane and supplemental sufentanil (maximum total 7 micrograms.kg-1). Haemodynamic and myocardial metabolic profiles were determined at the awake-sedated, post-induction, post-intubation, first skin incision, post-sternotomy, and pre-cardiopulmonary bypass intervals. Induction of anaesthesia produced a larger reduction in systolic blood pressure in Group A (156 +/- 22 to 104 +/- 20 mmHg vs 152 +/- 26 to 124 +/- 24 mmHg; P less than 0.05). No statistical differences were detected at any other time or in any other variable including myocardial lactate production (n = 13 events in each group), time to tracheal extubation and time to discharge from the ICU. We concluded that, apart from hypotension on induction of anaesthesia, propofol-sufentanil anaesthesia produced anaesthetic conditions equivalent to enflurane-sufentanil anaesthesia for CABG surgery.     

Continuous propofol infusion versus enflurane in children operated on for strabismus. Comparison of the quality of anesthesia and recovery conditions

In children, the use of a continuous infusion of propofol has not yet been reported. A study was therefore designed to compare the characteristics of anaesthesia and recovery when either propofol or enflurance was used as the main anaesthetic agent. All 42 children (14 girls, 28 boys), ASA I and scheduled for corrective squint surgery under general anaesthesia, received 350 micrograms.kg-1 midazolam and 40 micrograms.kg-1 atropine intrarectally 20 min before induction, which was carried out with 3 mg.kg-1 propofol intravenously in 20 s. The patients were then randomly assigned to two groups, according to the drug used for maintenance: group P (n = 21) received a continuous intravenous infusion of propofol, 18 mg.kg-1.h-1 for the first 30 min and 15 mg.kg-1.h-1 thereafter; group E (n = 21) received 2.5%, then, after 30 min, 2% enflurane. Both groups were given 15 micrograms.kg-1 dextromoramide and 0.09 mg.kg-1 vecuronium. During anaesthesia, the following parameters were monitored: systolic (Pasys), diastolic (Padia) and mean arterial (Pa) pressures, heart rate (fc), the presence or not of an oculocardiac reflex with or without a 20% fall in fc which responded to 10-15 micrograms.kg-1 atropine, the appearance of a cardiac dysrhythmia, duration of anaesthesia and the delay before extubation. Recovery was assessed 1, 2, 4 and 6 h postoperatively by using both clinical and psychomotor criteria, the latter being adapted to children having one or both eyes occluded.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Propofol auto-co-induction as an alternative to midazolam co-induction for ambulatory surgery

We propose the use of an intravenous propofol/propofol auto-co-induction technique as an alternative to propofol/midazolam for induction of anaesthesia. We have studied 54 unpremedicated ASA 1 or 2 patients undergoing day-stay anaesthesia for minor orthopaedic surgery. All received 10 micrograms.kg-1 or alfentanil before induction, followed by either midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1, propofol 0.4 mg.kg-1 or saline, and 2 min later, a propofol infusion at a rate of 50 mg.kg-1.h-1 until loss of eyelash reflex. We compared pre- and postinduction haemodynamic changes, complications at insertion of a laryngeal mask airway and recovery from anaesthesia in the three groups. Both co-induction techniques showed less postinduction hypotension and significant reduction of the total induction dose of propofol when compared to the control group. In the propofol/propofol group there was a decreased incidence of apnoea during induction of anaesthesia. These patients were discharged from hospital 2 h after the end of anaesthesia whereas patients in the midazolam/propofol group were discharged after 2 1/2 h (p < 0.001).     

A comparison of remifentanil and fentanyl in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We investigated the haemodynamic stability and emergence characteristics of isoflurane/nitrous oxide anaesthesia supplemented with remifentanil or fentanyl in patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy. METHODS: Anaesthesia was induced with propofol (1-2 mg kg-1) and either remifentanil (0.5 microgram kg-1) or fentanyl (1 microgram kg-1), followed by an infusion of remifentanil (0.2 microgram kg-1 min-1) or fentanyl (2 micrograms kg-1 h-1). RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups in haemodynamic variables, postoperative pain, nausea or vomiting. After induction there was a significant decrease in mean arterial pressure for both groups (P < 0.001) and a decrease in heart rate (P = 0.001) in the remifentanil group. In both groups these haemodynamic changes continued during maintenance of anaesthesia (P < 0.05). The time to eye opening after surgery was significantly shorter with remifentanil compared with fentanyl (6.62 +/- 3.89 vs. 18.0 +/- 15.18 min, P = 0.015). CONCLUSION: Remifentanil appears to be a comparable opioid to fentanyl when supplementing isoflurane/nitrous oxide anaesthesia for carotid endarterectomy.     

Anesthesia for arthroscopy of the knee: propofol versus thiopental and halothane

Sixty ASA I or II patients, who underwent general anaesthesia for arthroscopy of the knee, were separated into two groups. Induction was performed either with thiopentone 7 mg . kg-1 (group I) or with propofol 2.5 mg . kg-1 (group II). All patients were intubated and ventilated. Dextromoramide was used as analgesic. Maintenance of anaesthesia was obtained with halothane inhalation (group I) or by continuous automatic injection of propofol at a dose of 9 mg . kg-1 . h-1 (group II). Induction and maintenance were satisfactory in both groups. Pulse rate was stable at induction and intubation for the propofol group, whereas it increased at both stages of anaesthesia with thiopentone; it fell moderately in both groups afterwards. Systolic and diastolic blood pressures dropped more in the propofol group after induction, with a maximum decrease of 20%. Recovery was significantly more rapid and comfortable with propofol than with thiopentone.     

Comparison of midazolam and propofol in combination with alfentanil for total intravenous anesthesia

Hemodynamic function during induction of anesthesia, the alfentanil and naloxone requirements, and the speed of recovery from total intravenous anesthesia with alfentanil/midazolam (group M, n = 10) or alfentanil/propofol (group P, n = 10) were compared in patients undergoing lower limb surgery. Twenty patients were randomly assigned to receive either 2 mg/kg propofol in 5 min followed by 9 mg.kg-1.h-1 for 30 min and 4.5 mg.kg-1.h-1 until skin closure, or 0.42 mg/kg midazolam in 5 min followed by 0.125 mg.kg-1.h-1 until skin closure. Simultaneously, a variable-rate infusion of alfentanil was given. Patients were ventilated with 30% oxygen in air. In both groups blood pressure and heart rate decreased significantly (P less than 0.02) and to a similar extent during induction. The total dose of alfentanil was similar in both groups. No patient in group P and nine patients in group M needed naloxone (average dose 130 +/- 70 micrograms, P less than 0.001). Recovery, as judged by psychomotor tests (90% score was reached at 1 h in the P group and at about 4 h in the M group, P less than 0.001), sedative scores, and orientation in time and place, was shorter in group P than in group M. The conclusion is reached that propofol is superior to midazolam in total intravenous anesthesia with alfentanil.     

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol,alfentanil, and oxygen-air: three different dosage schemes

Three different dosage schemes of propofol infusions combined with a fixed-rate alfentanil infusion were investigated in total intravenous anaesthesia. In 30 premedicated patients, divided at random into three groups, anaesthesia was induced with propofol 2 mg.kg-1 immediately followed by an alfentanil infusion 10 micrograms.kg-1.min-1 as a loading dose which was decreased after ten minutes to a maintenance dose of 1 microgram.kg-1.min-1. Vecuronium bromide 0.1 mg.kg-1 was used as the muscle relaxant. After induction of anaesthesia a propofol infusion 2 mg.kg-1.hr-1 was started in group A, 3 mg.kg-1.hr-1 in group B and 4 mg.kg-1 hr-1 in group C. At signs of light anaesthesia supplementary bolus doses of 20 mg propofol and 1 mg alfentanil were given. The patients' lungs were ventilated with air-oxygen (FIO2 0.35). The mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures showed no statistical significant differences between the three groups. A significant (P less than 0.01) decrease of the mean systolic and diastolic blood pressures was present after induction of anaesthesia and tracheal intubation. Recovery was uneventful in all but one patient, who had ventilatory depression that responded to naloxone (0.2 mg IV). Awareness did not occur in any patient. The only difference between the three groups was the higher number of supplementary bolus doses of propofol and alfentanil needed in group A (P less than 0.01). In total intravenous anaesthesia propofol 3 and 4 mg.kg-1.hr-1 as a maintenance dose combined with a two-step fixed-rate alfentanil infusion provided smooth anaesthesia and uneventful rapid recovery.     

Effects of propofol and isoflurane on the neuromuscular block induced by atracurium]

Speed of onset, duration of action and recovery time for a bolus injection of atracurium were measured in two groups of patients. In group I anaesthesia considered of propofol, fentanyl, nitrous oxide and oxygen mixture. The induction dose of propofol was 2 mg/kg-1 followed by an infusion of 9.0 mg/kg-1/h-1 for first half hour and 4.5 mg/Kg-1/h-1 subsequently. In group II anaesthesia consisted of isoflurane, fentanyl, nitrous oxide and oxygen mixture. Isoflurane was given upon clinical needs. Speed of onset, duration of action, and recovery time for atracurium were measured in the two groups. No statistically significant differences between speed of onset and duration of action between the two groups were found. The recovery period from T1 = 10% to T1 = 70% twitch response was considerably longer with isoflurane (25 min +/- 6) than with propofol (18 min +/- 3) (p less than 0.01). Results obtained suggest that for adequate relaxation during tracheal intubation smaller doses of atracurium are not needed during isoflurane than propofol administration. Because of the longer recovery period of residual neuromuscular blockade during isoflurane anaesthesia decreasing doses of atracurium and careful monitoring of twitch depression tension are also suggested.     

Effects of propofol, propofol-nitrous oxide and midazolam on cortical somatosensory evoked potentials during sufentanil anaesthesia for major spinal surgery

Recording of cortical somatosensory evoked potentials (CSEP) enables monitoring of spinal cord function. We studied the effects of propofol, propofol-nitrous oxide or midazolam during sufentanil anaesthesia on CSEP monitoring during major spinal surgery. Thirty patients with normal preoperative CSEP were allocated randomly to one of the following anaesthesia regimens: propofol (2.5 mg kg-1 followed by 10-6 mg kg-1 h-1) with or without nitrous oxide, or midazolam (0.3 mg kg-1 followed by 0.15 mg kg-1 h-1) combined with sufentanil 0.5 microgram kg- 1 h-1 in the propofol and midazolam groups, or 0.25 microgram kg-1 h-1 in the propofol-nitrous oxide group. CSEP were elicited by alternate right and left tibial posterior nerve stimulation and recorded before and after induction (15 min, 1, 2 and 3 h), and during skin closure. CSEP latencies were not significantly modified in the three groups. CSEP amplitude decreased significantly in the propofol-nitrous oxide group (from mean 2.0 (SEM 0.3) to 0.6 (0.1) microV; P < 0.05) but not in the propofol (from 1.8 (0.6) to 2.2 (0.3) microV) or midazolam (1.7 (0.5) to 1.6 (0.5) microV) groups. The time to the first postoperative voluntary motor response (recovery) delay was significantly greater in the midazolam group (115 (19) min) compared with the propofol and propofol-nitrous oxide groups (43 (8) and 41 (3) min, respectively). Consequently, the use of propofol without nitrous oxide can be recommended during spinal surgery when CSEP monitoring is required.