Skip to main content Accessibility help
×
Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-qsmjn Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-24T23:25:21.406Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Chapter 1 - Why Bother?

The Advantages of TIVA

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 November 2019

Michael G. Irwin
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Gordon T. C. Wong
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Shuk Wan Lam
Affiliation:
The University of Hong Kong
Get access

Summary

Like many of you, we’re sure, we were trained to use IV anaesthetic agents for induction of anaesthesia but volatiles for maintenance – a sensible and seemingly safe combination that has been used for decades. So why change? The initial attraction of TIVA was the extremely rapid, smooth and clear-headed recovery of patients when using propofol as the hypnotic component of an anaesthetic. This is particularly apparent when the drug is used for cases of short to intermittent duration, for example in day-case surgery with earlier discharge from the post-anaesthetic care unit.[1] Clearly in modern practice, which is moving towards shorter in-patient stays, this represents a major advantage. In addition, improved levels of patient satisfaction occur with TIVA, presumably due to the favourable recovery profile.[2] Certainly, desflurane and sevoflurane allow rapid recovery but it is not as smooth, there may be more emergence delirium and quality indicators are not as good.[3]

Type
Chapter
Information
Taking on TIVA
Debunking Myths and Dispelling Misunderstandings
, pp. 1 - 4
Publisher: Cambridge University Press
Print publication year: 2019

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

Sahinovic, M.M., Struys, M., Absalom, A.R.. Clinical pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of propofol. Clin Pharmacokinet 2018; 57: 1539–58.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Hofer, C.K., Zollinger, A., Buchi, S., et al. Patient well-being after general anaesthesia: a prospective, randomized, controlled multi-centre trial comparing intravenous and inhalation anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 2003; 91: 631–7.Google Scholar
Wong, D.D., Bailey, C.R.. Emergence delirium in children. Anaesthesia 2015; 70: 383–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Murdoch, J.A., Grant, S.A., Kenny, G.N.. Safety of patient-maintained propofol sedation using a target-controlled system in healthy volunteers. Br J Anaesth 2000; 85: 299301.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lu, Y., Wu, X., Dong, Y., Xu, Z., Zhang, Y., Xie, Z.. Anesthetic sevoflurane causes neurotoxicity differently in neonatal naive and Alzheimer disease transgenic mice. Anesthesiology 2010; 112: 1404–16.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Wigmore, T.J., Mohammed, K., Jhanji, S.. Long-term survival for patients undergoing volatile versus IV anesthesia for cancer surgery: a retrospective analysis. Anesthesiology 2016; 124: 6979.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Inada, T., Kubo, K., Kambara, T., Shingu, K.. Propofol inhibits cyclo-oxygenase activity in human monocytic THP-1 cells. Can J Anesth 2009; 56: 222.Google Scholar
Zhao, H., Iwasaki, M., Yang, J., Savage, S., Ma, D.. Hypoxia-inducible factor-1: a possible link between inhalational anesthetics and tumor progression? Acta Anaesthesiol Taiwan 2014; 52: 70–6.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Eberhart, L.H.J., Morin, A.M., Wulf, H., Geldner, G.. Patient preferences for immediate postoperative recovery. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89: 760–1.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Qiu, Q., Choi, S.W., Wong, S.S.C., Irwin, M.G., Cheung, C.W.. Effects of intra-operative maintenance of general anaesthesia with propofol on postoperative pain outcomes – a systematic review and meta-analysis. Anaesthesia 2016; 71: 1222–33.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Irwin, M.G., Wong, G.T.C.. Taking on TIVA. Why we need guidelines on total intravenous anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 2018.Google Scholar
Wong, G.T.C., Choi, S.W., Tran, D.H., Kulkarni, H., Irwin, M.G.. An international survey evaluating factors influencing the use of total intravenous anaesthesia. Anaesth Intensive Care 2018; 46: 332–8.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed
Lim, A., Braat, S., Hiller, J., Riedel, B.. Inhalational versus propofol-based total intravenous anaesthesia: practice patterns and perspectives among Australasian anaesthetists. Anaesth Intensive Care 2018; 46: 480–7.CrossRefGoogle ScholarPubMed

Save book to Kindle

To save this book to your Kindle, first ensure coreplatform@cambridge.org is added to your Approved Personal Document E-mail List under your Personal Document Settings on the Manage Your Content and Devices page of your Amazon account. Then enter the ‘name’ part of your Kindle email address below. Find out more about saving to your Kindle.

Note you can select to save to either the @free.kindle.com or @kindle.com variations. ‘@free.kindle.com’ emails are free but can only be saved to your device when it is connected to wi-fi. ‘@kindle.com’ emails can be delivered even when you are not connected to wi-fi, but note that service fees apply.

Find out more about the Kindle Personal Document Service.

Available formats
×

Save book to Dropbox

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Dropbox.

Available formats
×

Save book to Google Drive

To save content items to your account, please confirm that you agree to abide by our usage policies. If this is the first time you use this feature, you will be asked to authorise Cambridge Core to connect with your account. Find out more about saving content to Google Drive.

Available formats
×