Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-ndmmz Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-05-01T13:25:00.483Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Sevoflurane provides better recovery than propofol plus fentanyl in anaesthesia for day-care surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  16 August 2006

V. A. Peduto ,
D. Mezzetti ,
M. Properzi  and
C. Giorgini
V. A. Peduto
Affiliation:
Institute of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Perugia School of Medicine, Perugia, Italy
D. Mezzetti
Affiliation:
Institute of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Perugia School of Medicine, Perugia, Italy
M. Properzi
Affiliation:
Institute of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Perugia School of Medicine, Perugia, Italy
C. Giorgini
Affiliation:
Institute of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, University of Perugia School of Medicine, Perugia, Italy
Get access

Abstract

To compare ease of maintenance and recovery characteristics of sevoflurane and propofol plus fentanyl in day-care anaesthesia, 60 outpatients undergoing elective surgery of up to 3 h duration were randomized to receive sevoflurane or propofol as their primary anaesthetic. Induction was always carried out with propofol, but a fentanyl bolus 5 μg kg−1 was added in the propofol group. Anaesthesia was supplemented with up to 70% N2O. Significantly shorter times to extubation (10.03 min ± 3.2 SD vs. 17.2 ± 7.3; P<0.001) and emergence (10.4 ± 3.1 vs. 16.8 ± 6.4; P<0.001) were observed in the sevoflurane group. Patients treated with sevoflurane felt less confused, showed better performances in the digit symbol substitution test and achieved higher modified Aldrete scores sooner in the post-operative course. Maintenance of anaesthesia with sevoflurane produces faster emergence and recovery than propofol plus fentanyl after anaesthesia of short to intermediate duration.

Keywords

anaesthetic techniquesgeneral anaesthesiaanaestheticspropofolsevofluranerecovery periodambulatory surgeryoutpatients
Type
Original Article
Information
European Journal of Anaesthesiology , Volume 17 , Issue 2 , February 2000 , pp. 138 - 143
Copyright
2000 European Society of Anaesthesiology

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.)