CJA
HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
This Article
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Submit a scholarly reply
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when eLetters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow reprints & permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Yurino, M
Right arrow Articles by Kimura, H
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow Articles by Yurino, M
Right arrow Articles by Kimura, H

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 40, 440-443, Copyright © 1993 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Vital capacity rapid inhalation induction technique: comparison of sevoflurane and halothane

M Yurino and H Kimura
Asahikawa Medical College, Department of Anaesthesia, Hokkaido, Japan.

Induction of anaesthesia using the vital capacity rapid inhalation induction (VCRII) technique with either sevoflurane or halothane was compared. The induction time, characteristics, and acceptability were assessed. Thirty-two volunteers were given one of the vapours: 17 received sevoflurane and 15 halothane. Subjects were unpremedicated and breathed approximately 2.6 x minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) equivalent of either agent. There were no differences in the patients' cardiovascular or respiratory variables. The mean time for induction of anaesthesia with halothane (153 +/- 46 sec, SD) was slower than with sevoflurane (81 +/- 22 sec, SD, P < 0.05), reflecting its higher blood:gas solubility. There were fewer induction complications such as coughing and movement in the sevoflurane than in the halothane group. Subjects in the sevoflurane group found the smell of anaesthetic more acceptable than those in the halothane group (65% vs 13%, respectively). Subjects in both groups had no objection to undergoing the procedure again. It is concluded that both halothane and sevoflurane are effective in VCRII of anaesthesia without premedication. However, the slower speed of induction with halothane frustrated the anaesthetist because of the longer induction time, and may increase the chance of pronounced excitatory phenomena occurring.




HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1993 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.