| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 40, 816-818, Copyright © 1993 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society
ARTICLES |
P Scanlon, M Carey, M Power and F Kirby
Department of Anaesthesia, St. James' Hospital, Dublin, Ireland.
The response to insertion of the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) following either propofol 2.5 mg.kg-1 or thiopentone 5 mg.kg-1 was assessed in two groups of patients. The purpose of the study was to ascertain which of these two induction agents provided the better conditions for insertion of the LMA. Anaesthesia was induced by propofol in 35 patients and by thiopentone in 37. Following induction, ventilation was assisted for two minutes using 50% oxygen and nitrous oxide and 2% isoflurane, before insertion of the LMA. The presence of gagging, coughing, laryngospasm and movement was noted and graded. Thiopentone was associated with an adverse response in 76% of patients, compared with propofol in 26% (P < 0.01). Gagging, laryngospasm and head movement were more common using thiopentone (P < 0.01, P < 0.05 and P < 0.05 respectively) and in 11% (P < 0.05) of the thiopentone group insertion of the LMA was impossible due to inadequate relaxation. We conclude that, using these doses, propofol is superior to thiopentone as an induction agent for insertion of the laryngeal mask airway.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  H.-J. Park, J.-R. Lee, C. S. Kim, S. D. Kim, and H.-S. Kim Remifentanil Halves the EC50 of Propofol for Successful Insertion of the Laryngeal Mask Airway and Laryngeal Tube in Pediatric Patients Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2007; 105(1): 57 - 61. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 T. M. Cook Editorial I: The classic laryngeal mask airway: a tried and tested airway. What now? Br. J. Anaesth., February 1, 2006; 96(2): 149 - 152. [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
S. Kabara, K. Hirota, H. Yoshioka, T. Kudo, H. Ishihara, and A. Matsuki Differential effects of thiopental on methacholine- and serotonin-induced bronchoconstriction in dogs{dagger} Br. J. Anaesth., September 1, 2003; 91(3): 379 - 384. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. H. Dueck, A. Oberthuer, C. Wedekind, M. Paul, and U. Boerner Propofol Impairs the Central but Not the Peripheral Part of the Motor System Anesth. Analg., February 1, 2003; 96(2): 449 - 455. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
M. Tanaka and T. Nishikawa Propofol requirement for insertion of cuffed oropharyngeal airway versus laryngeal mask airway with and without fentanyl: a dose-finding study Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2003; 90(1): 14 - 20. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
J.-H. Bahk, J. Sung, and I.-J. Jang A Comparison of Ketamine and Lidocaine Spray with Propofol for the Insertion of Laryngeal Mask Airway in Children: A Double-Blinded Randomized Trial Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2002; 95(6): 1586 - 1589. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 J. K.L. Hui, L. A.H. Critchley, M. K. Karmakar, and P. K.K. Lam Co-administration of alfentanil-propofol improves laryngeal mask airway insertion compared to fentanyl-propofol: [La co-administration d'alfentanil et de propofol, comparee a celle de fentanyl et de propofol, ameliore l'insertion du masque larynge] Can J Anesth, May 1, 2002; 49(5): 508 - 512. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
|
|
L. K. Ti, M. Y. H. Chow, and T. L. Lee Comparison of Sevoflurane with Propofol for Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion in Adults Anesth. Analg., April 1, 1999; 88(4): 908 - 908. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
