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 Similar articles in PubMed
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 HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Guard, B. C.
Right arrow Articles by Levine, M.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Guard, B. C.
Right arrow Articles by Levine, M.

Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 45, 1072-1078, Copyright © 1998 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society

ARTICLES

Maintenance and recovery characteristics after sevoflurane or propofol during ambulatory surgery in children with epidural blockade

BC Guard, N Sikich, J Lerman and M Levine
Department of Anaesthesia, Hospital for Sick Children, University of Toronto, Ontario, Canada.

PURPOSE: To compare the maintenance and recovery characteristics after sevoflurane with those after propofol in children with epidural blockade. METHODS: Fifty unpremedicated, children ASA I-II, 2-8 yr of age, scheduled for elective urological surgery as outpatients, were randomly allocated to receive either: 1) sevoflurane for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia or 2) propofol for induction (2-3 mg.kg-1 i.v.) and for maintenance (5-10 mg.kg-1.hr-1 i.v.). All children received N2O 70% in oxygen before induction and throughout the anaesthetic, rocuronium for neuromuscular blockade and a lumbar or caudal epidural block before incision. Heart rate (HR), systolic blood pressure (SBP), recovery times and all side effects during maintenance and recovery were recorded by a blinded observer. Adverse events during the first 24 hr were also recorded. RESULTS: Mean HR increased 5-10% after induction in both groups reaching a maximum by five minutes. Heart rate returned to baseline by skin incision in the sevoflurane group and by 10 min after induction in the propofol group. During maintenance, HR decreased by 10-20% below baseline values by 20 min in the propofol group only, where it remained for the remainder of the anaesthetic. Similarly, SBP increased by 10% after induction of anaesthesia in both groups, but returned to baseline by 10 min. Light anaesthesia occurred in four (16%) children, all in the propofol group. Emergence and recovery indices were similar in the two groups. DISCUSSION: Sevoflurane and propofol exhibit similar maintenance and recovery profiles when combined with epidural analgesia in children undergoing ambulatory surgery.


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Br J AnaesthHome page
P. E. Macintyre
Safety and efficacy of patient-controlled analgesia
Br. J. Anaesth., July 1, 2001; 87(1): 36 - 46.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
S. Uezono, T. Goto, K. Terui, F. Ichinose, Y. Ishguro, Y. Nakata, and S. Morita
Emergence Agitation After Sevoflurane Versus Propofol in Pediatric Patients
Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2000; 91(3): 563 - 566.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


HOME HELP FEEDBACK SUBSCRIPTIONS ARCHIVE SEARCH TABLE OF CONTENTS
Copyright © 1998 by the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society.