| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
Canadian Journal of Anesthesia, Vol 45, 1148-1150, Copyright © 1998 by Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society
ARTICLES |
N Nathan, A Peyclit, A Lahrimi and P Feiss
Department of Anaesthesia, CHU Dupuytren, Limoges, France.
PURPOSE: To analyse the cost-efficiency ratio of sevoflurane compared with propofol for gynaecological ambulatory anaesthesia. METHODS: In a prospective randomised study 52 ASA I patients scheduled for ambulatory pregnancy termination were premedicated with lorazepam and received alfentanil prior to anaesthesia induction with propofol (group P, n = 26) or with sevoflurane 8% (group S, n = 26) using the single breath vital capacity technique. Anaesthesia was maintained with N2O in both groups supplemented with sevoflurane (group S) or propofol boluses (group P). RESULTS: The quality of induction and maintenance of anaesthesia was similar between groups except for the incidence of movement during anaesthesia (14/26 patients in group P and 4/26 in group S, P < 0.05). The incidence of post-operative emesis was increased in the sevoflurane group (P < 0.05) but the patients felt able to perform normal activity after a similar delay (18.4 +/- 2.9 hr vs 20.6 +/- 2.8 hr, P > 0.05). The direct cost of anaesthesia was lower in the sevoflurane group (679 FF, n = 24 vs 1153 FF, n = 2-5 in propofol group) but the weight of uterine aspiration products was higher (293 +/- 66 g, median = 230 g, Range 110-800 g, n = 13 vs 108 +/- 8 g, median = 110 g, Range 60-160 g, n = 12, group S vs group P respectively, P = 0.004). Four patients needed reoperation and ambulatory anaesthesia failed in six patients because of uterine haemorrhage. CONCLUSION: Ambulatory anaesthesia with sevoflurane offers a good alternative to propofol but further investigation concerning blood loss with sevoflurane needs to be performed in gynaecological practice.
This article has been cited by other articles:
 |
|
 |
|
  V. K. Dalton, L. Harris, C. S. Weisman, K. Guire, L. Castleman, and D. Lebovic Patient Preferences, Satisfaction, and Resource Use in Office Evacuation of Early Pregnancy Failure. Obstet. Gynecol., July 1, 2006; 108(1): 103 - 110. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 H. E. Castagnini, F. van Eijs, F. C. Salevsky, and M. H. Nathanson Sevoflurane for interventional neuroradiology procedures is associated with more rapid early recovery than propofol: [Le sevoflurane, compare au propofol, est associe a une recuperation plus rapide en neuroradiologie interventionnelle] Can J Anesth, May 1, 2004; 51(5): 486 - 491. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 A. Gupta, T. Stierer, R. Zuckerman, N. Sakima, S. D. Parker, and L. A. Fleisher Comparison of Recovery Profile After Ambulatory Anesthesia with Propofol, Isoflurane, Sevoflurane and Desflurane: A Systematic Review Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2004; 98(3): 632 - 641. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
|
|
 |
|
 N. L. Law, K. F. J. Ng, M. G. Irwin, and J. S. F. Man Comparison of coagulation and blood loss during anaesthesia with inhaled isoflurane or intravenous propofol Br. J. Anaesth., January 1, 2001; 86(1): 94 - 98. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]
|
|
| HOME | HELP | FEEDBACK | SUBSCRIPTIONS | ARCHIVE | SEARCH | TABLE OF CONTENTS |
