Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Recovery profile of patients undergoing nasal surgical procedures: a comparison between sevoflurane and propofol

  • Main Article
  • Published:
Indian Journal of Otolaryngology and Head & Neck Surgery Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Objectives

To compare the recovery profile of sevoflurane and propofol in nasal surgical procedures.

Design

A prospective, double blind, randomized study

Setting

King Abdul Aziz University Hospital, Riyadh, Saudi Arabia, a tertiary care teaching hospital, attached with King Saud University, Riyadh Saudi Arabia.

Patients

60 ASA I–II patients age between 18–35 years, and weighing 50-80 kg, scheduled for nasal surgical procedures.

Methods

Patients were assigned randomly to one of the two groups, the Sevoflurane Group-S (n = 30) & the Propofol Group-P (n = 30). Anesthetic induction was carried out using propofol 2.0mg/kg.in both the groups. Cis-atracurium 0.15mg/kg was given for intubation. Airway was protected with a throat pack around the endo-tracheal tube. Fentanyl 1microgram/kg was given as bolus followed by infusion at a rate of 1 microgram/kg/ hour. Anesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane 2% in Group-S, and propofol infusion at a rate of 200 microgram/kg/min. in Group-P. 50% oxygen in nitrous oxide was given in both the groups. At the end of surgery, patients were extubated after reversal of the neuromuscular block. Immediate recovery was assessed by recording the time to breathe spontaneously, time to extubation, and time of spontaneous eyes movements from the time of giving reversal. Ketoprofen 1.5mg/kg intramuscularly was given to all patients before transfer to (PACU). In PACU, sedation score was assessed for 45 min. Intermediate recovery was assessed by TDT and DSST at 15, 30 and 45 min. Time taken to state name and father’s name was recorded.

Results

Patients in Group-S breathed significantly earlier than those in Group-P. Group-P showed significantly better performance with TDT at 45 min and with DSST at 30 and 45 min.

Conclusions

We conclude that both sevoflurane and propofol provide early and comparable post anesthesia recovery for patients undergoing nasal surgical procedures.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Biebuyck, Julien F, Gouldson, Rodney, Nathanson, Michael, White, Paul F, Smith Ian (1994) Propofol: An update on its clinical use. Anesthesiology 81:1005–1043

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Webster, Anthony C, Morley-Forster, Patricia K, Janzen, Victor, Watson, James, Dain, Steven L, Taves, Donald, Dantzer, Dale (1999) Anesthesia for intranasal surgery: A comparison between tracheal intubation and the flexible reinforced laryngeal mask airway. Anesthesia & Analgesia 88:421–453

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Hillman DR, Platt PR, Eastwood PR (2003) The upper airway during anesthesia. British Journal of Anaesthesia 91: 31–394

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Strum DP, Eger EL (1987) Partition coefficient for sevoflurane in human blood, saline and olive oil. Anesthesia & Analgesia 66:654–656

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  5. Juliana Barr, Talmage D Egan, Nancy F Sandoval, Katayoun Zomorodi, Carol Cohane, Pedro L Gambus, Steven L Shafer (2001) Propofol dosing regimens for ICU sedation based upon an integrated pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic model Anesthesiology 95:324–333

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  6. Gauthier, Alain Girard, Francois Boudreault, Daniel, Ruel, Monique Todorov, Alexandre (2002) Sevoflurane provides faster recovery and postoperative neurological assessment than isoflurane in long-duration neurosurgical cases. Anesthesia & Analgesia 95:1384–1388

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Pensado Castineiras A, Rama Maceiras P, Molins Gauna N, Fiqueiraoure A, Vasquez Fidalgo A (2000) Immediate anesthesia recovery and psychomotor function of patient after prolonged anesthesia with desflurane, sevoflurane or isoflurane. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim 47(9):386–392

    Google Scholar 

  8. G Edward Morgan, Jr., Maged S. Mikhail, Michael J. Murrey (2006) Clinical pharmacology, Inhalational anesthetics in Clinical Anesthesiology 4th edition, international edition, Lange Medical books/McGraw-Hill medical publishing division, 161

  9. Sharples A, Shaw EA, Meakin G. (1994) Recovery times following induction of anesthesia with propofol, methohexitone, enflurane or thiopentone in children. Paediatric Anaesthesia 4:101–104

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Veroli P, O’kelly, B, Bertrand, F, Trouvin JH, FarinottI R, Ecoffey C (1992) Extra hepatic metabolism of propofol in man during the an hepatic phase of orthotopic liver transplantation. British Journal of Anaesthesia 68:183–186

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Hughes MA, Glass PSA, Jacobs JR (1992) Context-sensitive half time in multicompartment pharmacokinetic models for intravenous anesthetic drugs. Anesthesiology 76: 334–341

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Nishimori M, Takasaki M, Akune T, Hanaoka K (1998) Propofol and sevoflurane-a comparison of anesthesia for laryngo-microsurgery. Masui 47(2):168–173

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Montes FR, Trillos JE, Rincon IE, Giraldo JC, Rincon JD, Vanegas MV, Charris H (2002) Comparison of total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane-fentanyl anesthesia for outpatient otorhinolaryngeal surgery. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 14(5):324–328

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Jellish WS, Leonetti JP, Murdoch JR, Fowles S (1995) Propofol-based anesthesia as compared with standard anesthetic techniques for middle ear surgery. Journal of Clinical Anesthesia 7(4):292–296

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Loop, Torsten, Priebe, Hans-Joachim R (2000) Recovery after anesthesia remifentanil combined with propofol, desfurane, or sevoflurane for otorhinolaryngeal surgery. Anesthesia & Anagesia 91:123–129

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Picard V, Dumont L, Pellegrini M (2000) Quality of recovery in children: sevoflurane versus propofol. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 44(3):307–310

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Nelskyl flurane-nitrous oxide and propofol-alfentanil-nitrous oxide anesthesia for minor gynecological surgery British Journal of Anaesthesia 1999; 83:576–57918

  18. Juckenhofel S, Feisel C, Schmitt HJ, Biedler A (1999) TIVA with propofol-remifentanil or balanced anesthesia with sevoflurane-fentanyl in laparoscopic operations. Hemodynamic, awakening and adverse effects. Anesthetist 48(11): 807–812

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  19. Raeder J, Gupta A, Pedersen FM (1997) Recovery characteristics of sevoflurane-or propofol-based anesthesia for daycare surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 41(8):988–994

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Hepaguslar H, Ozzeybek D, Ozkardesler S, Tasdogen A, Duru S, Elar Z (2004) Propofol and sevoflurane during epidural/general anesthesia: comparison of early recovery characteristics and pain relief. Middle East J Anesthesiology 7(5):819–832

    Google Scholar 

  21. Motsch J, Wandel C, Neff S, Martin E (1996) A comparative study of the use of sevoflurane and propofol in ambulatory surgery. Anaesthesist 45:S57–S62

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  22. Hong JY, Oh JI. Kim SM (2002) comparison of Sevofluranenitrous oxide and target controlled propofol with fentanyl anesthesia for hystroscopy. Yonsei Medical Journal 43(4): 420–426

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Magni G, Baisi F, La Rosa I, Imperiale C, Fabbrini V, Pennacchiotti ML, Rosa G. Magni G, Baisi F et al (2005) No difference in emergence time and early cognitive function between sevoflurane-fentanyl and propofol-remifentanil in patients undergoing craniotomy for supratentorial intracranial surgery. Journal Neurosurgery Anesthesiology 17(3): 134–138

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. King Abdul — Aziz University Hospital, P.O. Box 245, Riyadh, 11411, Saudi Arabia

    Aziz Ul Haq, Mansoor Aqil, Amjad Rasheed & Rana Altaf Ahmed

Authors
  1. Aziz Ul Haq
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mansoor Aqil
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Amjad Rasheed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Rana Altaf Ahmed
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Aziz Ul Haq.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Haq, A.U., Aqil, M., Rasheed, A. et al. Recovery profile of patients undergoing nasal surgical procedures: a comparison between sevoflurane and propofol. Indian J Otolaryngol Head Neck S 60, 123–127 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-008-0054-5

Download citation

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12070-008-0054-5

Keywords

Search

Navigation