COMPARISON BETWEEN TOTAL INTRAVENOUS ANESTHESIA (TIVA) WITH PROPOFOL – FENTANYL AND BALANCED ANESTHESIA WITH SEVOFLURANE – FENTANYL IN TERMS OF HEMODYNAMIC CHANGES AND RECOVERY PROFILES DURING LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY

Amit Dhungana, P. Baral, Satyendra N. Singh, B. Sah, A. Subedi, P. Thapa, Y. Trikhatri
{"title":"COMPARISON BETWEEN TOTAL INTRAVENOUS ANESTHESIA (TIVA) WITH PROPOFOL – FENTANYL AND BALANCED ANESTHESIA WITH SEVOFLURANE – FENTANYL IN TERMS OF HEMODYNAMIC CHANGES AND RECOVERY PROFILES DURING LAPAROSCOPIC CHOLECYSTECTOMY","authors":"Amit Dhungana, P. Baral, Satyendra N. Singh, B. Sah, A. Subedi, P. Thapa, Y. Trikhatri","doi":"10.54530/jcmc.1109","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Sevoflurane and propofol are considered to be the agents of choice in laparoscopic surgery due to their smooth induction of anesthesia, hemodynamic stability, better recovery profile and less postoperative complications. The aim of study is to compare hemodynamic changes and recovery profile of propofol with sevoflurane-based anesthesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy.\nMethods: Single blind comparative study was conducted among 132 patients aged 18-65 years, ASA-PS I & II undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, randomized by computer generated random number table into two groups, 66 patients each- Group A patients induced with propofol 1.5-2.5 mg/kg IV and maintained with propofol 100-200 mcg/kg/min IV and Group B induced with sevoflurane and maintained with sevoflurane at minimum alveolar concentration of 0.7-1.3. Primary outcome were hemodynamic parameters (heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure) and recovery profile.\nResults: Intraoperative heart rate and diastolic blood pressure were comparable between two groups at all times while there was a significantly lower systolic blood pressure only at 3 and 5 minutes after intubation in group B compared to group A (p < 0.05). Recovery profiles assessed in terms of time of eye opening (657.89 ± 172.30 s vs 453.58 ± 157.49 s), obeying command (696.79 ± 192.44s vs 481.06±164.96s), and time of extubation (706.41±166.27s vs 483.38±160.62s) were significantly faster in group B (p value < 0.001).\nConclusions: Hemodynamic changes were comparable between propofol group and sevoflurane group while sevoflurane group had faster recovery.","PeriodicalId":265624,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Chitwan Medical College","volume":"30 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2022-12-31","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Chitwan Medical College","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.54530/jcmc.1109","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Sevoflurane and propofol are considered to be the agents of choice in laparoscopic surgery due to their smooth induction of anesthesia, hemodynamic stability, better recovery profile and less postoperative complications. The aim of study is to compare hemodynamic changes and recovery profile of propofol with sevoflurane-based anesthesia in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods: Single blind comparative study was conducted among 132 patients aged 18-65 years, ASA-PS I & II undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, randomized by computer generated random number table into two groups, 66 patients each- Group A patients induced with propofol 1.5-2.5 mg/kg IV and maintained with propofol 100-200 mcg/kg/min IV and Group B induced with sevoflurane and maintained with sevoflurane at minimum alveolar concentration of 0.7-1.3. Primary outcome were hemodynamic parameters (heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure, mean arterial pressure) and recovery profile. Results: Intraoperative heart rate and diastolic blood pressure were comparable between two groups at all times while there was a significantly lower systolic blood pressure only at 3 and 5 minutes after intubation in group B compared to group A (p < 0.05). Recovery profiles assessed in terms of time of eye opening (657.89 ± 172.30 s vs 453.58 ± 157.49 s), obeying command (696.79 ± 192.44s vs 481.06±164.96s), and time of extubation (706.41±166.27s vs 483.38±160.62s) were significantly faster in group B (p value < 0.001). Conclusions: Hemodynamic changes were comparable between propofol group and sevoflurane group while sevoflurane group had faster recovery.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
异丙酚-芬太尼全静脉麻醉与七氟醚-芬太尼平衡麻醉在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中血流动力学变化和恢复情况的比较
背景:七氟醚和异丙酚被认为是腹腔镜手术的首选药物,因为它们诱导麻醉平稳,血流动力学稳定,恢复情况好,术后并发症少。本研究的目的是比较异丙酚与七氟醚麻醉在腹腔镜胆囊切除术中的血流动力学变化和恢复情况。方法:对132例18 ~ 65岁ASA-PS I、II期腹腔镜胆囊切除术患者进行单盲比较研究,采用计算机生成的随机数字表随机分为两组,每组66例,A组为异丙酚1.5 ~ 2.5 mg/kg IV,异丙酚100 ~ 200 mcg/kg/min IV, B组为七氟醚诱导,七氟醚维持肺泡最低浓度0.7 ~ 1.3。主要终点是血流动力学参数(心率、收缩压和舒张压、平均动脉压)和恢复情况。结果:两组患者术中心率和舒张压在任何时间均具有可比性,B组患者仅在插管后3、5分钟收缩压明显低于a组(p < 0.05)。B组患者睁眼时间(657.89±172.30 s vs 453.58±157.49 s)、服从命令时间(696.79±192.44s vs 481.06±164.96s)、拔管时间(706.41±166.27s vs 483.38±160.62s)均显著快于B组(p值< 0.001)。结论:异丙酚组与七氟醚组血流动力学变化相当,七氟醚组血流动力学恢复较快。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
EXTRAUTERINE MOLAR PREGNANCY: A CASE OF TUBAL PARTIAL MOLAR PREGNANCY ASSESSMENT OF GINGIVAL HEALTH AND ORAL HYGIENE PRACTICES AMONG THE PATIENTS VISITING A DENTAL HOSPITAL IN KATHMANDU TYMPANOPLASTY AND ITS OUTCOME IN VARIOUS AGE GROUPS USING THE MIDDLE EAR RISK INDEX SCALE AT A TERTIARY CARE CENTRE IN EASTERN NEPAL CALCIUM PYROPHOSPHATE DIHYDRATE DEPOSITION DISEASE OF ELBOW WITH ULNAR NERVE NEUROPATHY: A CASE REPORT CLINICO-RADIOGRAPHIC EVALUATION OF GUIDED TISSUE REGENERATION USING COLLAGEN MEMBRANE AND BIPHASIC CALCIUM PHOSPHATE IN TREATMENT OF INTRABONY PERIODONTAL DEFECTS
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1