JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (2)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Siddik-Sayyid, S. M
Right arrow Articles by Baraka, A. S.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Siddik-Sayyid, S. M
Right arrow Articles by Baraka, A. S.
Related Collections
Right arrow Pharmacology
Right arrow Airway

Anesth Analg 2005;100:1204-1209
© 2005 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000148166.29749.3B

GENERAL ARTICLES

A Comparison of Sevoflurane-Propofol Versus Sevoflurane or Propofol for Laryngeal Mask Airway Insertion in Adults

Sahar M Siddik-Sayyid, MD, FRCA, Marie T. Aouad, MD, Samar K. Taha, MD, Dima G. Daaboul, MD, Patricia G. Deeb, MD, Faraj M. Massouh, MD, Marie-Rose A. Muallem, MD, and Anis S. Baraka, MD, FRCA

Department of Anesthesiology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, Beirut, Lebanon.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Sahar Siddik-Sayyid, MD, FRCA, Associate Professor, Department of Anesthesiology, American University of Beirut Medical Center, PO Box 11 0236 Beirut, Beirut, Lebanon. Address e-mail to ss01{at}aub.edu.lb.

In a prospective, randomized study, we investigated the incidence of successful insertion of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) at the first attempt and the incidence of side effects after LMA insertion using the combination of sevoflurane and propofol as compared with either sevoflurane or propofol alone for induction of anesthesia. Eighty-three unpremedicated ASA physical status I–II patients were anesthetized with a single vital capacity breath (VCB) of sevoflurane 8% supplemented with IV propofol 1.5 mg/kg, a single VCB of sevoflurane 8%, or IV propofol 3 mg/kg. The coinduction technique was associated with the most frequent incidence of successful LMA insertion at the first attempt (93.5%) than either sevoflurane alone (46%) or propofol alone (61.5%) (P < 0.001). Propofol-induced induction of anesthesia allowed the fastest insertion of LMA and was associated with the least frequent incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. However, this advantage of propofol was offset by a frequent incidence of pain on injection (69%) and the occurrence of movements during insertion of the LMA (50% in the propofol group versus 19% and 26% in the sevoflurane and sevoflurane-propofol groups, respectively; P < 0.05), as well as a more frequent incidence of apnea (84% in the propofol group versus 7% and 16% in the sevoflurane and sevoflurane-propofol groups, respectively; P < 0.001). The report shows that induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane-propofol combined provides a frequent incidence of successful LMA insertion at the first attempt that is associated with an infrequent incidence of apnea.






Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2005 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.