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]


     

Anesth Analg 1986; 65:1189-1195
© 1986 International Anesthesia Research Society
This Article
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 PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Doze, V. A.
Right arrow Articles by White, P. F.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Doze, V. A.
Right arrow Articles by White, P. F.

Comparison of Propofol with Methohexital for Outpatient Anesthesia

Van A. Doze, BS, Lynn M. Westphal, BA, and Paul F. White, PhD, MD

Department of Anesthesia, Stanford University School of Medicine, Stanford, California.

Abstract

Propofol is an intravenous anesthetic currently available for clinical investigative use. The intraoperative and postoperative effects of propofol were compared to methohexital when used as an adjuvant to nitrous oxide for outpatient anesthesia. Sixty healthy young women were randomly assigned to receive either methohexital, 1.5 mg/kg intravenously (IV), or propofol, 2.5 mg/kg IV, for induction of anesthesia. Both drugs produced transient cardiovascular and respiratory depression after induction. Maintenance of anesthesia consisted of either methohexital, 6 ± 2 mg/min, or propofol, 7 ± 2 mg/min (mean ± SD) by continuous infusion in combination with nitrous oxide, 70% in oxygen. Use of a propofol infusion was associated with lower blood pressures and heart rates during maintenance. Propofol was associated with fewer side effects (e.g., hiccoughing, nausea, and vomiting) intra- and postoperatively. Recovery times for awakening, orientation, and ambulation were consistently shorter with propofol. We conclude that propofol is a useful alternative to methohexital for induction and maintenance of outpatient anesthesia.

Key Words: ANESTHETICS, INTRAVENOUS—methohexital; propofol • ANESTHESIA—outpatient




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
R. Sun, M. F. Watcha, P. F. White, G. D. Skrivanek, J. D. Griffin, L. Stool, and M. T. Murphy
A Cost Comparison of Methohexital and Propofol for Ambulatory Anesthesia
Anesth. Analg., August 1, 1999; 89(2): 311 - 311.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
M. M. Sa Rego, Y. Inagaki, and P. F. White
The Cost-Effectiveness of Methohexital Versus Propofol for Sedation During Monitored Anesthesia Care
Anesth. Analg., April 1, 1999; 88(4): 723 - 723.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


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 © 1986 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.