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 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
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via Web of Science (19)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Fleischmann, E.
Right arrow Articles by Sessler, D. I.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Fleischmann, E.
Right arrow Articles by Sessler, D. I.
Anesth Analg 1999;88:930
© 1999 International Anesthesia Research Society


GENERAL ARTICLES

Onset Time, Recovery Duration, and Drug Cost with Four Different Methods of Inducing General Anesthesia

Edith Fleischmann, MD*,{ddagger}, Ozan Akça, MD*,{ddagger}, Thomas Wallner, MD*,{ddagger}, Cem F. Arkiliç, MD*,{ddagger}, Andrea Kurz, MD*,{ddagger}, Randy S. Hickle, MD{ddagger}, Michael Zimpfer, MD*,{ddagger}, and Daniel I. Sessler, MD*,{ddagger},||

Department of Anesthesia and General Intensive Care ( *A) and ( {dagger}B), and {ddagger}Outcomes ResearchTM, University of Vienna; §Apotheus Laboratories, Ltd., Lubbock, Texas; ||Department of Anesthesia, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California; and ||Ludwig Boltzmann Institute for Clinical Anesthesia and Intensive Care, Vienna, Austria

Address correspondence to Dr. Ozan Akça, Department of Anesthesia and General Intensive Care (A), University of Vienna, Währinger-Gürtel 18–20, A-1090 Vienna, Austria. Address e-mail to 73674.63{at}CompuServe.com

We compared two conventional induction techniques (thiopental and propofol), an inhaled induction with sevoflurane using a circle system, and a rebreathing method. Fentanyl 1 µg/kg was given to women undergoing 10- to 20-min procedures. Anesthesia was induced (n = 20 each) with one of the following: 1) sevoflurane and N2O from a rebreathing bag (Sevo/Bag). A 5-L bag was prefilled with a mixture of sevoflurane 7% and N2O 60% in oxygen. The bag was connected between the normal circle system, separated by a spring-loaded valve; 2)sevoflurane 8% and N2O 60% from a circle system on a conventional anesthesia machine with a total fresh gas flow of 6 L/min (Sevo/Circle); 3) propofol 3 mg/kg as an IV bolus; 4) thiopental sodium 5 mg/kg as an IV bolus. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was treated with ondansetron. Induction times were comparable with each method. Recovery duration was shortest with sevoflurane, intermediate with propofol, and longest with thiopental. Induction drug costs were lowest with Sevo/Bag and thiopental, intermediate with Sevo/Circle, and highest with propofol. However, sevoflurane (by either method) caused considerable nausea and vomiting that required treatment. Consequently, total drug cost was least with thiopental, intermediate with Sevo/Bag and propofol, and greatest with Sevo/Circle. Thus, no single technique was clearly superior.

Implications: Anesthetic induction techniques influence awakening time, recovery duration, and drug costs. We tested two IV methods and two inhaled techniques. However, none of the four tested methods was clearly superior to the others.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
M. C. Lewis, R. I. Gerenstein, and G. Chidiac
Onset time for sevoflurane/nitrous oxide induction in adults is prolonged with increasing age.
Anesth. Analg., June 1, 2006; 102(6): 1699 - 1702.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
A. A. van den Berg, D. A. Chitty, R. D. Jones, M. S. Sohel, and A. Shahen
Intravenous or Inhaled Induction of Anesthesia in Adults? An Audit of Preoperative Patient Preferences
Anesth. Analg., May 1, 2005; 100(5): 1422 - 1424.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
H. S. Joo and W. J. Perks
Sevoflurane Versus Propofol for Anesthetic Induction: A Meta-Analysis
Anesth. Analg., July 1, 2000; 91(1): 213 - 219.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Home page
Anesth. Analg.Home page
K. H. Hoerauf, T. Wallner, O. Akca, R. Taslimi, and D. I. Sessler
Exposure to Sevoflurane and Nitrous Oxide During Four Different Methods of Anesthetic Induction
Anesth. Analg., April 1, 1999; 88(4): 925 - 925.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]




Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins and Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 1999 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 1999 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.