A Comparative Study to Evaluate the Intubating Conditions between Propofol-Sevoflurane and Propofol Alone Without Using Neuromuscular Blocking Agents

Journal Title: Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia - Year 2017, Vol 4, Issue 2

Abstract

Endotracheal intubation using an induction agent is usually facilitated by the use of depolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents like succinylcholine however it may be associated with various side effects. Propofol and sevoflurane can be used for endotracheal intubation as both provides adequate intubating conditions but propofol is associated with several adverse effects when used alone. So this study was aimed to compare the intubating conditions, haemodynamic changes and side effects using combination of low dose of propofol and lower concentration of sevoflurane with propofol alone at its usual dose. Material and Methods: The present study was conducted on sixty patients of ASA grade I or II , aged 20-40 years of either sex scheduled for various elective surgeries under general anaesthesia. The patients were randomly allocated into two groups of 30 each: Patients in Group P were induced with 67% N 2O in O2 and propofol 3 mg/ kg given intravenously over 30 seconds while patients in Group PS were induced with sevoflurane 0.5-4% inhaled concentration with 67% N 2O in O2 and propofol 1.5mg/kg given intravenously over 15 seconds. Endotracheal intubation was attempted at 4 minutes after the start of induction in both the groups.The intubating conditions, hemodynamic parameters (HR,SBP, DBP, MAP) and any side effects were observed and noted. Results: Intubating conditions were found to be significantly better in Group PS, (P<0.001). Intubating conditions were clinically accepted in 90% of patients in group PS compared to 73.3% in group P, which was highly significant, (P = 0.028). In Group P, HR, SBP, DBP and MAP were reduced significantly from their baseline values, (P<0.05). No significant difference in side-effects was noted between two groups, (P>0.05). Conclusion: The combination of sevoflurane and propofol seems to be a better alternative to propofol alone for endotracheal intubation in terms of better intubating conditions with minimal haemodynamic changes and side effects.

Authors and Affiliations

Patodi Veena

Keywords

Related Articles

Comparison of Ondansetron with Dexamethasone and Ondansetron as Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting Prophylaxis in Middle Ear Surgeries

Postoperative nausea & vomiting (PONV) is one of the most common and distressing complication during postoperative period increasing morbidity and cost of medical care. This study was conducted to compare the efficacy of...

A Study on Combined Spinal Epidural Labour Analgesia a Comparison between 0.125% Bupivacaine with Fentanyl Versus 0.1% Ropivacaine with Fentanyl

Introduction: The responsibility of the Anaesthesiologist in obstetrics is arguably greater than in any other fields of anaesthesia. Aim: To compare the quality of epidural analgesia of 0.125% bupivacaine with 0.1% ropiv...

Pain on Propofol Injection: Comparative Study of Pre-Treatment with Intravenous Lignocaine, Ondansetron and Fentanyl for the Prevention of Pain

Context: Propofol is a sedative-hypnotic intravenous anaesthetic agent. It causes a high incidence of pain during intravenous injection which leads to patient dissatisfaction. Aim: The aim of this study was to determine...

Prediction of Difficult Intubation in Apparently Normal Patients by Combining Modified Mallampatti Test and Thyromental Distance

Context: Difficult intubation is associated with serious complications, more so when there is failure of intubation. Inability to secure the airway during general anaesthesia remains one of the leading causes of morbidit...

Download PDF file
  • EP ID EP466164
  • DOI 10.21088/ijaa.2349.8471.42(pt-II)17.4
  • Views 174
  • Downloads 0

How To Cite

Patodi Veena (2017). A Comparative Study to Evaluate the Intubating Conditions between Propofol-Sevoflurane and Propofol Alone Without Using Neuromuscular Blocking Agents. Indian Journal of Anesthesia and Analgesia, 4(2), 383-390. https://europub.co.uk/articles/-A-466164