Núñez-Bacarreza JJ, Pórtela-Ortiz JM, Magro-Ibáñez E

Language: Spanish
References: 9
Page: 147-150
PDF size: 51.12 Kb.

ABSTRACT

Background: There are a number of studies comparing between inhaled induction with the technique of vital capacity and intravenous induction, specifically with propofol. Since 1993, it has been demonstrated that inhaled induction is similar with both inhaled agents. Muscle relaxation is essential for adequate intubation. Achieving proper relaxation as fast as possible is crucial for anesthesiologists. Published reports show that inhaled induction speeds the action of muscle relaxants; it has been stated that it reduces vecuronium onset time around 25%. Methodology: Prospective, comparative, interventionist. Patients and methods: A prospective, controlled, interventionist trial in 82 patients, randomized into two groups. Standard anesthetic management and monitoring. Group I received inhaled induction, group II received IV induction with propofol. Quality of intubation was assessed according to Good Clinical Research Practice (GCRP) criteria, and muscle relaxation with train-of-four (TOF) monitoring. Other clinical and hemodynamic parameters were monitored with either type of induction. Results: Demographic characteristics were similar among both groups. The time to loss of eyelash reflex and grasp was similar in both groups, as well as the time to achieve an adequate bispectral index (BIS). The only difference was the time required to achieve a 0% TOF, I194 sec in Group I and 159 sec in Group II (p 0.00005). Intubation conditions showed no significant differences among groups. Conclusions: Vital capacity inhaled induction with sevoflurane is comparable to endovenous induction while reducing the time needed to achieve adequate muscle relaxation for intubation.

REFERENCES

1. Yurino, Masaki, Kimura, Hitomi. Vital capacity rapid inhalation induction technique: comparison of sevoflurane and halothane. Can J Anaesth 1993;40:440-444.

2. Yogendran S, Prabhu A, Hendy A, McGuire G, Imarengiaye C, Wong J, Chung F. Vital capacity and patient controlled sevoflurane inhalation result in similar induction characteristics: Can J Anesth 2005;52:45-49.

3. Yogendran S, Imarengiaye C, Prabhu A, Hendy A, McGuire G, Wong J, Chung F. Comparison of patient controlled sevoflurane induction with sevoflurane vital capacity induction in outpatients undergoing arthroscopy: Can J Anesth 2002;49: A27-27.

4. Joo, Hwan S, Perks, William J. Sevoflurane versus propofol for anesthetic induction. Anesthesia & Analgesia 2000;91: 213-222.

5. Muzi M, Robinson BJ, Ebert TJ. Induction of anesthesia and tracheal intubation with sevoflurane in adults. clinical investigation anesthesiology. 1996;85:536-543.

6. Yamaguchi, Shigeki. High concentration sevoflurane induction of anesthesia accelerates onset of vecuronium neuromuscular blockade. Can J Anaesth 2001;48:34-39.

7. Mostafa SM. Sevoflurane for difficult tracheal intubation. Br J Anaesth 1997;79:392-393.

8. Joo HS, Perks WJ, Belo SE. Sevoflurane with remifentanyl allows rapid tracheal intubation without neuromuscular blocking agents: Can J Anesth 2001;48:646-650.

9. Viby-Mogensen J, Engbaek J, Eriksson LI, Gramstad L. Good clinical research practice (GCRP) in pharmacodynamic studies of neuromuscular blocking agents. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1996;40:59-74.