Header

UZH-Logo

Maintenance Infos

Propofol 1% versus propofol 2% in children undergoing minor ENT surgery


Pellégrini, M; Lysakowski, C; Dumont, L; Borgeat, A; Tassonyi, E (2003). Propofol 1% versus propofol 2% in children undergoing minor ENT surgery. British Journal of Anaesthesia, 90(3):375-377.

Abstract

Background. The induction characteristics of propofol 1% and 2% were compared in children undergoing ENT surgery, in a prospective, randomized, double‐blind study. Methods. One hundred and eight children received propofol 1% (n=55) or 2% (n=53) for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia. For induction, propofol 4mgkg-1 was injected at a constant rate (1200mlh-1), supplemented with alfentanil. Intubating conditions without the use of a neuromuscular blocking agent were scored. Results. Pain on injection occurred in 9% and 21% of patients after propofol 1% and 2%, respectively (P=0.09). Loss of consciousness was more rapid with propofol 2% compared with propofol 1% (47s vs 54s; P=0.02). Spontaneous movements during induction occurred in 22% and 34% (P=0.18), and intubating conditions were satisfactory in 87% and 96% (P=0.19) of children receiving propofol 1% or 2%, respectively. There were no differences between the two groups in respect of haemodynamic changes or adverse events. Conclusions. For the end‐points tested, propofol 1% and propofol 2% are similar for induction of anaesthesia in children undergoing minor ENT surgery. Br J Anaesth 2003: 90: 375-7

Abstract

Background. The induction characteristics of propofol 1% and 2% were compared in children undergoing ENT surgery, in a prospective, randomized, double‐blind study. Methods. One hundred and eight children received propofol 1% (n=55) or 2% (n=53) for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia. For induction, propofol 4mgkg-1 was injected at a constant rate (1200mlh-1), supplemented with alfentanil. Intubating conditions without the use of a neuromuscular blocking agent were scored. Results. Pain on injection occurred in 9% and 21% of patients after propofol 1% and 2%, respectively (P=0.09). Loss of consciousness was more rapid with propofol 2% compared with propofol 1% (47s vs 54s; P=0.02). Spontaneous movements during induction occurred in 22% and 34% (P=0.18), and intubating conditions were satisfactory in 87% and 96% (P=0.19) of children receiving propofol 1% or 2%, respectively. There were no differences between the two groups in respect of haemodynamic changes or adverse events. Conclusions. For the end‐points tested, propofol 1% and propofol 2% are similar for induction of anaesthesia in children undergoing minor ENT surgery. Br J Anaesth 2003: 90: 375-7

Statistics

Citations

Dimensions.ai Metrics
5 citations in Web of Science®
7 citations in Scopus®
Google Scholar™

Altmetrics

Downloads

1 download since deposited on 10 Oct 2018
1 download since 12 months
Detailed statistics

Additional indexing

Item Type:Journal Article, refereed, original work
Communities & Collections:National licences > 142-005
Dewey Decimal Classification:610 Medicine & health
Uncontrolled Keywords:Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
Language:English
Date:1 March 2003
Deposited On:10 Oct 2018 09:32
Last Modified:11 Oct 2018 07:37
Publisher:Elsevier
ISSN:0007-0912
OA Status:Green
Free access at:Publisher DOI. An embargo period may apply.
Publisher DOI:https://doi.org/10.1093/bja/aeg056
Related URLs:https://www.swissbib.ch/Search/Results?lookfor=nationallicenceoxford101093bjaaeg056 (Library Catalogue)

Download

Download PDF  'Propofol 1% versus propofol 2% in children undergoing minor ENT surgery'.
Preview
Content: Published Version
Language: English
Filetype: PDF (Nationallizenz 142-005)
Size: 57kB
View at publisher