Janet D. Pavlin

Propofol versus isoflurane for endoscopic sinus surgery

PURPOSE A previous retrospective study reported that propofol anesthesia decreased bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery compared with isoflurane. We performed a prospective study to compare the effects of propofol versus isoflurane on measured blood loss and the surgeons subjective assessment of operating conditions during endoscopic sinus surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS After receiving institutional review board approval and written informed consent, 56 patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery were randomly assigned to receive propofol (n = 30) or isoflurane (n = 26) supplemented with nitrous oxide-oxygen and alfentanil. Blood loss was calculated from the hemoglobin concentration in suction canisters. One surgeon, who was blinded to the anesthetic agent, performed every procedure and assessed bleeding as follows: 1, no bleeding; 2, modest bleeding; 3, bleeding interfering with operating conditions and cause for an agent switch; and 4, intolerable bleeding requiring a change in surgical plan. Results were compared in the two anesthetic groups using chi-squared test, unpaired t-test, Mann-Whitney Utest, and a permutation test. A P of .05 was considered significant. RESULTS Mean bleeding scores were less over time (P = .02) with propofol anesthesia, particularly in surgery in the ethmoid and sphenoid sinuses (P = .03), and the proportion of patients with a mean score >2 was less in the propofol group (30% v 54%; P = .033). Time until discharge to home or to a limited stay in a hospital bed was also less in the propofol group (183 v 243 minutes; P = .019). CONCLUSION In our study, surgical blood loss was the same for both anesthetic agents overall, but propofol appeared to offer an advantage in terms of subjective improvement in operating conditions, particularly in the ethmoid and sphenoid sinuses.

Management of bladder function after outpatient surgery.

BACKGROUND This study was designed to test a treatment algorithm for management of bladder function after outpatient general or local anesthesia. METHODS Three hundred twenty-four outpatients, stratified into risk categories for urinary retention, were studied. Patients in category 1 were low-risk patients (n = 227) having non-pelvic surgery and randomly assigned to receive 10 ml/kg or 2 ml/kg of intravenous fluid intraoperatively. They were discharged when otherwise ready, without being required to void. Patients in category 2 (n = 40), also presumed to be low risk, had gynecologic surgery. High-risk patients included 31 patients having hernia or anal surgery (category 3), and 31 patients with a history of retention (category 4). Bladder volumes were monitored by ultrasound in those in categories 2-4, and patients were required to void (or be catheterized) before discharge. The incidence of retention and urinary tract symptoms after surgery were determined for all categories. RESULT Urinary retention affected 0.5% of category 1 patients and none of category 2 patients. Median time to void after discharge was 75 min (interquartile range 120) in category 1 patients (n = 27) discharged without voiding. Fluids administered did not alter incidence of retention or time to void. Retention occurred in 5% of high-risk patients before discharge and recurred in 25% after discharge. CONCLUSION In reliable patients at low risk for retention, voiding before discharge appears unnecessary. In high-risk patients, continued observation until the bladder is emptied is indicated to avoid prolonged overdistention of the bladder.

Effects of bispectral index monitoring on recovery from surgical anesthesia in 1,580 inpatients from an academic medical center.

Background:The purpose of this study was to determine whether monitoring Bispectral Index (BIS) would affect recovery parameters in patients undergoing inpatient surgery. Methods:Anesthesia providers (n = 69) were randomly assigned to one of two groups, a BIS or non-BIS control group. A randomized crossover design was used, with reassignment at monthly intervals for 7 months. Duration of time in the postanesthesia care unit, time from the end of surgery to leaving the operating room, and incidence of delayed recovery (> 50 min in recovery) were compared in patients treated intraoperatively with or without BIS monitoring. Data were analyzed by analysis of variance, unpaired t test, or chi-square test as appropriate. Results:One thousand five hundred eighty patients in an academic medical center were studied. The mean BIS in the monitored group was 47. No differences were found in recovery parameters between the BIS-monitored group and the control group when comparisons were made using all subjects or when data were analyzed within anesthetic subgroups stratified by anesthetic agent or duration of anesthesia. There were some small reductions in the intraoperative concentration of sevoflurane (but not isoflurane). Conclusions:The use of BIS monitoring for inpatients undergoing a wide variety of surgical procedures in an academic medical center had some minor effects on intraoperative anesthetic use but had no impact on recovery parameters.

Optimal propofol-alfentanil combinations for supplementing nitrous oxide for outpatient surgery

BACKGROUND The combination of propofol and alfentanil with nitrous oxide provides balanced anesthesia with rapid recovery and minimal emetic side effects. The object of this study was to compare recovery parameters at varying proportions of propofol and alfentanil, and to determine the dosing rate and plasma concentration of propofol necessary to supplement nitrous oxide in the presence of varying concentrations of alfentanil METHODS Forty-eight patients were anesthetized with nitrous oxide, targeted manual infusions of alfentanil (target plasma concentrations of 0, 50, 100, and 150 ng/ml), and propofol at rates that were varied up or down by 25% depending on the response (movement/no movement) of the preceding patient (at the same alfentanil target concentrations) to ulnar-nerve stimulation. The minimum concentrations of propofol and alfentanil required to prevent movement in 50% of patients (EC50) was determined by logistic regression. Speed of emergence and recovery of cognitive function, time to discharge, and incidence of side effects were compared for four different combinations of propofol and alfentanil with nitrous oxide. RESULTS The EC50 for propofol alone with nitrous oxide was 6.1 microg/ml. AlfentaniL at concentrations of 41+/-17 (SD), 113+/-54, and 130+/-61 ng/mL reduced the EC50 of propofol to 3.3, 2.3, and 2.2 microg/ml, respectively, and decreased emergence time (eye opening) to 8.1, 4.9, and 3.4 min, compared with 24.3 min for propofol alone. Side effects did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS The authors conclude that there is a synergistic effect between propofol and alfentanil, and that combining alfentanil with propofol is associated with faster early recovery.

Safety and Efficacy of Rocuronium With Sugammadex Reversal Versus Succinylcholine in Outpatient Surgery-A Multicenter, Randomized, Safety Assessor-Blinded Trial.

Complex surgical procedures are increasingly performed in an outpatient setting, with emphasis on rapid recovery and case turnover. In this study, the combination of rocuronium for neuromuscular blockade (NMB) reversed by single-dose sugammadex was compared with succinylcholine followed by spontaneous recovery in outpatient surgery. This multicenter, randomized, safety assessor–blinded study enrolled adults undergoing a short elective outpatient surgical procedure requiring NMB and tracheal intubation. Patients were randomized to NMB with either rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg for tracheal intubation with incremental doses of rocuronium 0.15 mg/kg and subsequent reversal with sugammadex 4.0 mg/kg at 1–2 posttetanic counts or succinylcholine 1.0 mg/kg for intubation with spontaneous recovery. The primary efficacy end point was the time from sugammadex administration to recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9; for succinylcholine, time from administration to recovery of the first twitch (T1) to 90% was assessed. From 167 patients enrolled, 150 received treatment. The all-subjects-treated population comprised 70 patients in the rocuronium–sugammadex group and 80 in the succinylcholine group. Geometric mean (95% confidence interval) time from the start of sugammadex administration to recovery of the train-of-four ratio to 0.9 was 1.8 (1.6–2.0) minutes. Geometric mean (95% confidence interval) time from succinylcholine administration to recovery of T1 to 90% was 10.8 (10.1–11.5) minutes. Health outcome variables were similar between the groups. Adverse events were reported in 87.1% and 93.8% of patients for rocuronium–sugammadex and succinylcholine, respectively. In conclusion, rocuronium for intubation followed by sugammadex for reversal of NMB offers a viable treatment option in outpatient surgery without prolonging recovery duration or jeopardizing safety.