Details
Category: Volume 05 Issue 08 August 2017
Hits: 2279

Title: A Comparative Study of Induction and Recovery Characteristics of Propofol with that of Thiopentone

Authors: Lalitha M MD DA, Vijaya G MD

 DOI:  https://dx.doi.org/10.18535/jmscr/v5i8.07

Abstract

Background: Ambulatory surgery presents unique challenges for the anaesthetist. About 40- 60% of all surgical procedure could be performed in an out – patient surgery centre. Thiopentone sodium was considered as a standard drug for induction of anaesthesia. For short procedures in day care surgery which requires a quicker and smoother induction as well as smooth and rapid recovery Di-isopropyl Phenol [Diprivan] referred as Propofol is extensively used for induction of anaesthesia.

The aim of the study is to compare the merits and demerits of propofol with that of thiopentone sodium for induction and recovery.

Materials and Materials: This study is conducted among 60 patients who were posted for the minor gynaecological procedure – dilatation and curettage. Out of the 60 patients, 30 patients (Group I) received propofol and 30 patients (Group II) received thiopentone as induction agent. Time of induction, Effects on cardio-vascular & respiratory system, Speed of recovery, Hang over, Street fitness and other side effects were compared.

Results: Time for induction of anaesthesia in group I was 15 seconds at the earliest and 45 seconds as the maximum with a mean of 30.27 seconds. In group II the same was 18 seconds and 45 seconds respectively with a mean of 29.46 seconds. Apnoea lasting for less than 30 seconds was noted in 3 patients [10%] in Group I and the same was in 11 patients [36%] in group II. Incidence of cough was in 2 patients [6.6%] who received thiopentone. No such incidence was noticed in patient receiving propofol. 12 patients [40%] in the propofol group complained of pain whereas it was 5 [16%] in patients who received thiopentone. The mean increase in heart rate at the end of 3 min when compared to pre-induction value was 2 bpm in propofol group when compared to 3.71 bpm of thiopentone group. The mean decrease in mean arterial pressure in propofol group was 9.32 mm Hg and 3.66 mm Hg in thiopentone group at the end of 3 minutes. Recovery time in propofol ranged from 3-16 min with a mean of 8.67 min. In Thiopentone recovery time ranged from 5-23 min with a mean of 10.86 min.

Conclusion: Propofol can be used as an ideal induction agent for day care surgery, keeping in mind the respiratory depression and cardiovascular effect where a judicious and cautions approach and vigilant monitoring is required.

Keywords: Propofol, Thiopentone sodium, Haemodynamic changes, Induction, Recovery

References

  1. Edelist G. A comparison of propofol and thiopentone as induction agents in outpatient surgery. Can Anaesth Soc J 1987; 34: 110–6.Google Scholar
  2. MacKenzie N, Grant IS. Comparison of the new emulsion formulation of propofol with methohexitone and thiopentone for induction of anesthesia in day cases. Br J Anaesth 1985; 57: 725–31. PubMedC rossRef Google Scholar
  3. Wells JKG. Comparison of ICI 35868, etomidate and methohexitone for day care anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1985; 57: 732–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Adam HK, Briggs LP, Bahar M, Douglas EJ, Dundee JW. Pharmacokinetic evaluation of ICI 35868 in man. Br J Anaesth 1983; 55, 97–103.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Schuttler J, Stoeckel H, Schwilden H. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic modelling of propofol (Diprivan) in volunteers and surgical patients. Postgrad Med J 1985; 61(supp3):53–4.PubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. Glen JB, Hunter SC. Pharmacology of an emulsion formulation of ICI 35868. Br J Anaesth 1984; 56: 617–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Glen JB. Animal studies of the anaesthetic activity of ICI 35868. Br J Anaesth 1980; 52: 731–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Redern N, Stafford MA, Hull PF. Incremental propofol for short procedures. Br J Anaesth 1985; 57: 1178–82.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Doze VA, Shafer A, White PF. Propofol-nitrous oxide versus thiopental-isoflurane-nitrous oxide for general anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1988; 69: 63–71.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kay NH, Uppingtion I, Sear JW, Allen MC. Use of an emulsion of ICI 35868 (propofol) for the induction and maintenance of anaesthesia. Br J Anaesth 1985; 57: 736–42.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Fragen RJ, Hanssen CHJH, Denissen AF, Booij Hoj, Crul JB. Diisoprofol (ICI 35868) for total intravenous anaesthesia. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 1983; 27: 113–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Jessop E, Grounds RM, Morgan M, Lumley J. Comparison of infusions of propofol and methohexitone to provide light anaesthesia during surgery with regional blocks. Br J Anaesth 1985; 57: 1173–7.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Mouton SM, Bullington J, Davis L, Fisher K, Ramsey S, Wood M. A comparison of diprivan and thiopental for the induction of anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1985; 63: A354.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Plosker H, Sampson I, Cohen M, Kaplan JA. A comparison of diprivan and thiamylal sodium for the induction and maintenance of outpatient anesthesia. Anesthesiology 1985; 63: A366.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Briggs LP, Clarke RSJ, Dundee JW, Moore J, Bahar M, Wright PJ. Use of di-isopropyl phenol as main agent for short procedures. Br J Anaesth 1981; 53: 1197–202.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Grounds RM, Morgan M, Lumsley J. Some studies on the properties of the intravenous anaesthetic propofol (Diprivan): a review. Postgrad Med J 1985; 61 (suppl. 3): 9095.Google Scholar
  17. Grounds RM, Twigley AJ, Carli F, Whitwam JG, Morgan M. The haemodynamic effects of intravenous infusion comparison of the effects of thiopentone and propofol. Anaesthesia 1985; 40: 735–40.PubMed CrossRef Google Scholar
  18. Aun C, Major E. The cardiorespiratory effect of ICI 35868 in patients with valvular heart disease. Anaesthesia 1984; 39: 1096–100.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. O’Callaghan AC, Normandale JP, Grundy EH, Lumley J, Morgan M. Continuous intravenous infusion of disoprofol (ICI 35868, Diprivan). Comparison with althesin to cover surgery under local anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1982; 37: 295–300.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Cumming GC, Dixon J, Kay NH et al. Dose requirement of ICI 35868 (propofol, ‘Diprivan’) in a new formulation for induction of anaesthesia. Anaesthesia 1984; 39: 1168–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Prys-Roberts C. Haemodynamic effects of ‘Diprivan’ infusion anaesthesia; comparison with other intravenous and volatile anaesthetics. VII European Congress of Anaesthesiology Abstracts III; 1986; 296.Google Scholar
  22. Prys-Roberts C, Davies JR, Calverley RK, Goodman NW. Haemodynamic effects of infusion of diisopropylphenol (ICI 35868) during nitrous oxide anaesthesia in man. Br J Anaesth 1983; 55: 105–11.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Spelina KR, Coates DR, Monk CR, Prys-Roberts C, Norley I, Turtle MJ. Dose requirements of propofol by infusion during nitrous oxide anaesthesia in man. Br J Anaesth 1986; 56: 1080–4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. deGrood PMRM, Ruys AHC, van Egmond J, Borg Booij LHDJ, Crul JF. Propofol (‘Diprivan’) emulsion of total intravenous anaesthesia. Postgrad Med J 1985; 61 (suppl. 3): 61–9.Google Scholar
  25. Letourneau JE, Denis R. The reliability and validity of the Treiger dot test as a measure of recovery from general anaesthesia in a day care surgical unit. Anaesthesia Progress 1983: September/October: 152–5.Google Scholar
  26. Morrison DP. The crichton visual analogue scale for the assessment of behaviour in the elderly. Acta Psychiatr Scand 1983; 68: 408–13. PubMed CrossRef Google Scholar

Corresponding Author

Dr G.Vijaya MD.

Associate Professor, Dept of Anaesthesiology, Government Theni Medical College, Theni, Tamilnadu