Tags

Type your tag names separated by a space and hit enter

Comparison of dexmedetomidine-propofol vs. fentanyl-propofol for laryngeal mask insertion.
Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2008 Aug; 25(8):675-80.EJ

Abstract

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES

There have been many studies to find the optimum anaesthetics to provide excellent conditions for laryngeal mask insertion. We compared the effects of dexmedetomidine administered before propofol, on laryngeal mask insertion with fentanyl combined with propofol.

METHODS

In all, 52 patients, ASA I-II, scheduled to have minor urological procedures were randomized into two groups. Group F received 1 microg kg(-1) fentanyl (in 10 mL normal saline) and Group D received 1 microg kg(-1) dexmedetomidine (in 10 mL normal saline). We used 1.5 mg kg(-1) propofol for induction and 50% N2O and 1.5% sevoflurane in oxygen for maintenance. We observed jaw mobility (1: fully relaxed; 2: mild resistance; 3: tight but opens; 4: closed), coughing or movement (1: none; 2: one or two coughs; 3: three or more coughs; 4: bucking/movement) and other events such as spontaneous ventilation, breath holding, expiratory stridor and lacrimation. In each category, scores <2 were acceptable for laryngeal mask insertion.

RESULTS

More patients developed apnoea and their apnoea times were longer in Group F than Group D (P < 0.001). Respiratory rates increased in Group D (P < 0.001). Adverse events during laryngeal mask insertion were similar. The reductions in systolic and mean blood pressures were greater in Group F (systolic: P < 0.05, mean: P < 0.01). Emergence times were shorter in Group F than in Group D (P < 0.001).

CONCLUSION

Dexmedetomidine, when used before propofol induction provides successful laryngeal mask insertion comparable to fentanyl, while preserving respiratory functions more than fentanyl.

Authors+Show Affiliations

Hacettepe University School of Medicine, Anesthesiology and Reanimation, Ankara, Turkey. filizd@hacettepe.edu.trNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info availableNo affiliation info available

Pub Type(s)

Comparative Study
Journal Article
Randomized Controlled Trial

Language

eng

PubMed ID

18400141

Citation

Uzümcügil, F, et al. "Comparison of Dexmedetomidine-propofol Vs. Fentanyl-propofol for Laryngeal Mask Insertion." European Journal of Anaesthesiology, vol. 25, no. 8, 2008, pp. 675-80.
Uzümcügil F, Canbay O, Celebi N, et al. Comparison of dexmedetomidine-propofol vs. fentanyl-propofol for laryngeal mask insertion. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2008;25(8):675-80.
Uzümcügil, F., Canbay, O., Celebi, N., Karagoz, A. H., & Ozgen, S. (2008). Comparison of dexmedetomidine-propofol vs. fentanyl-propofol for laryngeal mask insertion. European Journal of Anaesthesiology, 25(8), 675-80. https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265021508004213
Uzümcügil F, et al. Comparison of Dexmedetomidine-propofol Vs. Fentanyl-propofol for Laryngeal Mask Insertion. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2008;25(8):675-80. PubMed PMID: 18400141.
* Article titles in AMA citation format should be in sentence-case
TY - JOUR T1 - Comparison of dexmedetomidine-propofol vs. fentanyl-propofol for laryngeal mask insertion. AU - Uzümcügil,F, AU - Canbay,O, AU - Celebi,N, AU - Karagoz,A H, AU - Ozgen,S, Y1 - 2008/04/10/ PY - 2008/4/11/pubmed PY - 2008/8/15/medline PY - 2008/4/11/entrez SP - 675 EP - 80 JF - European journal of anaesthesiology JO - Eur J Anaesthesiol VL - 25 IS - 8 N2 - BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There have been many studies to find the optimum anaesthetics to provide excellent conditions for laryngeal mask insertion. We compared the effects of dexmedetomidine administered before propofol, on laryngeal mask insertion with fentanyl combined with propofol. METHODS: In all, 52 patients, ASA I-II, scheduled to have minor urological procedures were randomized into two groups. Group F received 1 microg kg(-1) fentanyl (in 10 mL normal saline) and Group D received 1 microg kg(-1) dexmedetomidine (in 10 mL normal saline). We used 1.5 mg kg(-1) propofol for induction and 50% N2O and 1.5% sevoflurane in oxygen for maintenance. We observed jaw mobility (1: fully relaxed; 2: mild resistance; 3: tight but opens; 4: closed), coughing or movement (1: none; 2: one or two coughs; 3: three or more coughs; 4: bucking/movement) and other events such as spontaneous ventilation, breath holding, expiratory stridor and lacrimation. In each category, scores <2 were acceptable for laryngeal mask insertion. RESULTS: More patients developed apnoea and their apnoea times were longer in Group F than Group D (P < 0.001). Respiratory rates increased in Group D (P < 0.001). Adverse events during laryngeal mask insertion were similar. The reductions in systolic and mean blood pressures were greater in Group F (systolic: P < 0.05, mean: P < 0.01). Emergence times were shorter in Group F than in Group D (P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine, when used before propofol induction provides successful laryngeal mask insertion comparable to fentanyl, while preserving respiratory functions more than fentanyl. SN - 1365-2346 UR - https://www.unboundmedicine.com/medline/citation/18400141/Comparison_of_dexmedetomidine_propofol_vs__fentanyl_propofol_for_laryngeal_mask_insertion_ L2 - https://doi.org/10.1017/S0265021508004213 DB - PRIME DP - Unbound Medicine ER -