Abstract
Introduction
The safety of anaesthetic recovery is closely related to the speed of which the patient readies a state of stable circulation, respiration and well maintained reflexes. Apart from the risk of surgical complications, the risk of residual anaesthetic effects, are the reason for keeping patients in a highly staffed, and high surveillance recovery unit. With the new rapidly eliminated inhalational anaesthetic agent, such as desflurane, having low blood gas solubility coefficient (0.42), it is supposed to offer a rapid recovery. The so-called fast-track concept means that the patient is so well recovered when he leaves the operating theatre that the recovery unit may be by-passed without any risk for the patient.
Objectives :
The objectives of the study were to compare the effect of desflurane versus sevofiurane as inhalational agent for maintenance, on recovery time and side effects. A randomized single blinded prospective study was conducted in Hospital Universiti Sains Malaysia from June 2004 to June 2005 involving a total of 60 ASA I patients planned for elective orthopedic procedures with duration of surgery less then 2 hours. The patients were allocated into 2 equally numbered groups, desflurane (n=30) and sevofiurane (n=30).
Patients and Methods :
All patients were induced with intravenous fentanyl, propofol and atracurium. Intrappcratively, either dcsfiurane 6% or sevoflurane 2% (which are equivalent to 1MAC of both agents in 100% oxygen) was used together with 30% oxygen and 70% nitrous oxide. Atracurium infusion was used as a muscle relaxant and fentanyl was given for analgesia-Hemodynamic parameters (blood pressure and heart rate) were recorded on arrival, pre-intubation, post-intubation and every 10 minutes until the end of the surgery. Bispectral index scale (BIS) was used to monitor anaesthetic depth. During emergence, stimulation of patients was limited to verbal encouragement to open eyes with a tap on Ac shoulder at 10 seconds interval. Time was recorded from discontinuation of anaesthetic until patients opened their eyes and obeyed simple commands. The changes in BIS values with time were recorded as the inhalarional agent was discontinued. At the same time, patients were observed for any complications during emergence and at Ac recovery room.
Results :
From this study, there was significant difference between desflurane and sevoflurane in terms of recovery time, which included time to open eyes (7.21± 1.82 minutes, for desflurane versus 12.55±2.70 minutes, for sevoflurane with p < 0.001) and time to obey command (8.33±1.77 minutes, for desflurane versus 13.52±2.65 for sevoflurane with p < 0.001), with the duration of operation within 2 hours. The changes in BIS values with time showed significance difference between the groups, which was faster with desflurane groups. However, there was no significant difference in term of hemodynamic parameters between the groups. There were 5 (16.7%) incidence of complications during emergence/recovery in patients who received sevoflurane. However it was not statistically significant.
Conclusions :
In summary, this study showed that desflurane has a faster recovery time with similar hemodynamic and side effects as compared to sevoflurane.
Assoc. Prof. Dr. Nik Abdullah Nik Mohamad : Supervisor
Dr. Mahamorowi Omar : Co-Supervisor
