A comparison of propofol with methohexital and isoflurane in two general anesthetic techniques.
The purpose of this study was to compare two general anesthetic techniques involving oral intubation for use in outpatient third molar surgery. Fifty American Society of Anesthesiologists I or II patients were randomly allocated to two groups. Group 1 received methohexital, isoflurane, nitrous oxide, and alfentanil, while group 2 received propofol, alfentanil, and nitrous oxide. An analysis of the results showed that although the technique used in group 2 cost more, had a slightly longer induction time, and produced a similar duration of apnea, it did not cause significant hypotension (as previously reported), and had a significantly better overall recovery. It was concluded that the use of propofol in the outpatient surgery setting may be a valuable addition to the oral and maxillofacial surgeon's anesthetic armamentarium.
Werner
M E
ME
Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery, Tripler Army Medical Center, HI.
Bach
D E
DE
Newhouse
R F
RF
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D015760:Alfentanil; D000762:Anesthesia Recovery Period; D000766:Anesthesia, Dental / Q000191:economics; D000768:Anesthesia, General / Q000191:economics; D016527:Drug Costs; D006801:Humans; D007022:Hypotension / Q000139:chemically induced; D007530:Isoflurane / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000191:economics; D008723:Methohexital / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000191:economics; D008875:Middle Aged; D008964:Molar, Third / Q000601:surgery; D009325:Nausea / Q000139:chemically induced; D009609:Nitrous Oxide; D015742:Propofol / Q000009:adverse effects / Q000191:economics; D011597:Psychomotor Performance / Q000187:drug effects; D013997:Time Factors; D014081:Tooth Extraction; D014839:Vomiting / Q000139:chemically induced
D015760:Alfentanil; D007530:Isoflurane; D008723:Methohexital; D009609:Nitrous Oxide; D015742:Propofol