Cost-effectiveness of propofol anesthesia using target-controlled infusion compared with a standard regimen using desflurane.
The cost-effectiveness of propofol anesthesia using target-controlled infusion (TCI) versus a standard regimen using desflurane for anesthesia maintenance was analyzed. This observational study consisted of 100 inpatients 18 to 75 years old with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I or II who were scheduled for otological surgery lasting less than four hours. Patients received one of two treatments. The desflurane-maintenance group received propofol 2-4 mg/kg and sufentanil 0.15-0.30 microg (as the citrate)/kg. A constant fresh gas flow of 1 L/min was used during maintenance of anesthesia. The propofol-maintenance group received TCI propofol and an additional infusion of sufentanil. Anesthesia was induced with 0.15-0.30 microg/kg. One blinded evaluator assessed the postoperative recovery from anesthesia for all patients. The cost of drugs and medical devices used during the intraoperative and postoperative periods was calculated. Effectiveness was defined as the absence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), while the cost-effectiveness of each procedure was the cost per PONV-free episode. The efficiency of each procedure represented the production of effectiveness per dollar invested. Chi-square and t tests, sensitivity analysis, and logistic regression were also performed. The only intergroup difference detected was the frequency of PONV occurring in the early recovery phase (11 in the desflurane group versus 2 in the propofol group). Of those patients requiring antiemetic rescue, 9 were in the desflurane group and only 2 were in the propofol group (p < 0.05). The TCI propofol regimen was more expensive than the desflurane regimen ($45 versus $28 per patient, respectively) (p < 0.001). The differential cost-effectiveness ratio was $94.7 per PONV-free episode. PONV 24 hours after surgery and patient satisfaction were similar between groups. A standard regimen of desflurane was more cost-effective than TCI propofol for anesthesia maintenance in achieving PONV-free episodes.
Fombeur
Patricia O
PO
Hospital Saint-Louis, Paris, France.
Tilleul
Patrick R
PR
Beaussier
Marc J
MJ
Lorente
Christine
C
Yazid
Lassaad
L
Lienhart
André H
AH
D000293:Adolescent; D000328:Adult; D000368:Aged; D019162:Anesthetics, Combined / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics; D018685:Anesthetics, Inhalation / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000191:economics; D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics*; D003362:Cost-Benefit Analysis; D000077335:Desflurane; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D007262:Infusions, Intravenous; D007530:Isoflurane / Q000008:administration & dosage / Q000031:analogs & derivatives* / Q000191:economics; D008297:Male; D008875:Middle Aged; D013517:Otorhinolaryngologic Surgical Procedures; D015742:Propofol / Q000008:administration & dosage* / Q000191:economics*; D011446:Prospective Studies
D019162:Anesthetics, Combined; D018685:Anesthetics, Inhalation; D018686:Anesthetics, Intravenous; D000077335:Desflurane; D007530:Isoflurane; D015742:Propofol