LARYNGEAL MASK AIRWAY INSERTION: COMPARISON OF SEVOFLURANE WITH PROPOFOL IN ADULTS

VIVEK KUMAR; RANGARAJ SETLUR; SANDHYA GHODKE; NIKHAT JAHAN; RAVISHEKAR N HIREMATH

doi:10.22159/ajpcr.2022.v15i8.44281

Authors

VIVEK KUMAR Department of Anaesthesiology, AFMS, New Delhi, India.
RANGARAJ SETLUR Department of Anaesthesiology, AFMS, New Delhi, India.
SANDHYA GHODKE Department of Anaesthesiology, Rainbow Children Hospital, Bengaluru, Karnataka, India.
NIKHAT JAHAN Department of Community medicine, AFMS, New Delhi,
RAVISHEKAR N HIREMATH Department of Community medicine, AFMS, New Delhi, India. https://orcid.org/0000-0002-3393-7348

DOI:

https://doi.org/10.22159/ajpcr.2022.v15i8.44281

Keywords:

Laryngeal mask airway, Sevoflurane, Propofol

Abstract

Methods: A cross-sectional observational study was conducted on patients scheduled for vascular, reconstructive, gynaecological, and day care surgeries for whom propofol (P) and sevoflurane (S) were used as induction agent for LMA insertion. All patients who fulfilled the inclusion and exclusion criteria and had given propofol or sevoflurane at various departments during the specified duration were included in the study and data were collected using pre-defined protocol. A total of 100 consecutive patients (50 patients in each group) were included in the study.

Objectives: The objectives of the study were to evaluate and compare sevoflurane in one vital capacity breath with propofol in dose of 2 mg/kg for ease of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) insertion in adults.

Results: The mean age for sevoflurane (S) group and propofol (P) group was 35.30, standard deviation (SD) 8.74 and 34.88, SD 9.37, respectively. Heart rate (HR) at 2 min, 3 min, and 4 min after induction showed a fall with propofol which was statistically significant. There was statistically significant difference in systolic blood pressure at on 1 min, 2 min, 3 min, and 4 min when compared between the two groups. A statistically significant fall in the systolic blood pressure in Group P was noted when compared to Group S. There was statistically significant difference in diastolic blood pressure at 4 min when compared between the two groups. A fall in the diastolic blood pressure in Group P was noted when compared to Group S at 4 min. There was fall in blood pressure in Group P when compared with Group S and this was significant. Fall in oxygen saturation in 3 and 4 min was significant. However, this fall was not clinically significant, as the values remained above 94%. There was increase in end-tidal carbon dioxide in 1, 2, 3, and 4 min and was statistically significant between the two groups. Sevoflurane took longer time for induction and LMA insertion. Loss of eye lash reflex, jaw relaxation, and LMA insertion were lost earlier with propofol and were statistically significant. The overall LMA insertion was excellent with propofol in 50 patients and with sevoflurane 48 patients had excellent condition and two were satisfactory.

Conclusion: In our study, sevoflurane was associated with good hemodynamic stability, but quality of anesthesia provided with propofol was superior. Delayed jaw relaxation with sevoflurane when compared to propofol delayed LMA insertion. The overall insertion was excellent with propofol with all 50 patients as compared to sevoflurane.

Downloads

Download data is not yet available.

References

Bogetz MS. Using the laryngeal mask airway to manage the difficult airway. Anesthesiol Clin N Am 2002;20:863-70, vii. doi: 10.1016/ s0889-8537(02)00047-0, PMID 12512266

Krohner RG, Ramanathan S. Anatomy of Airway in Benumofs Airway Management. 2nd ed. Elsevier: Australia; 2006. p. 1-19, 476-97, 1027- 29.

Brimcombe JR. Laryngeal Mask Anaesthesia – Principles and Practice.2nd ed., Vol. 115. Saunders: New York. p. 35, 41.

Koppula R, Shenoy A. Comparison of sevoflurane with propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion in adults. Anesth Clin Pharmacol 2005;21:271-4.

Shao G, Zhang GG, Zhan G. Comparison of propofol and sevoflurane for laryngeal mask airway patients in elderly patients. South Med J 2007;100:360-5. doi: 10.1097/SMJ.0b013e31802fa6b6, PMID 17458394

Molloy ME, Buggy DJ, Scanlon P. Propofol or sevoflurane for LMA insertion. Can J Anaesth 1999;46:322-6. doi: 10.1007/BF03013222, PMID 10232714

Eberts TJ, Schmid PG. Inhaled anesthetics. In: Barash PG, Cullen BF, Stoelting RK, Cahalan MK, Stock MC, editors. Clinical Anesthesia. 6th ed. Philadelphia: Lippincott Williams & Wilkins; 2009. p. 413-43.

Morgan GE Jr., Mikhail MS, Murray MJ. Inhalational anesthetics. In: Clinical Anesthesiology. 4th ed. New York: McGraw-Hill; 2006. p. 155-78.

Ghatge S, Lee J, Smith I. Sevoflurane: An ideal agent for adult day-case anesthesia? Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003;47:917-31. doi: 10.1034/j.1399-6576.2003.00196.x, PMID 12904182

Driver I, Wilson C, Wiltshire S, Mills P, Howard-Griffin R. Co-induction and laryngeal Mask Airway – A comparison of thiopentone versus propofol. Anaesthesia 1997;52:698-700. doi: 10.1111/j.1365- 2044.1997.az0130b.x, PMID 9244033

Miner JR, Burton JH. Clinical practice advisory: Emergency department procedural sedation with propofol. Ann Emerg Med 2007;50:182-7, 187.e1. doi: 10.1016/j.annemergmed.2006.12.017, PMID 17321006

Ferson DZ, Brimcombe JR, Brain AI. The laryngeal mask airway. Int Anesthesiol Clin 1998;36:xi-xii.

Brown GW, Patel EF. Comparison of propofol and thiopentone for laryngeal mask airway insertion. Anaesthesia 1991;46:771-2.

Baker CE, Smith I. Sevoflurane: A comparison between vital capacity and tidal breathing techniques for induction of anesthesia and laryngeal mask airway placement. Anaesthesia 1999;54:841-4. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1999.00949.x, PMID 10460554

Sivalingam P, Kandasamy R, Madhavan G, Dhakshinamoorthi P. Conditions for laryngeal mask insertion. A comparison of propofol versus sevoflurane with or without alfentanil. Anaesthesia 1999;54:271-6. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2044.1999.00663.x

Yurino M, Kimura H. Induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane, nitrous oxide and oxygen: A comparison of spontaneous ventilation and vital capacity rapid inhalation induction techniques. Anesth Analg 1993;76:598-601. doi: 10.1213/00000539-199303000-00026, PMID 8452273

Priya V, Divatia JV, Dasgupta D. Comparison of propofol versus sevoflurane for laryngeal mask airway insertion. Indian J Anaesth 2002;46:31-4.

Thwaites A, Edmends S, Smith I. Inhalation induction with sevoflurane: A double-blind comparison with propofol. Br J Anaesth 1997;78:356-61. doi: 10.1093/bja/78.4.356, PMID 9135350

Ti LK, Chow MY, Lee TL. Comparison of sevoflurane with propofol for laryngeal mask airway insertion in adults. Anaesth Analog 1999;88:908-12.

Muzi M, Robinson BJ, Ebert TJ, O’Brien TJ. Induction of anesthesia and tracheal intubation with sevoflurane in adults. Anesthesiology 1996;85:536-43. doi: 10.1097/00000542-199609000-00012, PMID 8853083

Fredman B, Nathanson MH, Smith I, Wang J, Klein K, White PF. Sevoflurane for outpatient anesthesia: A comparison with propofol. Anesth Analg 1995;81:823-8. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199510000- 00028, PMID 7574017

Jellish WS, Lien CA, Fontenot HJ, Hall R. The comparative effects of sevoflurane versus propofol in the induction and maintenance of anesthesia in the adult patients. Anesth Analg 1996;82:479-85. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199603000-00009, PMID 8623947

Fleischmann E, Akça O, Wallner T, Arkiliç CF, Kurz A, Hickle RS, et al. Onset time, recovery duration, and drug cost with four different methods of inducing general anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1999;88:930-5. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199904000-00046, PMID 10195551

Philip BK, Lombard LL, Roaf ER, Drager LR, Calalang I, Philip JH. Comparison of vital capacity induction with sevoflurane to intravenous induction with propofol for adult ambulatory anesthesia. Anesth Analg 1999;89:623-7. doi: 10.1097/00000539-199909000-00014, PMID 10475291