Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-7cvxr Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-19T01:30:07.257Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Remifentanil versus alfentanil in total intravenous anaesthesia for day case surgery

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  02 June 2005

I. Alper
Affiliation:
Ege University, Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey
E. Erhan
Affiliation:
Ege University, Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey
G. Ugur
Affiliation:
Ege University, Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey
B. Ozyar
Affiliation:
Ege University, Department of Anaesthesiology and Reanimation, Faculty of Medicine, Bornova, İzmir, Turkey
Get access

Extract

Summary

Background and objective: We assessed the intraoperative haemodynamic responses and recovery profiles of total intravenous anaesthesia with remifentanil and alfentanil for outpatient surgery.

Methods: Patients in Group 1 (n = 20) received alfentanil 20 μg kg−1 followed by 2 μg kg−1 min−1 intravenously; patients in Group 2 (n = 20) received remifentanil 1 μg kg−1 followed by 0.5 μg kg−1 min−1 intravenously. Both groups then received propofol 2 mg kg−1 followed by 9 mg kg−1 h−1 intravenously. Five minutes after skin incision, infusion rates were decreased, and at the end of surgery, all infusions were discontinued. Early recovery was assessed by the Aldrete score, whereas intermediate recovery was assessed with the postanaesthetic discharge scoring system (PADS).

Results: Perioperative arterial pressure was similar in both groups; heart rate was lower in Group 2 (P < 0.05). The times to spontaneous and adequate respiration, response to verbal commands, extubation and times for Aldrete score ≥9 were shorter in Group 2 patients (P < 0.05). Pain scores were higher in Group 2 patients (P < 0.05). Overall times for postanaesthetic discharge scores ≥9 were similar.

Conclusions: Early recovery of patients after day surgery is significantly shorter after total intravenous anaesthesia with remifentanil compared with that with alfentanil but postoperative pain management must be planned ahead.

Type
Original Article
Copyright
© 2003 European Society of Anaesthesiology

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

White PF. Ambulatory anaesthesia. Advances into the new millennium. Anesth Analg 2000; 90: 12341235.Google Scholar
Philip BK, Scuderi PE, Chung F, et al. Remifentanil compared with alfentanil for ambulatory surgery using total intravenous anaesthesia. The Remifentanil/Alfentanil Outpatient TIVA Group. Anesth Analg 1997; 84: 515521.Google Scholar
Glass PSA, Gan TJ, Howell S. A review of the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of remifentanil. Anesth Analg 1999; 89 (Suppl): S714.Google Scholar
Aldrete JA. The post anaesthesia recovery score revisited. J Clin Anesth 1995; 7: 8991.Google Scholar
Chung F, Chan V, Ong D. A post anaesthetic discharge scoring system for home readiness after ambulatory surgery. J Clin Anesth 1995; 7: 500506.Google Scholar
Hogue CW, Bowdle TA, O'Leary C, et al. A multicenter evaluation of total intravenous anaesthesia with remifentanil and propofol for elective inpatient surgery. Anesth Analg 1996; 83: 279285.Google Scholar
Rowbotham DJ, Peacock JE, Jones RM, et al. Comparison of remifentanil in combination with isoflurane or propofol for short-stay surgical procedures. Br J Anaesth 1998; 80: 752755.Google Scholar
Dershwitz M, Randel GI, Rosow CE, et al. Initial clinical experience with remifentanil, a new opioid metabolized by esterases. Anesth Analg 1995; 81: 619623.Google Scholar
Steward DJ, Volgyesi G. Stabilometry: a new tool for measuring recovery following general anaesthesia. Can Anaesth Soc J 1978; 25: 46.Google Scholar