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.
Download full-text PDF |
Source |
---|---|
http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/s0278-2391(10)80442-2 | DOI Listing |
Enter search terms and have AI summaries delivered each week - change queries or unsubscribe any time!