Co-induction and laryngeal mask insertion# A comparison of thiopentone versus propofol

Authors: Driver, I.¹; Wilson, C.¹; Wiltshire, S.¹; Mills, P.¹; Howard-Griffin, R.¹

Source: Anaesthesia, Volume 52, Number 7, July 1997 , pp. 698-700(3)

Publisher: Blackwell Publishing

Key:

- Free Content

- New Content

- Subscribed Content

- Free Trial Content

Abstract:

Conditions for insertion of the laryngeal mask airway were assessed in 70 unpremedicated patients comparing the co-induction with midazolam-alfentanil-thiopentone and midazolam-alfentanil-propofol. Following pre-induction doses of midazolam 0.04 mg.kg⁻¹ and alfentanil 10 μg.kg⁻¹, patients received equipotent doses of either thiopentone or propofol. Whilst jaw relaxation and ease of laryngeal mask insertion were similar between the two groups, patients receiving propofol were less likely to have undesired responses requiring additional boluses of induction agent (p < 0.05). We conclude that, using these doses, propofol is superior to thiopentone for laryngeal mask airway insertion when using a co-induction technique.

Keywords: Equipment; laryngeal mask. Anaesthetics, intravenous; thiopentone, propofol. Analgesics; alfentanil. Hypnoticsbenzodiazepines; midazolam

Document Type: Research article

DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1997.az0130b.x

Affiliations: 1: Department of Anaesthesia, Ipswich Hospital, Heath Road, Ipswich, Suffolk IP4 5PD, UK

The full text electronic article is available for purchase. You will be able to download the full text electronic article after payment.

$50.39 plus tax Refund Policy