Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

G Van Norman

Publications and source records attributed to G Van Norman.

3 recordsLinked to original sources

Optimal propofol-alfentanil combinations for supplementing nitrous oxide for outpatient surgery.

BACKGROUND: The combination of propofol and alfentanil with nitrous oxide provides balanced anesthesia with rapid recovery and minimal emetic side effects. The object of this study was to compare recovery parameters at varying proportions of propofol and alfentanil, and to determine the dosing rate and plasma concentration of propofol necessary to supplement nitrous oxide in the presence of varying concentrations of alfentanil METHODS: Forty-eight patients were anesthetized with nitrous oxide, targeted manual infusions of alfentanil (target plasma concentrations of 0, 50, 100, and 150 ng/ml), and propofol at rates that were varied up or down by 25% depending on the response (movement/no movement) of the preceding patient (at the same alfentanil target concentrations) to ulnar-nerve stimulation. The minimum concentrations of propofol and alfentanil required to prevent movement in 50% of patients (EC50) was determined by logistic regression. Speed of emergence and recovery of cognitive function, time to discharge, and incidence of side effects were compared for four different combinations of propofol and alfentanil with nitrous oxide. RESULTS: The EC50 for propofol alone with nitrous oxide was 6.1 microg/ml. AlfentaniL at concentrations of 41+/-17 (SD), 113+/-54, and 130+/-61 ng/mL reduced the EC50 of propofol to 3.3, 2.3, and 2.2 microg/ml, respectively, and decreased emergence time (eye opening) to 8.1, 4.9, and 3.4 min, compared with 24.3 min for propofol alone. Side effects did not differ between groups. CONCLUSIONS: The authors conclude that there is a synergistic effect between propofol and alfentanil, and that combining alfentanil with propofol is associated with faster early recovery.

Adolescent↗

Propofol versus isoflurane for endoscopic sinus surgery.

PURPOSE: A previous retrospective study reported that propofol anesthesia decreased bleeding during endoscopic sinus surgery compared with isoflurane. We performed a prospective study to compare the effects of propofol versus isoflurane on measured blood loss and the surgeon's subjective assessment of operating conditions during endoscopic sinus surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: After receiving institutional review board approval and written informed consent, 56 patients undergoing endoscopic sinus surgery were randomly assigned to receive propofol (n = 30) or isoflurane (n = 26) supplemented with nitrous oxide-oxygen and alfentanil. Blood loss was calculated from the hemoglobin concentration in suction canisters. One surgeon, who was blinded to the anesthetic agent, performed every procedure and assessed bleeding as follows: 1, no bleeding; 2, modest bleeding; 3, bleeding interfering with operating conditions and cause for an agent switch; and 4, intolerable bleeding requiring a change in surgical plan. Results were compared in the two anesthetic groups using chi-squared test, unpaired t-test, Mann-Whitney Utest, and a permutation test. A P of .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Mean bleeding scores were less over time (P = .02) with propofol anesthesia, particularly in surgery in the ethmoid and sphenoid sinuses (P = .03), and the proportion of patients with a mean score >2 was less in the propofol group (30% v 54%; P = .033). Time until discharge to home or to a limited stay in a hospital bed was also less in the propofol group (183 v 243 minutes; P = .019). CONCLUSION: In our study, surgical blood loss was the same for both anesthetic agents overall, but propofol appeared to offer an advantage in terms of subjective improvement in operating conditions, particularly in the ethmoid and sphenoid sinuses.

Adult↗