Search PubMed⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

V Dyrberg

Publications and source records attributed to V Dyrberg.

7 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1990

Comparison of induction with and first hour of recovery from brief propofol and methohexital anesthesia.

Anesthesia and recovery during the first hour after propofol and methohexital anesthesia for termination of pregnancy, lasting about 12 min, were compared, the latter in a double-blind manner by means of psychomotor tests (coin counting and continuous auditory reaction time). Muscle movements and hiccups were seen significantly more frequently during methohexital inductions. No differences were seen regarding pain at the site of injection or apnea between the groups. At 15 min after the last dose of anesthetic, recovery after methohexital was ahead of that after propofol, but after 1 h, psychomotor performance was better in the propofol group. Side-effects during recovery were few, and incidences did not differ significantly. Although the difference in reaction time test was significant, it was hardly large enough to be of any clinical importance. Both drugs are useful for brief outpatient anesthesia, but smoother induction gives propofol an edge over methohexital.

Abortion, Induced↗
PubMed1989

Induction and recovery characteristics of propofol, thiopental and etomidate.

Propofol, thiopental and etomidate, with 20 patients in each group, were compared for anesthesia of short duration in women undergoing termination of pregnancy, with respect to: 1: pain on injection (equally often after propofol and etomidate, but more rarely after thiopental); 2: apnea following induction (no difference); 3: involuntary muscular movements more frequent after etomidate); 4: blood pressure (larger drop after propofol); 5: heart rate (greater increase after thiopental); 6: time to eye opening on command (longer after propofol); 7: Steward score on eye opening (no difference); 8: coin counting after 15, 30 and 60 min (performance better after propofol at 15 and 30 min, producing even shorter times than preoperatively at 60 min); 9: reaction time after 15, 30 and 60 min (performance better after propofol, producing even shorter times than preoperatively at 60 min. It is concluded that the faster recovery gives propofol an advantage over thiopental and etomidate in outpatient anesthesia.

Abortion, Induced↗
PubMed1986

Anaesthesia for colonoscopy. An examination of the anaesthesia as an element of risk at colonoscopy.

The importance of anaesthesia as an element of risk at colonoscopy has been examined retrospectively over a 10-year period from 1975 to 1984. The colonoscopic examinations were made by surgical gastroenterologists and anaesthesiologists working in cooperation. In 1242 cases the patients received diazepam/fentanyl anaesthesia during the colonoscopy (Group I) and in 126 cases they received general anaesthesia (Group II). The incidence of perforations of the large bowel in Group I was 0.8% (95% confidence limits: 0.4-1.5%) and in Group II 0.0% (95% confidence limits: 0.0-2.9%). Statistically the difference is not significant (P = 0.38). The groups were comparable with a view to the patients' age, weight, the duration of the colonoscopy and the number of times that polypectomy had been performed. All anaesthesia was administered by staff qualified by training and experience to administer anaesthesia, and did not cause any complications. However, four patients had vasovagal reflexes due to manipulation of the colonoscope. The dosing in the patients in Group I averaged: diazepam as premedication 9.2 mg, intravenous diazepam 12.4 mg, intravenous fentanyl 0.14 mg, and the duration of the colonoscopy was 36.5 min. The medication and the duration of the colonoscopy did not vary significantly in the patients with perforation of the large bowel. Our conclusion is that diazepam/fentanyl anaesthesia, administered by experienced staff, is harmless, and that general anaesthesia for colonoscopy did not involve an increased risk of perforation of the large bowel.

Aged↗