Dr. Md Sirajul Islam, Dr. Mohammad Mostafizur Rahaman, Dr. Md Abdus Salam
Propofol, marketed as Diprivan among other names, is a short-acting medication that results in a decreased level of consciousness and lack of memory for events. Its uses include the starting and maintenance of general anesthesia, sedation for mechanically ventilated adults, and procedural sedation. Sevoflurane is a sweet-smelling, nonflammable, highly fluorinated methyl isopropyl ether used as an inhalational anaesthetic for induction and maintenance of general anesthesia. We have a very few comparative data regarding these two anaesthetic agents. The aim of this study was to compare between ‘total intravenous anesthesia with propofol’ and ‘sevoflurane inhalation anesthesia on postoperative complications. This retrospective study was conducted in Pabna Medical College Hospital, Pabna, Bangladesh during the period from January 2018 to December 2018. In total 94 patients who had ENT surgeries previously were finalized as the total study population. Total patients were divided into 2 groups. In Group I there were 43 patients to whom total intravenous anesthesia with propofol (TIVA) had been used and in Group II there were 51 patients to whom sevoflurane inhalation anesthesia (SIA) had been used. Postoperative complications and recovery period were determined as tachycardia, bradycardia, hypertension, hypotension, recovery time, additional analgesia and nausea-vomiting. For the patients who had surgeries under TIVA, the additional analgesia and nausea-vomiting incidences were found as 23.26% and 20.93% respectively and the recovery period was 12 minutes. On the other hand, for the patients who had surgeries under SIA, the additional analgesia and nausea-vomiting incidences were found as 19.61% and 33.33% respectively and the recovery period was 8 minutes. Due to retrospective nature of this study, results were depended on the records of patient's files only and it was a limitation of this study. According to the analysis of complications regarding two different procedures we found near about the similar performance. Although there was a difference between the lengths of recovery time but that doesn’t a big issue to differ among the procedures. As it was a single centered study with some unavoidable limitations, to get more specific information we would like to recommend for conducting more studies in several places.
Pages: 01-04 | 1130 Views 421 Downloads