British journal of anaesthesia
-
Sedation may influence the responses of some experimental pain models used to test analgesic efficacy. In this study we compared the effects of a sedative (propofol) and analgesic (alfentanil) on: nociceptive reflex to single and repeated electrical stimulations; mechanical pressure pain; and evoked potentials elicited by nociceptive (electrical and laser) and non-nociceptive (acoustical) stimulation. We studied 12 healthy volunteers with two subanaesthetic concentrations of propofol and two analgesic concentrations of alfentanil. ⋯ The pressure pain tolerance thresholds were increased significantly by alfentanil, whereas propofol significantly decreased the thresholds (hyperalgesia). Propofol and alfentanil induced similar reductions in the amplitudes of the evoked potentials elicited by nociceptive (electrical and laser) and non-nociceptive (acoustical) stimulation, whereas only alfentanil reduced the perceived pain to nociceptive stimulations. We have shown that sedation can influence both the psychophysical and electrophysiological responses of some experimental pain tests used to measure analgesic efficacy, and that propofol in subhypnotic doses, has no analgesic effect on painful electrical and heat stimulations, but has a hyperalgesic effect on mechanical pressure pain.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Comparison of propofol and a propofol-methohexitone mixture for induction of day-case anaesthesia.
We studied 99 patients undergoing day-case urological surgery, allocated randomly to receive a sleep dose of either 1% propofol or a mixture of equal volumes of 1% propofol and 0.5% methohexitone, and thereafter a standardized anaesthetic. With the exception of minor differences in intraoperative heart rate there were no significant differences between the two groups in induction properties and complications, intraoperative variables, rate of recovery or postoperative sequelae.
-
Clinical Trial
ASA classification and perioperative variables as predictors of postoperative outcome.
In a prospective study of 6301 surgical patients in a university hospital, we examined the strength of association between ASA physical status classification and perioperative risk factors, and postoperative outcome, using both univariate analysis and calculation of the odds ratio of the risk of developing a postoperative complication by means of a logistic regression model. Univariate analysis showed a significant correlation (P < 0.05) between ASA class and perioperative variables (intraoperative blood loss, duration of postoperative ventilation and duration of intensive care stay), postoperative complications and mortality rate. ⋯ Estimating the increased risk odds ratio for single variables, we found that the risk of complication was influenced mainly by ASA class IV (risk odds ratio = 4.2) and ASA class III (risk odds ratio = 2.2). We conclude that ASA physical status classification was a predictor of postoperative outcome.