1999AnaesthesiaRequires access

Comparison of sevoflurane and propofol with rocuronium for modified rapid‐sequence induction of anaesthesia

D Lowry, M T Carroll, R. K. Mirakhur, Agnes Hayes, David C. Hughes, R OʼHare

Open publisher page 32 citations

Abstract

We compared the use of sevoflurane and propofol with three different doses of rocuronium for modified rapid-sequence induction of anaesthesia. One hundred and forty adult patients were randomly allocated to have a rapid-sequence intravenous induction with propofol 2-3 mg.kg-1 (group P) or an inhalational induction with sevoflurane 8% in oxygen, using a vital capacity technique (group S). Following loss of the eyelash reflex, cricoid pressure was applied and 20 patients in each group were administered rocuronium 0.3 (groups P/0.3 and S/0.3), 0.45 (groups P/0.45 and S/0.45) or 0.6 (groups P/0.6 and S/0.6) mg.kg-1. An additional 10 patients in each group received only saline placebo in place of the muscle relaxant (groups P/Saline and S/Saline). Laryngoscopy was started 60 s later and intubating conditions evaluated by a blinded anaesthetist according to a standard scoring system. Intubating conditions were acceptable in one patient and no patient, respectively, following induction with sevoflurane and propofol without the muscle relaxant. The conditions were acceptable in 30, 55 and 90% of subjects with sevoflurane induction, and in 45, 80 and 90% of subjects with propofol induction following 0.3, 0.45 and 0.6 mg.kg-1 of rocuronium, respectively (no significant difference for each dose of rocuronium). The present study shows that intubating conditions during a rapid-sequence induction using rocuronium 0.6 mg.kg-1 following induction of anaesthesia with sevoflurane or propofol are similar.

About this research paper

What this paper is about

We compared the use of sevoflurane and propofol with three different doses of rocuronium for modified rapid-sequence induction of anaesthesia. One hundred and forty adult patients were randomly allocated to have a rapid-sequence intravenous induction with propofol 2-3 mg.kg-1 (group P) or an inhalational induction with sevoflurane 8% in oxygen, using a vital capacity technique (group S). Following loss of the eyelash reflex, cricoid pressure was applied and 20 patients in each group were administered rocuronium 0.3 (groups P/0.3 and S/0.3), 0.45 (groups P/0.45 and S/0.45) or 0.6 (groups P/0.6 and S/0.6) mg.kg-1. An additional 10 patients in each group received only saline placebo in place of the muscle relaxant (groups P/Saline and S/Saline). Laryngoscopy was started 60 s later and intubating conditions evaluated by a blinded anaesthetist according to a standard scoring system. Intubating conditions were acceptable in one patient and no patient, respectively, following induction with sevoflurane and propofol without the muscle relaxant. The conditions were acceptable in 30, 55 and 90% of subjects with sevoflurane induction, and in 45, 80 and 90% of subjects with propofol induction following 0.3, 0.45 and 0.6 mg.kg-1 of rocuronium, respectively (no significant difference for each dose of rocuronium). The present study shows that intubating conditions during a rapid-sequence induction using rocuronium 0.6 mg.kg-1 following induction of anaesthesia with sevoflurane or propofol are similar.

Why it matters

OpenAlex reports 32 citations for this work. Citation counts describe recorded attention and do not establish research quality.

Key contribution

A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.

Method / approach

Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Main findings

Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Limitations

Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Applications

Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.

Available abstract

We compared the use of sevoflurane and propofol with three different doses of rocuronium for modified rapid-sequence induction of anaesthesia. One hundred and forty adult patients were randomly allocated to have a rapid-sequence intravenous induction with propofol 2-3 mg.kg-1 (group P) or an inhalational induction with sevoflurane 8% in oxygen, using a vital capacity technique (group S). Following loss of the eyelash reflex, cricoid pressure was applied and 20 patients in each group were administered rocuronium 0.3 (groups P/0.3 and S/0.3), 0.45 (groups P/0.45 and S/0.45) or 0.6 (groups P/0.6 and S/0.6) mg.kg-1. An additional 10 patients in each group received only saline placebo in place of the muscle relaxant (groups P/Saline and S/Saline). Laryngoscopy was started 60 s later and intubating conditions evaluated by a blinded anaesthetist according to a standard scoring system. Intubating conditions were acceptable in one patient and no patient, respectively, following induction with sevoflurane and propofol without the muscle relaxant. The conditions were acceptable in 30, 55 and 90% of subjects with sevoflurane induction, and in 45, 80 and 90% of subjects with propofol induction following 0.3, 0.45 and 0.6 mg.kg-1 of rocuronium, respectively (no significant difference for each dose of rocuronium). The present study shows that intubating conditions during a rapid-sequence induction using rocuronium 0.6 mg.kg-1 following induction of anaesthesia with sevoflurane or propofol are similar.

Key concepts: Rocuronium, Propofol, Medicine, Sevoflurane, Rapid sequence induction, Anesthesia, Saline, Rocuronium Bromide

Related papers

Back to paper searchBrowse research topicsOriginal source
Comparison of sevoflurane and propofol with rocuronium for modified rapid‐sequence induction of anaesthesia — Research Paper | ScholarLens