Anaesthesia for daycase gynaecological laparoscopy: a survey of clinical practice in the United Kingdom

Simpson, R. B.; Russell, D.

doi:10.1046/j.1365-2044.1999.00654.x

Cited by 43 publications

(16 citation statements)

References 39 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Unclassified

Order By: Relevance

“…1 It has been used with PPV for abdominal surgery, including gynecologic laparoscopy, with minimal morbidity in lean patients who did not have gastroesophageal reflux (GER). [2][3][4][5] These studies suggest that the clinical performance of a properly sized and seated LMA-C is comparable to that of an ETT.…”

Section: Me Et Th Ho Od Ds S:mentioning

confidence: 99%

LMA-Classic™ and LMA-ProSeal™ are effective alternatives to endotracheal intubation for gynecologic laparoscopy

Maltby

Beriault

Watson

et al. 2003

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

P Pu ur rp po os se e: : To compare the laryngeal mask airways (LMA), LMAClassic™ (LMA-C) and LMA-ProSeal™ (PLMA) with the endotracheal tube (ETT) with respect to pulmonary ventilation and gastric distension during gynecologic laparoscopy. M Me et th ho od ds s: :We stratified 209 women, aged $ 18 yr, ASA physical status I-III, by body mass index as non-obese (# 30 kg·m -2 ) or obese (> 30 kg·m -2 ) and randomized them to LMA-C/PLMA or ETT groups for airway management. Anesthesia was induced with propofol, fentanyl and succinylcholine or rocuronium. In the LMA-C/PLMA group we used a size 4 LMA-C in non-obese patients and size 4 or 5 PLMA in obese patients. In the ETT group we used a cuffed 7.0 mm ETT in all patients. Anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane in nitrous oxide and 30-50% oxygen, fentanyl and neuromuscular blockade with mechanical ventilation (tidal volume 10 mL·kg -1 ). The staff surgeon, blinded to the type of airway, scored stomach size on an ordinal scale 0-10 at initial insertion of the laparoscope and immediately before the conclusion of the surgical procedure.R Re es su ul lt ts s: : There were no crossovers and no statistically significant differences between LMA-C/PLMA and ETT groups for SpO 2, P ET CO 2 or airway pressure before or during peritoneal insufflation in short (# 15 min) or long (> 15 min) periods of peritoneal inflation. Differences between groups with respect to stomach size changes during surgery were not statistically significant. C Co on nc cl lu us si io on n: : A correctly placed LMA-C or PLMA is as effective as an ETT for positive pressure ventilation without clinically important gastric distension in non-obese and obese patients. Objectif : Comparer les masques laryngés (ML), ML Classique™ (MLC) et le ML ProSeal™ (MLP), au tube endotrachéal (TET) quant à la ventilation pulmonaire et à la distension gastrique pendant la laparoscopie gynécologique. Méthode : Nous avons réparti 209 femmes, $ 18 ans, d'état physique ASA I-III, selon l'indice de masse corporelle, comme non obèses (# 30 kg·m -2 ) ou obèses (> 30 kg·m -2 ) et leur avons assigné au hasard le MLC/MLP ou le TET pour maintenir la perméabilité des voies aériennes. L'anesthésie a été induite avec du propofol, du fen-

show abstract

Section: Me Et Th Ho Od Ds S:mentioning

confidence: 99%

LMA-Classic™ and LMA-ProSeal™ are effective alternatives to endotracheal intubation for gynecologic laparoscopy

Maltby

Beriault

Watson

et al. 2003

Can J Anesth/J Can Anesth

104

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Despite the high incidence of PONV, inhalation anesthesia with isoflurane-N 2 O is frequently used in this patient group [2]. Although ondansetron has been shown to prevent PONV after inhalation anesthesia in gynecologic laparoscopy [1,3], one disadvantage of ondansetron use is the high cost of this antiemetic drug [4].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Efficacy and costs of 3 anesthetic regimens in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

Purhonen

Koski

Niskanen

et al. 2006

Journal of Clinical Anesthesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

“…There have been claims that the high acquisition costs of some anaesthetics are more than offset by their improved side effect profiles or by such swift recovery that further procedures can be added to the day's surgical workload, lowering the average cost per case [4]. Coupled with these claims, a large and contradictory evidence base for the optimal anaesthetic in day surgery has led to wide variation in anaesthetic practice [5,6]. There is no evidence to suggest that there are clinically or statistically significant differences in the long-term sequelae of the most widely used anaesthetic techniques and agents, apart from halothane-induced hepatitis [7].…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

Clinical and economic choices in anaesthesia for day surgery: A prospective randomised controlled trial

Elliott

Payne

Moore³

et al. 2003

Anaesthesia

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

SummaryWe compared the cost-effectiveness of general anaesthetic agents in adult and paediatric day surgery populations. We randomly assigned 1063 adult and 322 paediatric elective patients to one of four (adult) or two (paediatric) anaesthesia groups. Total costs were calculated from individual patient resource use to 7 days post discharge. Incremental cost-effectiveness ratios were expressed as cost per episode of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) avoided. In adults, variable secondary care costs were higher for propofol induction and propofol maintenance (propofol ⁄ propofol; p < 0.01) than other groups and lower in propofol induction and isoflurane maintenance (propofol ⁄ isoflurane; p < 0.01). In both studies, predischarge PONV was higher if sevoflurane ⁄ sevoflurane (p < 0.01) was used compared with use of propofol for induction. In both studies, there was no difference in postdischarge outcomes at Day 7. Sevoflurane ⁄ sevoflurane was more costly with higher PONV rates in both studies. In adults, the cost per extra episode of PONV avoided was £296 (propofol ⁄ propofol vs. propofol ⁄ sevoflurane) and £333 (propofol ⁄ sevoflurane vs. propofol ⁄ isoflurane).

show abstract

Anaesthesia for daycase gynaecological laparoscopy: a survey of clinical practice in the United Kingdom

Cited by 43 publications

References 39 publications

LMA-Classic™ and LMA-ProSeal™ are effective alternatives to endotracheal intubation for gynecologic laparoscopy

LMA-Classic™ and LMA-ProSeal™ are effective alternatives to endotracheal intubation for gynecologic laparoscopy

Efficacy and costs of 3 anesthetic regimens in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

Clinical and economic choices in anaesthesia for day surgery: A prospective randomised controlled trial

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About