1988
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1988.tb09059.x
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and alfentanil by computer‐assisted infusion

Abstract: SummaryThe combination of propofol and alfentanil was administered to 20 0.34). The plasma level of alfentanil was 285 nglml ( S D 72) during major noxious stimulation and 148 nglml ( S D 56) during riiinor stimulation. The computer-assisted infusions showed a measuredlpredicted ratio of I .01 ( S D

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1

Citation Types

4
52
0
7

Year Published

1990
1990
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 170 publications
(63 citation statements)
references
References 10 publications
4
52
0
7
Order By: Relevance
“…Rapid and smooth recovery from propofol anesthesia is reported in man [12,22,23], goats [5], sheep [13] and horses [15][16][17][18]. Time required for recovery in this study approximated to that of the horse administered xylazine 1.0 mg/kg followed by propofol 2.0 mg/kg in other study [16], and recovery was calm and smooth like other reports.…”
supporting
confidence: 74%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Rapid and smooth recovery from propofol anesthesia is reported in man [12,22,23], goats [5], sheep [13] and horses [15][16][17][18]. Time required for recovery in this study approximated to that of the horse administered xylazine 1.0 mg/kg followed by propofol 2.0 mg/kg in other study [16], and recovery was calm and smooth like other reports.…”
supporting
confidence: 74%
“…The intravenous anesthetic, propofol (2,6-diisopropylphenol) has been widely used for total intravenous anesthesia of human beings [12,20,22] and some animals [9,11,13]. The drug is characterized by short duration of action with little cumulative effects, easiness of anesthetic depth control and rapid recovery [4,12].…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Therefore, target concentrations will not be precisely attained in each subject. A mean variation of measured to target concentration of 20 to 30% is expected with a CACI system (Glass et al 1990;Shafer et al 1990;Schuttler et al 1988). The mean performance error and the mean absolute performance error in this study were less than 30%.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 47%
“…Thus, use of data from this study has allowed a comprehensive evaluation of the predictive performance of three models in this study. It has been suggested that for a TCI system to be clinically acceptable, MDPE should be no greater than 10-20%, MDAPE should be in the region of 20-30% and maximal variation should not exceed 50-60% [12]. Based on these criteria, and the ranges observed in Table 3, only the White model meets all three requirements.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%