Comparison of propofol and thiopentone for induction of anaesthesia for elective caesarean section
- PMID: 2802124
- DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1989.tb09264.x
Comparison of propofol and thiopentone for induction of anaesthesia for elective caesarean section
Abstract
Propofol 2.5 mg/kg was compared with thiopentone 5 mg/kg as an induction agent for elective Caesarean section. Thirty-two healthy women with cephalopelvic disproportion were included in an open randomised study. The placental transfer of propofol was also studied in 10 other mothers given a single dose of 2.5 mg/kg. The induction characteristics and haemodynamic response to propofol and thiopentone were similar. Side effects were rare with both agents, but propofol caused more discomfort on injection compared to thiopentone. Recovery times were shorter after propofol as evaluated by time to orientation, recovery scoring after anaesthesia and measurements with the Maddox wing. Rapid placental transfer and significant fetal uptake were detected for propofol. There was no significant neonatal depression as assessed by Apgar scores and blood gas analyses. Propofol appears to be a suitable alternative to thiopentone as an induction agent for anaesthesia in elective Caesarean section.
Similar articles
-
A comparison between propofol and thiopentone as induction agents in obstetric anaesthesia.Anaesthesia. 1989 Sep;44(9):753-7. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1989.tb09263.x. Anaesthesia. 1989. PMID: 2802123 Clinical Trial.
-
Propofol for induction and maintenance of anaesthesia at caesarean section. A comparison with thiopentone/enflurane.Anaesthesia. 1991 Jan;46(1):20-3. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2044.1991.tb09307.x. Anaesthesia. 1991. PMID: 1996746 Clinical Trial.
-
The haemodynamic effects of propofol and thiopentone for induction of caesarean section.Anaesth Intensive Care. 1990 May;18(2):175-9. doi: 10.1177/0310057X9001800203. Anaesth Intensive Care. 1990. PMID: 2368889 Clinical Trial.
-
Hypnotic agents for induction of general anesthesia in cesarean section patients: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.J Clin Anesth. 2018 Aug;48:73-80. doi: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2018.04.010. Epub 2018 May 26. J Clin Anesth. 2018. PMID: 29778972
-
General anesthesia for caesarean section.Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015 Jun;28(3):240-6. doi: 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000185. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2015. PMID: 25827280 Review.
Cited by
-
Propofol emulsion reduces proliferative responses of lymphocytes from intensive care patients.Intensive Care Med. 1993;19(5):299-302. doi: 10.1007/BF01690552. Intensive Care Med. 1993. PMID: 8408941 Clinical Trial.
-
Risk-benefit assessment of anaesthetic agents in the puerperium.Drug Saf. 1991 Jul-Aug;6(4):285-301. doi: 10.2165/00002018-199106040-00006. Drug Saf. 1991. PMID: 1888444 Review.
-
Pharmacokinetic implications for the clinical use of propofol.Clin Pharmacokinet. 1989 Nov;17(5):308-26. doi: 10.2165/00003088-198917050-00002. Clin Pharmacokinet. 1989. PMID: 2684471 Review.
-
Propofol infusion anaesthesia for caesarean section.Can J Anaesth. 1990 Jul;37(5):514-20. doi: 10.1007/BF03006318. Can J Anaesth. 1990. PMID: 2197002 Clinical Trial.
-
Factors Associated with Apgar Score among Newborns Delivered by Cesarean Sections at Gandhi Memorial Hospital, Addis Ababa.J Pregnancy. 2020 Jan 6;2020:5986269. doi: 10.1155/2020/5986269. eCollection 2020. J Pregnancy. 2020. PMID: 32395344 Free PMC article.
Publication types
MeSH terms
Substances
LinkOut - more resources
Full Text Sources
Medical