Comparison of propofol and thiopentone for induction of anaesthesia for elective Caesarean section

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.

[1]  J. Kanto,et al.  Propofol as an induction agent in children: pain on injection and pharmacokinetics , 1989, Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica.

[2]  J. Kanto,et al.  Anaesthesia for cardioversion: A comparison of propofol and thiopentone , 1988, Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthesie.

[3]  B. Pizer,et al.  Neonatal serum cortisol suppression by etomidate compared with thiopentone, for elective caesarean section. , 1988, European journal of anaesthesiology.

[4]  J. Downing,et al.  Comparison of Midazolam and Thiopental for Rapid Sequence Anesthetic Induction for Elective Cesarean Section , 1987, Anesthesia and analgesia.

[5]  M. White,et al.  Pharmacokinetics of propofol in female patients. Studies using single bolus injections. , 1987, British journal of anaesthesia.

[6]  T. Manner,et al.  Use of simple tests to determine the residual effects of the analgesic component of balanced anaesthesia. , 1987, British journal of anaesthesia.

[7]  N. Redfern,et al.  Incremental propofol for short procedures. , 1985, British journal of anaesthesia.

[8]  J. Brooker,et al.  Effect of lignocaine on pain caused by propofol injection , 1985, Anaesthesia.

[9]  A. Crisp.  Gastrointestinal disturbance in anorexia nervosa. , 1985, Postgraduate medical journal.

[10]  Stark Rd,et al.  A review of the safety and tolerance of propofol ('Diprivan'). , 1985 .

[11]  J. Dundee.  Intravenous anaesthesia and the need for new agents. , 1985, Postgraduate medical journal.

[12]  J. Glen,et al.  A review of the safety and tolerance of propofol ('Diprivan'). , 1985, Postgraduate medical journal.

[13]  J. Sear,et al.  SUPPRESSION BY ETOMIDATE OF NORMAL CORTISOL RESPONSE TO ANAESTHESIA AND SURGERY , 1983, The Lancet.

[14]  I. Ledingham,et al.  INFLUENCE OF SEDATION ON MORTALITY IN CRITICALLY ILL MULTIPLE TRAUMA PATIENTS , 1983, The Lancet.

[15]  M. Bonati,et al.  Clinical Pharmacokinetics of Cerebrospinal Fluid , 1982, Clinical pharmacokinetics.

[16]  C Maxwell,et al.  Sensitivity and accuracy of the visual analogue scale: a psycho-physical classroom experiment. , 1978, British journal of clinical pharmacology.

[17]  J. G. Hannington-Kiff.  Measurement of Recovery from Outpatient General Anaesthesia with a Simple Ocular Test , 1970, British medical journal.

[18]  L. C. Mark,et al.  Intravenous Thiobarbiturate Anesthesia for Cesarean Section , 1969, Anesthesiology.

[19]  Seymour Geisser,et al.  Statistical Principles in Experimental Design , 1963 .

[20]  B. Sellick.  Cricoid pressure to control regurgitation of stomach contents during induction of anaesthesia. , 1961, The Lancet.