Comparison of Inhalational Vital Capacity Induction with Sevoflurane to Intravenous Induction with Propofol for Insertion of Laryngeal Mask Airway in Adults: A Randomized Study.

BACKGROUND

Since the development of laryngeal mask airway (LMA) by Dr. Brain, it is extensively used for airway management; satisfactory insertion of LMA requires administration of an induction agent and suppression of airway reflexes. Among intravenous agents, propofol has been the drug of choice in view of better safety profile, relaxation and depression of upper airway reflexes. Sevoflurane on the other hand, with pleasant odor, nonirritating to the airways and with bronchodilator property are best among the volatile induction agents. While it is true both propofol and sevoflurane have their merits, still both have certain limitations. We aimed to compare the quality and ease of LMA insertion, hemodynamic changes, and complications with inhalation of 8% sevoflurane vital capacity breath and propofol.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

A prospective randomized study of 100 American Society of Anaesthesiologists' Class I and II patients was conducted equal distribution among two groups with 50 each undergoing gynecological procedures under general anesthesia. Group received injection propofol and Group S received sevoflurane. At the end point of induction, the LMA insertion was attempted. Scoring systems were used to grade the conditions for insertion of the LMA. Induction characteristics, hemodynamic changes, and complications were assessed.

RESULTS

Sevoflurane took a longer time for induction and jaw relaxation than propofol. There was no statistically significant difference between the two groups, with respect to LMA insertion time, and conditions. Apnea time was more in propofol group. Fall in heart rate and mean blood pressure was more in propofol.

CONCLUSION

Propofol is associated with faster induction while sevoflurane is associated with good hemodynamic stability.