Comparison of methohexital and propofol use in ambulatory procedures in oral and maxillofacial surgery.
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
; 66(10): 1996-2003, 2008 Oct.
Article
em En
| MEDLINE
| ID: mdl-18848094
PURPOSE: Short-acting anesthetic agents, such as propofol and methohexital, are commonly used for ambulatory procedures in the practices of oral and maxillofacial surgeons (OMS). This study compares the safety and anesthetic outcomes of propofol and methohexital. In addition, the study compares the safety and outcomes of these agents when administered either by an OMS who simultaneously provides anesthesia and performs the procedure (anesthetist/surgeon), or by a non-OMS provider of anesthesia (anesthesiologist or certified registered nurse anesthetist; CRNA) whose sole obligation is to provide anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a prospective study of anesthesia techniques used in an office-based ambulatory setting by OMS throughout the United States, in which either propofol or methohexital was used for sedation/anesthesia. The study variables included demographic information, anesthetic agent, adverse outcomes related to anesthesia, operative procedure, and provider of anesthesia. These variables were compared with the patient group that received a benzodiazepine/narcotics regimen for sedation (control group). Bivariate (contingency tables) and multivariate (logistic regression) analyses were conducted. P < or = .05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: The study included 47,710 patients who met the inclusion criteria: 26,147 (54.8%) patients were in the propofol group, 15,859 (33.2%) were in the methohexital group, and 5,704 (12.0%) were in the benzodiazepine group. Among all study patients, 333 (0.7%) had an adverse event. The most common complication was nausea and vomiting without aspiration. Of the patients in the propofol group, methohexital group, or benzodiazepine group, 0.4%, 1.1%, and 0.8% had an adverse event, respectively. The higher number of complications among patients in the methohexital group compared with patients in the other 2 groups was statistically significant. Of 26,147 patients in the propofol group, 23,799 (91.0%) received anesthesia from an anesthetist/surgeon (OMS), and 2,368 (9.1%) from an anesthesiologist or nurse anesthetist (non-OMS). A total of 109 patients (0.4%) had an adverse event. The majority of patients who received anesthesia from a non-OMS were in the propofol group (2,368 of 2,404 patients; 98.5%). There was no statistically significant difference in the occurrence of adverse outcomes when comparing patients in the propofol group who received anesthesia from an OMS with those who received anesthesia from a non-OMS (P = .24, bivariate analysis; P = .33, multivariate analysis). CONCLUSIONS: There is a statistically significant increase in adverse events related to methohexital compared with propofol or benzodiazepine/narcotics for anesthesia. Propofol appears to have the lowest risk for adverse events. There is no statistically significant difference in the number of adverse outcomes between the administration of propofol for ambulatory surgery by OMS as an anesthetist/surgeon and anesthesiologist/nurse anesthetist. It remains critical that our specialty maintains the highest standards, to provide safe anesthesia and to reduce adverse anesthetic events.
Texto completo:
1
Coleções:
01-internacional
Base de dados:
MEDLINE
Assunto principal:
Propofol
/
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Bucais
/
Procedimentos Cirúrgicos Ambulatórios
/
Anestesia Dentária
/
Anestesia Intravenosa
/
Metoexital
Tipo de estudo:
Clinical_trials
/
Etiology_studies
/
Guideline
/
Observational_studies
/
Prognostic_studies
/
Risk_factors_studies
Limite:
Adolescent
/
Adult
/
Aged
/
Aged80
/
Child
/
Child, preschool
/
Female
/
Humans
/
Infant
/
Male
Idioma:
En
Revista:
J Oral Maxillofac Surg
Ano de publicação:
2008
Tipo de documento:
Article
País de afiliação:
Estados Unidos
País de publicação:
Estados Unidos