- 【Updated on May 12, 2025】 Integration of CiNii Dissertations and CiNii Books into CiNii Research
- Trial version of CiNii Research Knowledge Graph Search feature is available on CiNii Labs
- Suspension and deletion of data provided by Nikkei BP
- Regarding the recording of “Research Data” and “Evidence Data”
Safety and Efficacy of Target Controlled Infusion (Diprifusor™) vs Manually Controlled Infusion of Propofol for Anaesthesia
-
- J. Hunt-Smith
- Departments of Anaesthesia, Royal Melbourne and Westmead Hospitals, and North Shore and Auckland Hospitals, New Zealand
-
- A. Donaghy
- Departments of Anaesthesia, Royal Melbourne and Westmead Hospitals, and North Shore and Auckland Hospitals, New Zealand
-
- K. Leslie
- Departments of Anaesthesia, Royal Melbourne and Westmead Hospitals, and North Shore and Auckland Hospitals, New Zealand
-
- M. Kluger
- Departments of Anaesthesia, Royal Melbourne and Westmead Hospitals, and North Shore and Auckland Hospitals, New Zealand
-
- K. Gunn
- Departments of Anaesthesia, Royal Melbourne and Westmead Hospitals, and North Shore and Auckland Hospitals, New Zealand
-
- N. Warwick
- Departments of Anaesthesia, Royal Melbourne and Westmead Hospitals, and North Shore and Auckland Hospitals, New Zealand
Search this article
Description
<jats:p> In this multi-centre, randomized trial, we compared the safety and efficacy of Diprifusor™ TCI with manually controlled infusion (MCI) of propofol for anaesthesia. With approval, 123 adult male and female patients were studied. Firstly, each investigator anaesthetized five patients to familiarize themselves with Diprifusor™ TCI. In Stage 2, 98 patients were randomized to receive propofol-based anaesthesia via TCI or MCI. Adjuvant drugs, airway management and monitoring were managed at the discretion of the anaesthetist. Results are presented as mean (SD). Induction times were significantly longer [67 (32) vs 54 (17)s] and induction doses were significantly lower [14 (5) vs 16 (4) ml] in the TCI vs the MCI group. Recovery times and total doses were not significantly different. There were statistically but not clinically significant differences in mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate. Quality of anaesthesia and ease of control of anaesthesia were similar. We conclude that Diprifusor™ TCI and MCI are similar in terms of safety and efficacy. </jats:p>
Journal
-
- Anaesthesia and Intensive Care
-
Anaesthesia and Intensive Care 27 (3), 260-264, 1999-06
SAGE Publications
- Tweet
Details 詳細情報について
-
- CRID
- 1360294647925875712
-
- ISSN
- 14480271
- 0310057X
-
- Data Source
-
- Crossref