Comparison of surgical conditions during propofol or desflurane anesthesia for endoscopic sinus surgery

• Main Authors: Kwangrae Cho, Jin Young Lee, Sung Kuk Park, Soon Ho Cheong, Kun Moo Lee, Se Hun Lim, Jeong Han Lee, Myoung-Hun Kim, Hyun-Tae Kim, Jung-Kyu Park
• Format: Article
• Language: English
• Published: Korean Society of Anesthesiologists 2012-10-01
• Series: Korean Journal of Anesthesiology
• Subjects: desflurane; propofol; remifentanil; sinusitis
• Online Access: http://ekja.org/upload/pdf/kjae-63-302.pdf
• ISSN: 2005-6419; 2005-7563

BackgroundReduction of intraoperative bleeding is necessary to achieve the ideal surgical field for the endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). Intraoperative intra nasal bleeding is influenced by various anesthetics. This study compared surgical field condition between propofol/remifentanil (PR) based anesthesia and desflurane/remifentanil (DR) based anesthesia.MethodsAmerican Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class I or II patients undergoing ESS were randomly assigned to group PR (n = 36) or group DR (n = 32). The extent of the preoperative surgical lesion was classified as high (> 12) and low (≤ 12) Lund-Mackay (LM) scores according to the computed tomography findings. The target mean blood pressure was maintained at 70-80 mmHg. Only one surgeon was involved in rating the visibility of the surgical field on a numeric rating scale (NRS) every 10 minutes.ResultsThere was a different surgical field grade from PR to DR. The mean (SD) surgical field score of NRS for the PR and DR was 2.3 (0.57) and 2.7 (0.67), respectively (P = 0.006). Especially in the high-LM score patients, the mean (SD) of surgical field score for the PR and DR was 2.4 (0.67) and 3.0 (0.63), respectively (P = 0.012).ConclusionsIn the high-LM score patients, PR based anesthesia resulted in better surgical field condition for ESS than DR based anesthesia. In ESS, PR based anesthesia is considered to be helpful.