OBJECTIVE:In ambulatory anaesthesia the time required to recover from cognitive impairment should be as short as possible. The aim of this study was to compare the early cognitive recovery after remifentanil/propofol (R/P) and sevoflurane/fentanyl (S/F) anaesthesia.METHODS:Sixty patients scheduled for elective gynaecological laparoscopy and 24 female volunteers tested for the assessment of learning effects were investigated. After praemedication with midazolam anaesthesia was induced with propofol, atracurium and either 1 microgram/kg fentanyl or 1 microgram/kg remifentanil. For maintenance 0.25 microgram/kg/min remifentanil and 0.6 mg/kg/min propofol (R/P) or 1.7 vol% sevoflurane (S/F) were given. Both groups were ventilated with 30% oxygen in air and received metamizol for postoperative analgesia. Verbal Learning Test, Stroop Colour and Word Interference Test, Digit Symbol Substitution Test and Four Boxes Test were performed the day before surgery and 30 min, 1 h, 2 h and 4 h after termination of anaesthesia.RESULTS:For remifentanil/propofol cognitive function was still impaired 2 h (Verbal Learning) and 4 h (Stroop, Digit Symbol Substitution and Four Boxes Test) after termination of anaesthesia. After sevoflurane/fentanyl anaesthesia cognitive impairment lasted the same duration in Four Boxes Test, but shorter in Stroop and Digit Symbol Substitution and could not be found in Verbal Learning Test.CONCLUSION:The duration of cognitive impairment in the early postoperative period differed by the test procedures and the anaesthetic procedures used in this investigation. Recovery appeared to be faster after sevoflurane/fentanyl than after remifentanil/propofol at least in aspects of cognitive function.

OBJECTIVE:This study was designed to investigate the differences between TIVA with propofol/remifentanil (P/R) and balanced anaesthesia with sevoflurane/fentanyl (S/F) in gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Emphasis was put on haemodynamic reaction, recovery profile, postoperative side effects and patient satisfaction.METHODS:Sixty patients were randomly assigned to receive either total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol/remifentanil or anaesthesia with sevoflurane/fentanyl. After premedication (midazolam) and induction of anesthesia (propofol, atracurium) in both groups, either 1 microgram/kg fentanyl (S/F) or 1 microgram/kg remifentanil (P/R) was injected. Anaesthesia was maintained with 0.5 microgram/kg/min remifentanil (reduced to 50% after 5 min) and 0.06 microgram/kg/min propofol (P/R) or 1.7 vol % sevoflurane (S/F). Both groups were mechanically ventilated with 30% oxygen in air. The administration of sevoflurane and the infusion of the anaesthetics were adjusted to maintain a surgical depth of anaesthesia. For postoperative analgesia 1 g paracetamol was administered rectally prior to surgery. After recovery 20 mg/kg metamizol was given intravenously. At the end of surgery the anaesthetics were discontinued and haemodynamics, early emergence from anaesthesia, pain level, frequency of analgesic demand, incidence of PONV, shivering and patient satisfaction were assessed. Parameters were recorded for 24 h postoperatively.RESULTS:Recovery time after propofol-remifentanil anaesthesia was significantly shorter than after administration of sevoflurane and fentanyl (spontaneous ventilation 4.1 vs. 6.3 min, extubation 4.3 vs. 9.3 min, eye opening 4.4 vs 8.2 min, stating name 5.3 vs. 13.2 min, stating date of birth 5.4 vs. 13.3 min). There were no significant differences between the groups in shivering, pain score, analgesic demand and PONV. The S/F group responded to tracheal intubation with significantly higher blood pressure than the P/R group. During maintenance of anaesthesia heart rate in patients with S/F was significantly higher (P/R:HR max +16/-10; S/F:HR max +24/-0.). Measured on a scale (S/F 62%).CONCLUSION:Compared with patients given balanced anaesthesia with sevoflurane and fentanyl, TIVA with propofol and remifentanil proved to be particularly suited for gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. Its major advantages are haemodynamic stability, significantly shorter times of emergence, and the exceptional acceptance by the patients.