Skip Navigation

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow E-Letters: Submit a response to the article
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me when E-letters are posted
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a friend
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Add to My Personal Archive
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Right arrow Search for citing articles in:
ISI Web of Science (7)
Right arrowRequest Permissions
Right arrow Disclaimer
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Stewart, A. V. G.
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, G. W. E.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Stewart, A. V. G.
Right arrow Articles by Mitchell, G. W. E.
Social Bookmarking
Add to CiteULike   Add to Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us  
What's this?

British Journal of Anaesthesia, 2001, Vol. 86, No. 4 570-572
© 2001 The Board of Management and Trustees of the British Journal of Anaesthesia

Small-dose selective spinal anaesthesia for short-duration outpatient gynaecological laparoscopy: recovery characteristics compared with propofol anaesthesia

A. V. G. Stewart1, H. Vaghadia*,1, L. Collins1 and G. W. E. Mitchell2

1Department of Anaesthesia, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada. 2Department of Gynaecology, Vancouver General Hospital, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, British Columbia, Canada*Corresponding author: Department of Anaesthesia, LSP2, Room 2449, Vancouver Hospital and Health Sciences Centre, 855 West 12th Avenue, Vancouver V5Z 1M9, British Columbia, Canada

A randomized controlled trial compared recovery characteristics after selective spinal anaesthesia (SSA) or propofol general anaesthesia (GA) for short-duration outpatient laparoscopic surgery. Forty women were randomized to receive either SSA (1% lidocaine 10 mg, sufentanil 10 µg and sterile water 1.8 ml) or GA (propofol and nitrous oxide 50% in oxygen). Compared with the GA group, times to leaving the operating room, performing a straight leg raise, performing deep knee-bends and achieving an Aldrete score >9 and the time in Phase II recovery were significantly shorter (P<0.05) in the SSA group.

Br J Anaesth 2001; 86: 570–2


Add to CiteULike CiteULike   Add to Connotea Connotea   Add to Del.icio.us Del.icio.us    What's this?


This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
J. de Santiago, J. Santos-Yglesias, J. Giron, F. Montes de Oca, A. Jimenez, and P. Diaz
Low-Dose 3 mg Levobupivacaine Plus 10 {micro}g Fentanyl Selective Spinal Anesthesia for Gynecological Outpatient Laparoscopy
Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2009; 109(5): 1456 - 1461.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
S. S. Liu, W. M. Strodtbeck, J. M. Richman, and C. L. Wu
A Comparison of Regional Versus General Anesthesia for Ambulatory Anesthesia: A Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials
Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2005; 101(6): 1634 - 1642.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
P. H. Lennox, C. Chilvers, and H. Vaghadia
Selective Spinal Anesthesia Versus Desflurane Anesthesia in Short Duration Outpatient Gynecological Laparoscopy: A Pharmacoeconomic Comparison
Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2002; 94(3): 565 - 568.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

Home page
 Anesth. Analg.Home page
P. H. Lennox, H. Vaghadia, C. Henderson, L. Martin, and G. W. E. Mitchell
Small-Dose Selective Spinal Anesthesia for Short-Duration Outpatient Laparoscopy: Recovery Characteristics Compared with Desflurane Anesthesia
Anesth. Analg., February 1, 2002; 94(2): 346 - 350.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Disclaimer: Please note that abstracts for content published before 1996 were created through digital scanning and may therefore not exactly replicate the text of the original print issues. All efforts have been made to ensure accuracy, but the Publisher will not be held responsible for any remaining inaccuracies. If you require any further clarification, please contact our Customer Services Department.