• M Zaballos, A Reyes, J Etulain, C Monteserín, M Rodríguez, and E Velasco.
• Servicio de Anestesiología, Reanimación y Terapéutica del Dolor, Hospital Universitario Gregorio Marañón, Madrid, España; Universidad Complutense de Madrid, Madrid, España. Electronic address: mati@plagaro.net.
• Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim (Engl Ed). 2018 Feb 1; 65 (2): 96-102.

ObjectiveRecently, the evaluation of postoperative results has focused on the opinion of the patient as of great relevance. Our objective was to evaluate the quality of recovery by questionnaire (QoR-15) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy, comparing desflurane versus a total intravenous technique with propofol (TIVA). A non-inferiority hypothesis was proposed between both techniques.Material And MethodsProspective longitudinal cohort study in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy in which multimodal management was applied including low pneumoperitoneum pressures, deep neuromuscular block and pain prevention strategy and PONV. Anaesthesia maintenance was performed with either desflurane or propofol at the discretion of the anaesthesiologist. QoR-15 was evaluated pre-and 24hours after surgery.ResultsSixty-one patients were evaluated: 29 in the desflurane group and 32 in the TIVA group with no differences in demographic parameters, ASA grade, and preoperative QoR-15 questionnaire. The duration of the intervention was superior in TIVA group, 55 ± 15 vs. 45 ± 9min in desflurane group; p =.05. The desflurane group received more fentanyl than the TIVA group: 200 ± 65 vs. 113 ± 38μg; p =.05. No differences in pain, PONV or time of stay between groups. QoR-15 at 24h decreased 7% relative to baseline, with no differences between groups.ConclusionsThe quality of recovery evaluated by the patient was as favourable in the patients of the desflurane group as in those of the TIVA group in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy as outpatients.Copyright © 2017 Sociedad Española de Anestesiología, Reanimación y Terapéutica del Dolor. Publicado por Elsevier España, S.L.U. All rights reserved.

34 keywords...

hide…