Comparison of propofol and methohexital for deep sedation.

Author(s): Meyers CJ, Eisig SB, Kraut RA

Affiliation(s): Montefiore Medical Center/Albert Einstein College of Medicine, Bronx, NY 10467-2490.

Publication date & source: 1994-05, J Oral Maxillofac Surg., 52(5):448-52

Publication type: Clinical Trial; Randomized Controlled Trial

The purpose of this investigation was to compare two sedation techniques for use in outpatient third molar surgery. Forty ASA class I or II volunteers were randomly allocated to two groups. All subjects received supplemental oxygen via a nasal hood, sublimaze (.0007 mg/kg [corrected] intravenous bolus), and midazolam (.5 mg/min) titrated to effect. Using an incremental bolus technique, group A then received methohexital, while group B received propofol. Both groups maintained stable mean arterial pressure, oxygen saturation, and end-tidal CO2 throughout the perioperative period. However, group A had a dramatic increase in heart rate (26.7% versus 13.9% for group B [P < .05]). Better postoperative psychomotor performance (P < .05) as measured by the Trieger Dot analysis was demonstrated by patients who received propofol. It was concluded that propofol is superior to methohexital for intravenous sedation.