Literature DB >> 11004040

Bisulfite-containing propofol: is it a cost-effective alternative to Diprivan for induction of anesthesia?

X Shao1, H Li, P F White, K W Klein, C Kulstad, A Owens.   

Abstract

UNLABELLED: Propofol (Diprivan(TM); AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE) is a commonly used drug for the induction of general anesthesia in the ambulatory setting. With the availability of a new bisulfite-containing generic formulation of propofol, questions have arisen regarding its cost effectiveness and safety compared with Diprivan(TM). Two hundred healthy outpatients were randomly assigned, according to a double-blinded protocol, to receive either Diprivan(TM) or bisulfite-containing propofol 1.5 mg/kg IV as part of a standardized induction sequence. Maintenance of anesthesia consisted of either desflurane (4%-8% end-tidal) or sevoflurane (1%-2% end-tidal) in combination with a remifentanil infusion (0.125 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) IV). Patient assessments included pain on injection, induction time, hemodynamic and bispectral electroencephalographic changes during induction, emergence time, and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The two propofol groups were comparable demographically, and the induction times and bispectral index values during the induction were also similar. However, the bisulfite-containing formulation was associated with less severe pain on injection (5% vs 11%), with fewer patients recalling pain on injection after surgery (38% vs. 51%, P<0.05). None of the patients manifested allergic-type reactions after the induction of anesthesia. The acquisition cost (average wholesale price in US dollars) of a 20-mL ampoule of Diprivan(TM) was $15 compared with $13 for the bisulfite-containing propofol formulation. Therefore, we concluded that the bisulfite-containing formulation of propofol is a cost-effective alternative to Diprivan(TM) for the induction of outpatient anesthesia. IMPLICATIONS: Bisulfite-containing propofol and Diprivan(TM) (AstraZeneca, Wilmington, DE) were similar with respect to their induction characteristics; however, the generic formulation was associated with a smaller incidence of injection pain. Assuming that the drug costs are similar, these data suggest that the bisulfite-containing formulation of propofol is a cost-effective alternative to Diprivan(TM).

Entities:  

Mesh:

Substances:

Year:  2000        PMID: 11004040     DOI: 10.1097/00000539-200010000-00019

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Anesth Analg        ISSN: 0003-2999            Impact factor:   5.108


  3 in total

1.  Propofol emulsion-free drug concentration is similar between batches and stable over time.

Authors:  Robert Damitz; Anuj Chauhan; Nikolaus Gravenstein
Journal:  Rom J Anaesth Intensive Care       Date:  2016-04

Review 2.  Induction of anaesthesia: a guide to drug choice.

Authors:  Nathalie Nathan; Isabelle Odin
Journal:  Drugs       Date:  2007       Impact factor: 9.546

3.  Total intravenous anaesthesia: is it worth the cost?

Authors:  Ian Smith
Journal:  CNS Drugs       Date:  2003       Impact factor: 5.749

  3 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.