This open labelled, randomised, controlled study was designed to compare the induction and recovery characteristics of sevoflurane and halothane anaesthesia in children. Forty American Society of Anaesthesiologist (ASA) physical status class 1 or 2 children (aged 1-10 year, weighed less than 25 kg) scheduled for elective urological procedure lasting less than one hour were allocated randomly to receive either sevoflurane (group S, n = 20) or halothane (group H, n = 20). The induction time in children receiving sevoflurane was significantly shorter than in those receiving halothane (mean (SD) 46 (13.6) second vs 69 (19.4) seconds, p < 0.005). The emergence from anaesthesia was also faster in children receiving sevoflurane than in those receiving halothane (mean (SD) 9 min (4.3 min) vs 21 min (8.9 min), p < 0.001). No major adverse effects were encountered in each group. We concluded that sevoflurane is comparable to halothane in Malaysian children.
Twenty patients undergoing various surgical procedures were anaesthetised using hypotensive anaesthesia using labetalol and halothane. The technique is safe, predictable and cheap. This technique also offers the advantage of usage of less blood, thus minimising the complications of transfusion induced diseases like hepatitis and AIDS.
Two children with Tetralogy of Fallot presented for dental extraction. Anaesthesia was induced rapidly and smoothly by inhalation of sevoflurane. We discussed the advantages of sevoflurane as an induction agent as compared to halothane in these children.