A prospective, randomised trial comparing the quality of recovery between full inhalation anaesthesia and total intravenous anaesthesia post gynaecological surgery.

Q3 Medicine

Qatar Medical Journal Pub Date : 2026-03-03 eCollection Date: 2026-01-01 DOI:10.5339/qmj.2026.5

Purtishil Junghare, Bisman Jeet Kaur Khurana, Hazarika Amarjyoti, Meena Shyam Charan, Naik Naveen, Arora Ashima, Bora Girdhar

{"title":"A prospective, randomised trial comparing the quality of recovery between full inhalation anaesthesia and total intravenous anaesthesia post gynaecological surgery.","authors":"Purtishil Junghare, Bisman Jeet Kaur Khurana, Hazarika Amarjyoti, Meena Shyam Charan, Naik Naveen, Arora Ashima, Bora Girdhar","doi":"10.5339/qmj.2026.5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Assessing the quality of recovery (QOR) after open gynaecological surgery done under general anaesthesia (GA) is one of the methods to evaluate anaesthesia outcomes effectively. GA can be administered as full inhalation anaesthesia (FIA) and/or total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA). Studies have not compared QOR between TIVA and FIA in this cohort. Our study aims to compare the effect of TIVA and FIA on postoperative recovery of patients assessed by the Quality of Recovery-40 (QOR-40) questionnaire.Methods: One hundred and eight consenting adult patients posted for open gynaecological surgeries under GA were randomly allocated to Sevoflurane-based full inhalation anaesthesia (Group FIA) or propofol-based TIVA (Group TIVA). The primary outcome was comparing the QOR-40 score on the first postoperative day (POD1). Comparing QOR-40 on POD2, extubation time, and Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (MOAA/S) score after extubation were the secondary outcomes. Epidural analgesia was provided throughout the study period in both groups.Results: The mean QOR-40 score in group FIA was not significantly different from that in group TIVA (171.44 ± 7.43 vs. 171.37 ± 7.48; P = 0.951). However, within the group, there was a significant reduction in scores in POD1 (P < 0.001) and POD2 (P < 0.001) from pre-operative values. There was no significant difference in extubation time (P = 0.207) and MOAA/S score (P = 0.548) between the groups.Conclusion: Our study found no significant difference in QOR-40 score, extubation time, and MOAA/S score between group FIA and TIVA.","PeriodicalId":53667,"journal":{"name":"Qatar Medical Journal","volume":"2026 1","pages":"5"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2026-03-03","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC12969928/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Qatar Medical Journal","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.5339/qmj.2026.5","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2026/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"Medicine","Score":null,"Total":0}

引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Assessing the quality of recovery (QOR) after open gynaecological surgery done under general anaesthesia (GA) is one of the methods to evaluate anaesthesia outcomes effectively. GA can be administered as full inhalation anaesthesia (FIA) and/or total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA). Studies have not compared QOR between TIVA and FIA in this cohort. Our study aims to compare the effect of TIVA and FIA on postoperative recovery of patients assessed by the Quality of Recovery-40 (QOR-40) questionnaire.

Methods: One hundred and eight consenting adult patients posted for open gynaecological surgeries under GA were randomly allocated to Sevoflurane-based full inhalation anaesthesia (Group FIA) or propofol-based TIVA (Group TIVA). The primary outcome was comparing the QOR-40 score on the first postoperative day (POD1). Comparing QOR-40 on POD2, extubation time, and Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale (MOAA/S) score after extubation were the secondary outcomes. Epidural analgesia was provided throughout the study period in both groups.

Results: The mean QOR-40 score in group FIA was not significantly different from that in group TIVA (171.44 ± 7.43 vs. 171.37 ± 7.48; P = 0.951). However, within the group, there was a significant reduction in scores in POD1 (P < 0.001) and POD2 (P < 0.001) from pre-operative values. There was no significant difference in extubation time (P = 0.207) and MOAA/S score (P = 0.548) between the groups.

Conclusion: Our study found no significant difference in QOR-40 score, extubation time, and MOAA/S score between group FIA and TIVA.

Abstract Image

查看原文本刊更多论文

一项前瞻性随机试验，比较全吸入麻醉和全静脉麻醉在妇科手术后的恢复质量。

背景：评估全麻妇科开放手术后的恢复质量（QOR）是有效评价麻醉效果的方法之一。GA可作为全吸入麻醉（FIA）和/或全静脉麻醉（TIVA）进行。研究没有比较TIVA和FIA在该队列中的QOR。我们的研究目的是比较TIVA和FIA对患者术后恢复的影响，通过恢复质量-40 （QOR-40）问卷评估。方法：108例经同意在全麻下进行妇科开放手术的成年患者随机分为七氟醚全吸入麻醉组（FIA组）和异丙酚全吸入麻醉组（TIVA组）。主要结果是比较术后第一天（POD1）的QOR-40评分。比较POD2 QOR-40评分、拔管时间、拔管后MOAA/S评分为次要观察结果。两组在整个研究期间均给予硬膜外镇痛。结果：FIA组与TIVA组QOR-40平均评分差异无统计学意义（171.44±7.43∶171.37±7.48;P = 0.951）。然而，在组内，与术前相比，POD1评分（P < 0.001）和POD2评分（P < 0.001）显著降低。两组间拔管时间（P = 0.207）和MOAA/S评分（P = 0.548）差异无统计学意义。结论：本研究发现FIA组与TIVA组QOR-40评分、拔管时间、MOAA/S评分无显著差异。

本文章由计算机程序翻译，如有差异，请以英文原文为准。

求助全文

约1分钟内获得全文求助全文

来源期刊