Objective: Outpatient anesthesia requires a safe anesthetic method and an anesthetic agent that provides a rapid anesthesia depth and hemodynamic stability. To provide an uneventfully recovery, the anesthetic must also be rapidly metabolized, and its metabolites should not accumulate in the body. This study compared sedo-analgesia effects, recovery times, postoperative complications, Modified Aldrete Scale, Visual Analog Scores, and patient and surgeon satisfaction between propofol and ketofol, administered as anesthetics during the probe curettage procedure.
Methods: A total of 60 female patients included in the study. Group P was administered 2 mg/kg of propofol and a 1 μg/kg intravenous bolus of fentanyl for induction and 100 μg/kg/min of propofol for maintenance. Group K was administered a 600 µg/kg IV bolus of ketofol for induction and 100 µg/kg/min of ketofol for maintenance. Additional fentanyl (50 µg) was administered to Group P, and 25 µg/kg/min of ketofol was administered to Group K according to autonomic and hemodynamic responses.
Results: Demographic data of the 2 groups were similar. A significant decrease in hemodynamic values was detected in patients in Group P after induction. No change in these values was detected during or after induction in Group K. The additional analgesia requirement was 66.6% in Group P. Nausea was detected in 2 patients in Group K. Additionally, hallucination was detected in 2 patients in Group K. Patient and surgeon satisfaction were complete in both groups.
Conclusion: According to our findings, ketofol anesthesia may be a good option in uterine curettage, patients recover quickly and comfortably, and ketofol both provides sufficient analgesia for the minor surgical intervention and reduces complications.