Comparison of Recovery Profile Between Total Intravenous Anesthesia and Inhalational Anesthesia in Short Surgical Procedures

Abstract

Background: Total Intravenous Anesthesia (TIVA) and Inhalational Anesthesia are widely used techniques in short-duration surgeries. Rapid recovery with minimal adverse effects is crucial for optimizing patient turnover and satisfaction in such procedures.

Aim: To compare the recovery profile between total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) and inhalational anesthesia in patients undergoing short surgical procedures.

Methods: A prospective randomized comparative study was conducted among 200 patients (100 per group) of ASA I–II status scheduled for short elective surgeries under general anesthesia. Group T received propofol-based TIVA, while Group I received sevoflurane-based inhalational anesthesia. Recovery parameters—time to eye-opening, extubation, obeying commands, and orientation—were recorded. Postoperative outcomes, including PONV, hemodynamic instability, and patient satisfaction, were evaluated using Modified Aldrete and Steward recovery scores. Data were analyzed using Welch t-test and Chi-square test, with p < 0.05 considered statistically significant.

Results: Baseline characteristics were comparable between groups. Inhalational anesthesia showed significantly faster early emergence (eye-opening: 6.9 ± 2.0 min vs. 7.8 ± 2.1 min, p = 0.002; extubation: 7.4 ± 2.2 min vs. 8.6 ± 2.3 min, p < 0.001). However, the incidence of PONV was significantly lower in the TIVA group (9% vs. 22%, p = 0.012). Global recovery scores (Aldrete and Steward) and time to discharge were comparable. Patient satisfaction was higher with TIVA (4.4 ± 0.6 vs. 4.2 ± 0.7, p = 0.029).

Conclusion: Both anesthetic techniques are safe and effective for short surgeries. Inhalational anesthesia facilitates quicker early emergence, while TIVA offers superior postoperative comfort and reduced PONV. Selection should be tailored to patient preference, procedure type, and institutional protocols.