Measurement of blood losses before and after renal transplantation.

K. Boddy,A. Linton,D. Lawson,G. Will

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1136/bmj.3.5765.22

1971-07-03

British Medical Journal

Abstract:There is a significant association between the occurrence of post-halothane jaundice and a previous administration of halothane when the interval between the two halothane anaesthetics is four weeks or less. The risk is in any case small and seems to lie between 1 case in 6,000 (Cardiff data) and 1 case in 22,000 (average of C.S.D. data) repeat halothane anaesthetics within four weeks. In the case of patients who had not had halothane within the previous four weeks the risk is smaller still. From the C.S.D. data it appears to be less than 1 in 600,000. On the assumption that the average consultant anaesthetist administers 1,000 anaesthetics per annum and that if all the patients having second anaesthetics within four weeks were given halothane, in a working life of 30 years he will have administered such repeat halothane anaesthetics to about 2,000 patients. Most therefore of the consultant anaesthetists in the British Isles are likely to complete their professional lives without seeing a single case of halothane jaundice. There seems therefore little reason, on present evidence, to stop halothane anaesthesia. Nevertheless, and in spite of the rarity of jaundice, it is reasonable to avoid halothane when it has been administered to the same patient during the previous four weeks. However, this advice assumes that there is an equally effective and safe alternative with which the anaesthetist is familiar. Otherwise it might mean that by avoiding a rare cause of morbidity or mortality a more common one is introduced.