Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1992
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialSubhypnotic doses of propofol possess direct antiemetic properties.
Propofol is associated with a low incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. In a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we investigated the possible direct antiemetic properties of a subhypnotic dose of propofol. Fifty-two ASA physical status I or II patients, aged 15-60 yr with nausea and vomiting after minor gynecologic, orthopedic, or digestive tract surgery, were included in the study and received either propofol (10 mg = 1 mL) or placebo (1 mL Intralipid) intravenously in the postanesthesia care unit. ⋯ Hemodynamic values remained unchanged in both groups. Pain on injection (7.6%) or dizziness (3.6%) only occurred in the propofol group. We conclude that propofol has significant direct antiemetic properties.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1992
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison between preincisional and postincisional lidocaine infiltration and postoperative pain.
We conducted a randomized, double-blind trial to compare the efficacy of preincisional and postincisional wound infiltration with 1% lidocaine (40 mL) on the postoperative pain of 37 patients scheduled for elective inguinal herniotomy. The demand for additional postoperative analgesics occurred earlier in those who received lidocaine infiltration after incision (165 min) than in those who received preincisional lidocaine (225 min, P less than 0.05). The preincisional lidocaine infiltration group also had fewer patients requiring supplemental analgesics (58%) than the postincisional group (94%) (P less than 0.05). We conclude that preincisional infiltration of the surgical wound with lidocaine is a more effective method of providing postoperative analgesia than is postincisional infiltration.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1992
ReviewPreoperative cardiac evaluation for noncardiac surgery: a functional approach.
The preoperative assessment of the high risk patient undergoing noncardiac surgery has traditionally been based on history, physical examination, and preoperative testing. We propose a method of assessing preoperative risk based on the presentation of coronary artery disease, exercise tolerance, and extent of the surgical procedure. Since this is an evolving field, as new information and perioperative management techniques become available, the preoperative evaluation of the high risk patient will change. ⋯ In the patient at risk of but without overt symptoms of coronary artery disease, the number of clinical risk factors can determine the probability of coronary artery disease in the individual patient. The decision to perform preoperative revascularization should be based on its anticipated improvement of both the short- and long-term prognosis of the patient considering the risk of such procedures. The objective assessment of LVEF should be performed in patients with a poor exercise tolerance with either a high risk of perioperative ischemia or a suspicion of cardiomyopathy.