Anesthesia and analgesia
- 
    Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998 Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial0.125% ropivacaine is similar to 0.125% bupivacaine for labor analgesia using patient-controlled epidural infusion.We compared the effects of 0.125% ropivacaine with 0.125% bupivacaine in laboring patients using patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). Fifty-one ASA physical status I or II term parturients with functioning epidural catheters were randomized to receive ropivacaine or bupivacaine using a prospective, double-blind design. Basal infusions (6 mL/h) were supplemented with patient-controlled boluses (5 mL) every 10 min as required. For inadequate analgesia, patients were administered 10-mL boluses of study solution until comfortable. There were no differences in verbal pain scores, amount of local anesthetics used, sensory levels, motor blockade, labor duration, mode of delivery, side effects, or patient satisfaction between the two local anesthetics. We conclude that 0.125% ropivacaine and bupivacaine are clinically indistinguishable and are both highly effective for labor analgesia using PCEA. ⋯ This study compared labor analgesia from 0.125% ropivacaine and 0.125% bupivacaine using patient-controlled epidural analgesia. We found no significant differences in local anesthetic use, analgesic characteristics, or side effects between 0.125% ropivacaine and 0.125% bupivacaine. We conclude that these two drugs are clinically indistinguishable at this concentration. 
- 
    Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998 Diabetes mellitus and difficult laryngoscopy in renal and pancreatic transplant patients.Limited mobility of the cervical spine or temperomandibular joint may contribute to increased difficulty of laryngoscopy in patients who have severe diabetes mellitus. The frequency of difficult laryngoscopy in diabetics undergoing renal and/or pancreatic transplants has been reported to be as high as 32%. We retrospectively reviewed the anesthetic records of all adult patients who underwent renal and/or pancreatic transplant and endotracheal intubation from January 1, 1985 to October 31, 1995. Characteristics specifically reviewed included the presence of diabetes mellitus, type of organ donor, age, gender, body mass index, previous difficult laryngoscopy, known characteristics potentially related to difficult laryngoscopy, and degree of difficulty with laryngoscopy. Laryngoscopy was graded as easy, minimally to moderately difficult, and moderately to extremely difficult to perform. Factors associated with any degree of difficult intubation were univariately assessed by using Fisher's exact test. Of 725 patients, 15 (2.1%) were identified as having difficult laryngoscopies, although all underwent successful endotracheal intubations. Factors associated with difficult laryngoscopy were diabetes mellitus (P = 0.002) and characteristics known to be related to difficult laryngoscopy (P = 0.02). These findings confirm an increase in the frequency of difficult laryngoscopy in diabetic patients undergoing renal and/or pancreatic transplant, although no laryngoscopies were rated as moderately to extremely difficult. We conclude that the frequency of difficult laryngoscopy in these diabetic patients is much lower than previous reports have suggested. ⋯ Previous studies have suggested that airway management of many diabetic patients may be difficult. Our medical record review of patients with severe diabetes undergoing organ transplants showed that extraordinary techniques were not required to successfully manage their airways. 
- 
    Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998 Randomized Controlled Trial Meta Analysis Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe comparative effects of postoperative analgesic therapies on pulmonary outcome: cumulative meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials.We performed meta-analyses of randomized, control trials to assess the effects of seven analgesic therapies on postoperative pulmonary function after a variety of procedures: epidural opioid, epidural local anesthetic, epidural opioid with local anesthetic, thoracic versus lumbar epidural opioid, intercostal nerve block, wound infiltration with local anesthetic, and intrapleural local anesthetic. Measures of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), vital capacity (VC), peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), PaO2, and incidence of atelectasis, pulmonary infection, and pulmonary complications overall were analyzed. Compared with systemic opioids, epidural opioids decreased the incidence of atelectasis (risk ratio [RR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.85) and had a weak tendency to reduce the incidence of pulmonary infections (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.18-1.53) and pulmonary complications overall (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20-1.33). Epidural local anesthetics increased PaO2 (difference 4.56 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.058-9.075) and decreased the incidence of pulmonary infections (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.65) and pulmonary complications overall (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.80) compared with systemic opioids. Intercostal nerve blockade tends to improve pulmonary outcome measures (incidence of atelectasis: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.27-1.57, incidence of pulmonary complications overall: RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.18-1.22), but these differences did not achieve statistical significance. There were no clinically or statistically significant differences in the surrogate measures of pulmonary function (FEV1, FVC, and PEFR). These analyses support the utility of epidural analgesia for reducing postoperative pulmonary morbidity but do not support the use of surrogate measures of pulmonary outcome as predictors or determinants of pulmonary morbidity in postoperative patients. ⋯ When individual trials are unable to produce significant results, it is often because of insufficient patient numbers. It may be impossible for a single institution to study enough patients. Meta-analysis is a useful tool for combining the data from multiple trials to increase the patient numbers. These meta-analyses confirm that postoperative epidural pain control can significantly decrease the incidence of pulmonary morbidity. 
- 
    Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998 Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEconomic considerations of the use of new anesthetics: a comparison of propofol, sevoflurane, desflurane, and isoflurane.Cost control in anesthesia is no longer an option; it is a necessity. New anesthetics have entered the market, but economic differences in comparison to standard anesthetic regimens are not exactly known. Eighty patients undergoing either subtotal thyroidectomy or laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly divided into four groups, with 20 patients in each group. Group 1 received propofol 1%/sufentanil, Group 2 received desflurane/sufentanil, Group 3 received sevoflurane/sufentanil, and Group 4 received isoflurane/sufentanil (standard anesthesia) for anesthesia. A fresh gas flow of 1.5-2 L/min and 60% N2O in oxygen was used for maintenance of anesthesia, and atracurium was given for muscle relaxation. Concentrations of volatile anesthetics, propofol, and sufentanil were varied according to the patient's perceived need. Isoflurane, desflurane, and sevoflurane consumption was measured by weighing the vaporizers with a precision weighing machine. Biometric data, time of surgery, and time of anesthesia were similar in the four groups. Times for extubation and stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were significantly longer in the isoflurane group. Use of sufentanil and atracurium did not differ among the groups. Propofol patients required fewer additional drugs in the PACU (e.g., antiemetics), and thus showed the lowest additional costs in the PACU. Total (intra- and postoperative) costs were significantly higher in the propofol group ($30.73 per patient; $0.24 per minute of anesthesia). The costs among the inhalational groups did not differ significantly (approximately $0.15 per minute of anesthesia). We conclude that in today's climate of cost savings, a comprehensive pharmacoeconomic approach is needed. Although propofol-based anesthesia was associated with the highest cost, it is doubtful whether the choice of anesthetic regimen will lower the costs of an anesthesia department. ⋯ Cost analysis of anesthetic techniques is necessary in today's economic climate. Consumption of the new inhaled drugs sevoflurane and desflurane was measured in comparison to a standard anesthetic regimen using isoflurane and an IV technique using propofol. Propofol-based anesthesia was associated with the highest costs, whereas the costs of the new inhaled anesthetics sevoflurane and desflurane did not differ from those of a standard, isoflurane-based anesthesia regimen. 
- 
    Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998 Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPrevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting with a combination of granisetron and droperidol.In this randomized, double-blind study, we compared the efficacy and safety of granisetron plus droperidol with each antiemetic alone for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in 150 female patients scheduled for elective major gynecological surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive i.v. either granisetron 2.5 mg (Group G), droperidol 1.25 mg (Group D), or granisetron 2.5 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg (Group GD) immediately before the induction of anesthesia (n = 50 in each group). A standard anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were used. Complete response, defined as no PONV and no administration of rescue antiemetic medication during the first 24 h after anesthesia, was 84% in Group G, 54% in Group D, and 96% in Group GD (P = 0.046 versus Group G, P = 0.001 versus Group D). No clinically important adverse effects were observed in any group. In conclusion, the combination of granisetron and droperidol is more effective than each antiemetic alone for complete response in patients undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery. ⋯ We compared the efficacy of granisetron plus droperidol with each antiemetic alone for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after gynecological surgery. The granisetron/droperidol combination was the most effective against these emetic symptoms.