Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialQuantifying oral analgesic consumption using a novel method and comparison with patient-controlled intravenous analgesic consumption.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1998
Comparative StudyA comparison of awake versus paralyzed tracheal intubation for infants with pyloric stenosis.
This prospective, nonrandomized, observational study of 76 infants with pyloric stenosis was conducted at an academic children's hospital and compared awake versus paralyzed tracheal intubation in terms of successful first attempt rate, intubation time, heart rate (HR) and arterial hemoglobin oxygen saturation (SpO2) changes, and complications. Three groups were determined by intubation method: awake (A) with an oxygen-insufflating laryngoscope, after rapid-sequence induction (R), or after modified rapid-sequence induction (M) including ventilation through cricoid pressure. Successful first attempt intubation rate was 64% for Group A versus 87% for paralyzed Groups R and M (P = 0.028). Median intubation time was 63 s in Group A versus 34 s in Groups R and M (P = 0.004). Transient, mild decreases in mean HR and SpO2 and incidences of significant bradycardia and decreased SpO2 did not vary by group. Complications, including bronchial or esophageal intubation, emesis, and oropharyngeal trauma, were few. Senior anesthesiologists intervened in four tracheal intubations. We advocate anesthetized, paralyzed tracheal intubation because struggling with conscious infants takes longer, often requires multiple attempts, and prevents neither bradycardia nor decreased SpO2. After induction, additional mask ventilation with O2 confers no advantage over immediate tracheal intubation in preserving SpO2. ⋯ In our children's hospital, awake tracheal intubation was not superior to anesthetized, paralyzed intubation in maintaining adequate oxygenation and heart rate or in reducing complications, and should be abandoned in favor of the latter technique for routine anesthetic management of otherwise healthy infants with pyloric stenosis.
-
Uptake of inhaled anesthetics may be measured as the amount of anesthetic infused to maintain a constant alveolar concentration of anesthetic. This method assumes that the patient absorbs all of the infused anesthetic, and that none is lost to circuit components. Using a standard anesthetic circuit with a 3-L rebreathing bag simulating the lungs, and simulating metabolism by input of carbon dioxide, we tested this assumption for halothane, isoflurane, and sevoflurane. Our results suggest that after washin of anesthetic sufficient to eliminate a material difference between inspired and end-tidal anesthetic, washin to other parts of the circuit (probably the ventilator) and absorbent (soda lime) continued to remove anesthetic for up to 15 min. From 30 min to 180 min of anesthetic administration, circuit components absorbed trivial amounts of isoflurane (12 +/- 13 mL vapor at 1.5 minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration, slightly more sevoflurane (39 +/- 15 mL), and still more halothane (64 +/- 9 mL). During this time, absorbent degraded sevoflurane (321 +/- 31 mL absorbed by circuit components and degraded by soda lime). The amount degraded increased with increasing input of carbon dioxide (e.g., the 321 +/- 31 mL increased to 508 +/- 48 mL when carbon dioxide input increased from 250 mL/min to 500 mL/min). Measurement of anesthetic uptake as a function of the amount of anesthetic infused must account for these findings. ⋯ Systems that deliver inhaled anesthetics may also remove the anesthetic. Initially, anesthetics may diffuse into delivery components and the interstices of material used to absorb carbon dioxide. Later, absorbents may degrade some anesthetics (e.g., sevoflurane). Such losses may compromise measurements of anesthetic uptake.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1998
Hydroxyethyl starch antibodies in humans: incidence and clinical relevance.
Hydroxyethyl starch (HES) is a plasma expander used for perioperative i.v. fluid management, as well as for resuscitation from trauma and shock. HES is very well tolerated, and the incidence of anaphylactic reactions is lower than with dextran or gelatin. Dextran anaphylaxis is caused by circulating dextran-reactive antibodies (ABs) of the immunoglobin G (IgG) class found in most adults. Histamine release from mast cells induces adverse reactions after gelatin infusion. The cause of adverse reactions due to HES is not yet clear. To investigate AB formation due to HES, we collected sera of 1004 patients at least 14 days after starch administration. Using a highly sensitive enzyme-linked immunoabsorbent assay technique, we found one patient with a low 1:10 titer of HES-reactive ABs (immunoglobin M [IgM] class). Despite repeated HES infusions, no clinical reaction could be detected in this patient. On the basis of a binomial distribution, a one-tailed confidence interval (99%) was used to calculate the percentage of the occurrence of ABs in general with maximum of 33 in 10,000 persons (IgM) and 23 in 10,000 persons (IgG). We suggest that HES-reactive ABs are extremely rare and that they do not necessarily induce anaphylaxis. Other mechanisms may be responsible for adverse reactions due to HES. ⋯ The frequency of antibody formation due to hydroxyethyl starch, a commonly used plasma expander, was prospectively investigated in 1004 patients. Only one patient showed transient antibody formation, which was not harmful to the patient. This low antigenicity could explain the excellent tolerance of hydroxyethyl starch compared with other plasma expanders.