Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialInfusion of propofol, sufentanil, or midazolam for sedation after aortic surgery: comparison of oxygen consumption and hemodynamic stability.
We conducted a prospective, randomized study to compare quality of sedation, hemodynamic stability, and oxygen consumption of three different drugs for continuous i.v. sedation in the immediate postoperative period in patients scheduled for aortic surgery (propofol [n = 12], sufentanil [n = 12], or midazolam [n = 12]). After arrival in the recovery room, patients were randomized into one of the following groups: Group P (continuous infusion of propofol 2 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1)), Group S (continuous infusion of sufentanil 0.25 microg x kg(-1) x h(-1), with bolus doses of midazolam 2 mg to maintain sedation at 3-4 on the Ramsay scale), and Group M (continuous infusion of midazolam 0.07-0.15 microg x kg(-1) x h(-1) to maintain sedation at 3-4 on the Ramsay scale). The three drugs were associated with similar hemodynamic stability, incidence of myocardial ischemia, and comparable kinetics and mean values for VO2, but a significant higher number of peaks for VO2 in Group S during the period of rewarming. To obtain an appropriate Ramsay score, we needed to increase the rate of administration of the drug in Group P, and to decrease this rate in Group M. After the drugs were discontinued, Group P required mechanical ventilation for less time. In conclusion, propofol is as effective as sufentanil or midazolam in controlling increased VO2 postoperatively. The initial dose of 2 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1) had to be increased for most patients. In addition, propofol sedation is associated with a quicker recovery compared with midazolam and sufentanil. ⋯ A prospective, randomized comparison of propofol, sufentanil and midazolam infusions revealed similar effects on hemodynamics, oxygen consumption, and rate of myocardial ischemia after aortic surgery, although propofol was associated with a quicker recovery compared with midazolam and sufentanil.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialAnalgesic effect of bupivacaine on extraperitoneal laparoscopic hernia repair.
Local anesthetics decrease postoperative pain when placed at the surgical site. Patients benefit from laparoscopic extraperitoneal hernia repair because this allows earlier mobilization than the more classical open surgical approach. The purpose of this study was to determine the pain-sparing efficacy of local anesthetics placed in the preperitoneal fascial plane during extraperitoneal laparoscopic inguinal hernia surgery. Forty-two outpatients were included in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, institutional review board-approved study. At the conclusion of a standardized general anesthetic, 21 patients received 60 mL of 0.125% bupivacaine into the preperitoneal fascial plane before incisional closure, whereas the other 21 patients received 60 mL of the isotonic sodium chloride solution placebo. Postoperative pain was assessed 1, 4, 8, 24, and 72 h postoperatively. In addition, postoperative fentanyl and outpatient acetaminophen 500 mg/hydrocodone 5 mg requirements were recorded. All hernia repairs were performed by the same surgeon. Appropriate statistical analyses were used. There were no significant differences between the bupivacaine and isotonic sodium chloride solution groups with regard to postoperative pain scores, length of postanesthesia care unit stay, or analgesic requirements. Furthermore, neither unilateral versus bilateral repair nor operative time affected the measured parameters. The addition of 60 mL of 0.125% bupivacaine into the preperitoneal fascial plane during extraperitoneal laparoscopic hernia repair did not significantly alter pain scores, supplementary analgesic requirements, or recovery room length of stay. ⋯ The placement of 60 mL of 0.125% bupivacaine into the preperitoneal fascial plane during extraperitoneal laparoscopic hernia repair did not significantly alter pain scores, supplementary analgesic requirements, or recovery room length of stay.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe efficacy of intrathecal neostigmine, intrathecal morphine, and their combination for post-cesarean section analgesia.
We designed this study to evaluate the postoperative analgesic efficacy and safety of intrathecal (i.t.) neostigmine, i.t. morphine, and their combination in patients undergoing cesarean section under spinal anesthesia. Seventy-nine term parturients were randomly divided into four groups to receive isotonic sodium chloride solution 0.2 mL, neostigmine 25 microg, morphine 100 microg, or the combination of i.t. neostigmine 12.5 microg and morphine 50 microg with i.t. 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 12 mg. There were no significant differences among the four groups with regard to spinal anesthesia, maternal blood pressure and heart rate, or fetal status. Postoperative analgesia was provided by i.v. patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) using fentanyl and ketorolac. Compared with the saline group, the time to first PCA use was significantly longer in the neostigmine group (P < 0.001), with lower 24-h analgesic consumption (P < 0.001). Nausea and vomiting were the most common side effects of i.t. neostigmine (73.7%). Analgesic effectiveness was similar between the neostigmine and morphine groups. Compared with the neostigmine group, the combination group had significantly prolonged analgesic effect and reduced 24-h PCA consumption (P < 0.05) with less severity of nausea and vomiting (P = 0.058). Compared with the morphine group, the combination group tended to have prolonged times to first PCA use (P = 0.054) with a lower incidence of pruritus (P < 0.03). ⋯ Intrathecal (i.t.) neostigmine 25 microg produced postoperative analgesia for cesarean section similar to that of i.t. morphine 100 microg, but with a high incidence of nausea and vomiting. The combination of i.t. neostigmine 12.5 microg and i.t. morphine 50 microg may produce better postoperative analgesia with fewer side effects than i.t. neostigmine 25 microg or i.t. morphine 100 microg alone.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 1998
The effect of thoracic paravertebral blockade on intercostal somatosensory evoked potentials.
The paravertebral nerve blocks used in upper abdominal or thoracic surgery provide excellent pain relief and can inhibit some aspects of the neuroendocrine stress response to surgical trauma, which suggests that a very high-quality afferent block can be effected. To confirm this, we evaluated intercostal somatosensory evoked potentials (SSEPs) in 10 patients undergoing paravertebral nerve blocks as a treatment for chronic pain. SSEPs were recorded before and after ipsilateral thoracic paravertebral deposition of 1.5 mg/kg bupivacaine 0.5%. Sensory loss to temperature was demonstrated in all patients at the level of injection and had a mean superior spread of 1.4 (range 0-4) dermatomes and a mean inferior spread of 2.8 (range 0-7) dermatomes. SSEPs were abolished (the normal waveform was rendered unrecognizable with unmeasurable latencies and a mean amplitude of zero) in all patients at the level of injection. In addition, a two-dermatome SSEP abolition was found in four patients and a three-dermatome abolition was found in two patients. SSEPs were modified, but not significantly, at all other test points. We conclude that cortical responses to thoracic dermatomal stimulation can be abolished at the block level and adjacent dermatomes by thoracic paravertebral nerve blockade. Equivalent results have not been demonstrated with more central forms of afferent blockade, which suggests that thoracic paravertebral nerve blocks may be uniquely effective. ⋯ To improve outcomes after major surgery, as much nociceptive information as possible should be prevented from entering the central nervous and neuroendocrine systems. We have shown that local anesthetics alongside the vertebral column can abolish the usual brain recordings that follow intercostal nerve stimulation, which suggests that paravertebral nerve blocks may be uniquely effective.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialAcetaminophen as an adjunct to morphine by patient-controlled analgesia in the management of acute postoperative pain.
Opioids play a fundamental role in the management of postoperative pain, but their use is associated with a number of side effects, including nausea and vomiting, sedation, and respiratory depression. Co-administration of a nonopioid has been proposed as a method of reducing opioid intake and minimizing side effects. Sixty-one ASA physical status I and II patients were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled, parallel study to investigate the effect of a combination of acetaminophen and morphine after open reduction and internal fixation of acute limb fractures. Patients were randomized to receive either oral acetaminophen (1 g every 4 h) or placebo as an adjuvant to morphine by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) postoperatively. They were assessed daily for 72 h or until the PCA was discontinued according to standardized guidelines. The outcome variables collected were pain scores (11-point scale), amount of morphine self-administered, duration of PCA use, compliance with study design, incidence of nausea and sedation, and overall patient satisfaction. The acetaminophen group had lower pain scores on Day 1 (2.1 vs 3.3; P = 0.03) and a shorter average duration of PCA use (35.8 vs 45.5 h; P = 0.03). Overall patient satisfaction was also significantly greater in the acetaminophen group (8.7 vs 7.9; P = 0.04). These data suggest that acetaminophen is a useful adjunct to morphine PCA. ⋯ This study assesses the benefit of combining two analgesics for the treatment of postoperative pain. Such a combination improves the quality of pain relief and patient satisfaction.