Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialEffective analgesia after bilateral tubal ligation.
Postpartum bilateral tubal ligation is a brief surgical procedure with minimal tissue injury, yet postoperative recovery times and analgesia requirements are often disproportionately large. To evaluate the analgesic efficacy of local anesthetic infiltration, 20 parturients scheduled for elective minilaparotomy and bilateral tubal ligation with either spinal or epidural anesthesia participated in this prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind trial. All patients received IV metoclopramide 10 mg and ketorolac 60 mg intraoperatively, as well as preincisional infiltration of the infraumbilical skin incision with 0.5% bupivacaine. Infiltration of bilateral uterine tubes and mesosalpinx was performed with either 0.5% bupivacaine (n = 10) or isotonic sodium chloride solution (saline) (n = 10). IV meperidine (25 mg every 3 min as needed) was given to treat pain in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). The total amount of meperidine administered in the PACU was significantly larger in the saline group than in the bupivacaine group. Pain scores at 30, 45, 60, 75, and 90 min postoperatively and on the seventh postoperative day were significantly lower in the bupivacaine group than in the saline group. During tubal ligation, infiltration of uterine tubes and mesosalpinx with 0.5% bupivacaine significantly enhanced analgesia both in the immediate postoperative setting and on the seventh postoperative day compared with infiltration with sodium chloride. ⋯ During bilateral tubal ligation with either spinal or epidural anesthesia, preemptive analgesia using IV ketorolac, IV metoclopramide, and infiltration of the incised skin and uterine tubes with 0.5% bupivacaine allowed 9 of 10 patients to recover with no pain, nausea, vomiting, or cramping and to maintain good analgesia for 7 days postoperatively.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe effect of fresh gas flow and anesthetic technique on the ability to control acute hemodynamic responses during surgery.
We evaluated the effect of the fresh gas flow (FGF) rate and the anesthetic technique on the ability to control the acute hyperdynamic response to a specific surgical stimulus during surgery in 90 consenting ASA physical status I-III patients undergoing lower abdominal procedures. After the administration of midazolam 2 mg IV, anesthesia was induced in all patients with propofol 1.5 mg/kg IV and fentanyl 1 microg/kg IV and was initially maintained with desflurane or isoflurane, 0.7 minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration, at total FGF rates of either 1 or 3 L/min. In response to the surgical stimulation of skin incision and retropubic dissection, an increase in mean arterial pressure (MAP) >20% above the preincision baseline MAP value provoked a stepwise increase in the inspired concentration of the volatile anesthetic or the IV administration of a variable-rate infusion of esmolol. At both FGF rates, the acute hemodynamic response to surgical stimulation was more efficiently treated by increasing the inspired concentration of desflurane than isoflurane. At 1 L/min, the average time to control the increase in MAP was significantly shorter with desflurane (17+/-12 min) compared with isoflurane (29+/-16 min), with 60% of the patients in the isoflurane group requiring rescue therapy. When an esmolol infusion was used to control the increase in MAP, supplementation with fentanyl was required in 40% and 53% of patients anesthetized with desflurane and isoflurane, respectively. In conclusion, desflurane provided more rapid and reliable control of acute hemodynamic responses to surgical stimulation than isoflurane or esmolol when the volatile anesthetics were administered at low FGF rates. ⋯ At low fresh gas flow rates (1 L/min), desflurane more successfully and rapidly controlled the acute hemodynamic responses to painful surgical stimuli than isoflurane.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe effects of maternal position during induction of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery.
Combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSE) is a popular technique for cesarean delivery. Regional blocks in obstetrics are often performed with the parturient in the sitting position because the midline may be recognized more easily than in the lateral decubitus position. When conventional spinal anesthesia is performed in the sitting position, the patient is placed supine immediately after drug injection. In contrast, when CSE is performed with the woman sitting, there is a delay in assuming the supine position because of epidural catheter placement, which may affect the incidence of hypotension. Healthy women, at term of pregnancy, about to undergo an elective cesarean section under CSE, were randomly assigned to the sitting or lateral recumbent position for initiation of the block. All parturients were given 1000 mL of lactated Ringer's solution in the 15 min preceding induction and an additional 300-500 mL while the actual block was being performed. On completion of the CSE, they were turned to the supine position with left uterine displacement. A second anesthesiologist, blinded to the woman's position during CSE, evaluated the sensory level of anesthesia, maternal heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, need for ephedrine, and occurrence of nausea and vomiting. Results are expressed as mean +/- SD. Twelve women were studied in the sitting group and 10 were studied in the lateral recumbent group. The severity and duration of hypotension were greater in those parturients who had CSE induced in the sitting (47%+/-7% and 6+/-3 min, respectively) compared with the lateral recumbent position (32%+/-14% and 3+/-2 min, respectively). Women in the sitting group also required twice as much ephedrine (38+/-18 mg) to correct hypotension compared with the other group (17+/-12 mg). In conclusion, the severity and duration of hypotension were greater when CSE was induced in the sitting compared with the lateral decubitus position. ⋯ We studied the induction of combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSE) in the sitting versus lateral recumbent positions in healthy women undergoing a scheduled cesarean delivery. The severity and duration of hypotension were greater when CSE was induced in the sitting position. Thus, the position used for induction of CSE should be among the factors considered when there is greater maternal or fetal risk from hypotension.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialOral antihistamines reduce the side effects from rapid vancomycin infusion.
Rapid infusion of vancomycin causes histamine-mediated side effects, hypotension, and rash, known as "red man syndrome." In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, we examined the ability of oral antihistamines to attenuate three clinical end points: rash, hypotension, and vancomycin discontinuation, and we compared these findings with those of a similar study using IV antihistamines. Patients (ASA physical status I-III) who required vancomycin prophylaxis for elective arthroplasty received either oral antihistamines (diphenhydramine < or = 1 mg/kg and cimetidine < or = 4 mg/kg, n = 20) or placebo (n = 10) 1 h before rapid vancomycin infusion (1 g over 10 min). The vancomycin infusion was discontinued if the mean arterial blood pressure decreased by > or = 20% or if itching was intolerable for the patient. Clinically significant hypotension developed in no treated patients, compared with five (50%) patients in the placebo group (P = 0.001). Rapid infusion was stopped for one treated patient (5%) and for five (50%) patients in the placebo group (P = 0.004). Incidence (P = 0.011) and severity of rash (P = 0.015) were also reduced in treated patients. Peak histamine levels were increased but were similar for patients in both groups (mean +/- SD, 1.9+/-2.5 vs 1.6+/-2.4 ng/mL; P = 0.75). Oral antihistamines were as effective as IV antihistamines. In conclusion, oral H1 and H2 antihistamine pretreatment is a practical, safe, and inexpensive option to attenuate histamine-mediated side effects associated with rapid vancomycin infusion. ⋯ Clinicians often must administer vancomycin faster than the 1-h recommended time, which can cause "red man syndrome" (rash, itching, hypotension). Our randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study showed that oral H1 and H2 antihistamine pretreatment significantly reduced the histamine-related side effects of rapid vancomycin infusion.