Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialCombination of intrathecal sufentanil 10 mug plus bupivacaine 2.5 mg for labor analgesia: is half the dose enough?
This controlled, double-blinded, prospective trial of 42 parturients in early labor was conducted to determine whether halving the total amount of intrathecal (i.t.) sufentanil and bupivacaine reduced the incidence of systemic hypotension while providing adequate analgesia with minimal lower limb motor block. Combined spinal-epidural analgesia (CSE) was instituted; Group A (n = 21) received a total of 10 microg of sulfentanil plus 2.5 mg of bupivacaine, whereas Group B (n = 21) received half that dose. Compared with Group B, Group A had a higher incidence of hypotension (nine parturients in Group A, two in Group B; P < 0.05), a greater degree of motor block (P < 0.05), and a higher incidence of sedation (nine parturients in Group A were sedated, one in Group B; P < 0.01). Group B had higher pain scores for the first 5 min (P < 0.05) and a lower level of sensory blockade (median of T7 in Group B compared with T4 in Group A; P < 0.01). We conclude that halving the total amount of i.t. 10 microg of sufentanil plus 2.5 mg of bupivacaine is a suitable option for CSE in labor because it reduces the incidence of some side effects, such as hypotension and maternal sedation, without compromising overall high maternal satisfaction. ⋯ We showed that adequate labor pain relief could be provided by halving the recommended dose of 10 microg of intrathecal sufentanil plus 2.5 mg of bupivacaine. The larger dose, however, produced faster pain relief, which lasted longer than the reduced dose. The mother and baby were not adversely affected with either dose.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical TrialEpidural steroids for treating "failed back surgery syndrome": is fluoroscopy really necessary?
Epidural steroids are commonly administered in the treatment of "failed back surgery syndrome." Because patient response is dependent on accurate steroid placement, fluoroscopic guidance has been advocated. However, because of ever-increasing medical expenditures, the cost-benefit of routine fluoroscopy should be critically evaluated. Therefore, 50 patients were enrolled into this institutional review board-approved, prospective, controlled, single-blinded study. At a predetermined intervertebral level, the epidural space was identified using an air loss of resistance technique. Thereafter, an epidural catheter was inserted 2 cm through the epidural needle. To determine the accuracy of the clinical placement, contrast medium was administered through the epidural catheter; antero-posterior and lateral lumbar spine radiographs were then obtained. The number of attempts required to successfully locate the epidural space, the reliability of the air loss of resistance technique in indicating successful epidural penetration in failed back surgery syndrome, the ability of the clinician to accurately predict the intervertebral space at which the epidural injection was performed, and the spread of contrast medium within the epidural space were recorded. A total of 48 epidurograms were performed. The number of attempts to successfully enter the epidural space was 2 +/- 1. In 44 cases, the radiological studies confirmed the clinical impression that the epidural space had been successfully identified. In three patients, the epidural catheter was in the paravertebral tissue. One myelogram was recorded. In 25 patients, the epidural catheter did not pass through the predetermined intervertebral space. In 35 cases, the contrast medium did not reach the level of pathology. ⋯ The clinical sign of loss of resistance is a reliable indicator of epidural space penetration in most cases of "failed back surgery syndrome." However, surface anatomy is unreliable and may result in inaccurate steroid placement. Finally, despite accurate placement, the depot-steroid solution will spread to reach the level of pathology in only 26% of cases.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Comparative Study Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical TrialDetermination of an effective dose of intrathecal morphine for pain relief after cesarean delivery.
Very small doses of intrathecal (i.t.) morphine (25-200 microg) have been used in an effort to provide effective postoperative pain relief while minimizing side effects after cesarean delivery. We performed a double-blinded study in 40 patients presenting for elective cesarean delivery in which i.t. morphine was administered along with oral hydrocodone/acetaminophen and other medications commonly administered after cesarean delivery. We administered i.t. morphine by up-down sequential allocation of doses. For the purposes of this study, adequate postoperative analgesia was defined as comfort not requiring i.v. morphine for 12 h after spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine, fentanyl, and morphine. In addition, a time and cost comparison was performed for study patients receiving intrathecal morphine compared with a historical group of patients receiving patient-controlled analgesia with i.v. morphine. We were unable to determine with meaningful precision a dose of i.t. morphine to provide analgesia in this context. However, very small doses of i.t. morphine combined with oral hydrocodone/acetaminophen and other medications commonly prescribed after cesarean delivery provided postoperative pain relief with no more time commitment than patient-controlled analgesia (148 +/- 61 vs 150 +/- 57 min) and with significantly less acquisition cost ($15.13 +/- $4.40 vs $34.64 +/- $15.55). ⋯ When used along with oral analgesics, very small doses of spinal morphine provide adequate pain relief after cesarean delivery. Spinal anesthetics, oral analgesics, and other medications commonly prescribed to treat side effects after cesarean delivery contribute significantly to this analgesia. When small doses of spinal morphine are used in this setting, they provide adequate analgesia and patient satisfaction that is time- and cost-effective.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe effects of prostaglandin E1 on intraoperative temperature changes and the incidence of postoperative shivering during deliberate mild hypothermia for neurosurgical procedures.
We investigated the effects of i.v. prostaglandin E1 (PGE1) on intraoperative changes of core temperature and the incidence of postoperative shivering in neurosurgical patients undergoing deliberate mild hypothermia. Eighty-three patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: patients in the control group did not receive PGE1, whereas patients in the PG20 group and PG50 group received PGE1 at a dose of 0.02 and 0.05 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1), respectively. The administration of PGE1 was started just after the induction of anesthesia and continued until the end of anesthesia. Anesthesia was maintained with nitrous oxide in oxygen, sevoflurane, and fentanyl. After the induction of anesthesia, patients were cooled using a water blanket and a convective device blanket. Tympanic membrane temperature was maintained at 34.5 degrees C. During surgical wound closure, patients were rewarmed. Intraoperative changes in tympanic membrane and skin temperatures and the incidence of postoperative shivering were compared among groups. Demographic and intraoperative variables were similar among groups. There were no significant differences in tympanic temperatures among groups at each point during the operation. Skin temperature 30 min after rewarming and just after tracheal extubation was significantly lower in the PG20 group than in the PG50 group. Postoperative shivering was more frequent in the PG20 group (43%) than in the control (13%) and PG50 (17%) groups. These results suggest that the intraoperative administration of PGE1 does not affect changes in core temperature during deliberate mild hypothermia and that PGE1 at a dose of 0.02 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) may increase the occurrence of postoperative shivering. ⋯ Deliberate mild hypothermia has been proposed as a means of providing cerebral protection during neurosurgical procedures. Vasodilating drugs may be used during deliberate mild hypothermia to maintain peripheral circulation and to enhance the cooling and rewarming rate. In the present study, however, we found no benefit from i.v. prostaglandin E1 administration during deliberate mild hypothermia in neurosurgical patients.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 1999
Comparative StudyAn examination of the interactions between the antinociceptive effects of morphine and various mu-opioids: the role of intrinsic efficacy and stimulus intensity.
We examined the effects of several opioids that vary in intrinsic efficacy at the mu-opioid receptor alone and in combination with morphine in a rat warm water tail withdrawal procedure using 50 degrees C and 52 degrees C water (i.e., low- and high-stimulus intensities). Morphine, levorphanol, dezocine, and buprenorphine produced dose-dependent increases in antinociception using both stimulus intensities. Butorphanol produced maximal levels of antinociception at the low, but not at the high, stimulus intensity, whereas nalbuphine failed to produce antinociception at either stimulus intensity. For cases in which butorphanol and nalbuphine failed to produce antinociception alone, these opioids dose-dependently antagonized the effects of morphine. When levorphanol, dezocine, and buprenorphine were combined with morphine, there was a dose-dependent enhancement of morphine's effects. Similar effects were obtained at the low-stimulus intensity when butorphanol was administered with morphine. In most cases, the effects of these combinations could be predicted by summating the effects of the drugs when administered alone. These results indicate that the level of antinociception produced by an opioid is dependent on the intrinsic efficacy of the drug and the stimulus intensity. Furthermore, the level of antinociception produced by the opioid, not necessarily the opioids' intrinsic efficacy, determines the type of interaction among opioids. ⋯ Compared with high-efficacy opioids, lower efficacy opioids produce lower levels of pain relief, especially in situations of moderate to severe pain. When opioids are given in combination, the effects can only be predicted on the basis of the antinociception obtained when the drugs are administered alone.