Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of regularly administered sustained release oral morphine with intramuscular morphine for control of postoperative pain.
We studied the efficacy and side effect profile of regularly administered, oral sustained-release morphine sulfate tablets (MST) and IM morphine in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty under lumbar spinal anesthesia. Patients in Group I received MST 20 mg 12 hourly and a placebo IM injection 6 hourly regularly. Group II patients received an oral placebo 12 hourly and morphine sulfate 10 mg IM 6 hourly regularly. Rescue analgesia was provided with regular diclofenac suppositories and patient-controlled analgesia. Pain scores assessed by using visual analog scale and verbal pain scoring at rest and with movement were low in both groups, with no statistical difference between groups. Mean patient-controlled analgesia morphine consumption during the 48-h study was 16.7 mg in the IM group and 25.9 mg in the MST group. The difference between the groups was significant at 36 h postoperatively (0.03). Side effects of sedation and respiratory depression were not problematic in either group, with a maximal sedation score of 2 occurring once in a patient in Group II. Nausea and vomiting occurred more often in Group II, but this was not statistically significant, with a mean nausea/vomiting score for Group II of 1.7. We conclude that oral, sustained-release morphine is an attractive alternative to IM opiates in patients undergoing body surface surgery under regional anesthesia. ⋯ Each postoperative analgesic has its own limitations for route of administration, dosage, and potential side effects. Using the oral route for drug administration seems more attractive than other methods but may not be suitable in all postoperative patients. We studied the efficacy and side effect profile of sustained-release, oral morphine compared with standard IM morphine for the treatment of pain after hip replacement surgery. We concluded that use of the oral preparation is a suitable alternative to the IM route in this population undergoing surgery under spinal anesthesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPrevention of hypotension by a single 5-mg dose of ephedrine during small-dose spinal anesthesia in prehydrated cesarean delivery patients.
To evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic ephedrine for the prevention of hypotension associated with spinal anesthesia, 50 parturients undergoing cesarean delivery received either ephedrine 5 mg or saline IV in a double-blinded fashion immediately after the induction of spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia was performed with hyperbaric bupivacaine 6.6 mg combined with sufentanil 3.3 microg as part of a combined spinal-epidural technique. All patients received 1000 mL of lactated Ringer's solution and 500 mL of hydroxyethylstarch 6% before the spinal injection. Additional ephedrine boluses (5 mg) were administered IV when the systolic blood pressure or heart rate decreased by more than 30% from baseline values, when systolic blood pressure became <100 mm Hg, or when patients complained of nausea or feeling faint. The height of the block was equal in the groups; however, more patients in the placebo group were found to develop hypotension (58% vs 25%, P < 0. 05). Only 2 (8%) patients in the ephedrine group developed hypotension with systolic blood pressure values <90 mm Hg, whereas 10 patients (42%) in the saline group experienced hypotension of this severity (P < 0.05). In addition, there was a higher incidence of nausea in the placebo-treated patients. The total amount of ephedrine administered did not differ between groups. These findings suggest that the incidence and severity of hypotension are significantly reduced by the IV administration of a prophylactic dose of 5 mg ephedrine in patients receiving small-dose spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. ⋯ Ephedrine is the drug most often used to correct hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in healthy patients. A single IV dose of 5 mg decreases the occurrence and limits the severity of hypotension in prehydrated subjects receiving a small-dose spinal local anesthetic-opioid combination.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPatient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor: the effects of the increase in bolus and lockout interval.
Most studies use a bolus size of <6 mL of 0.125% bu- pivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) during labor. In this double-blinded, randomized study, we compared the efficacy of a larger bolus injected via a PCEA pump to a conventional PCEA setting. By using a combination of 0.125% bupivacaine with 1:800,000 epinephrine and 0.625 microg/mL sufentanil, the first PCEA setting was typical (4 mL/8 min), whereas the other combined a 12-mL bolus dose and a 25-min lockout interval, i.e., similar maximal hourly dose. Rescue analgesia was provided with 6 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine. Patient satisfaction and pain were scored on verbal and visual analog scales. Data were analyzed from 103 parturients in the 12-mL/25-min group and 100 in the 4-mL/8-min group. In the 12-mL/25-min group, the median pain score on a 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale was lower at 6-cm cervical dilation (1 [range = 0-8] vs 3 [0-8]) and at delivery (1 [0-10] vs 2 [0-10]). Satisfaction was also better (70% vs 38% "excellent" opinions, at 6-cm cervical dilation). Use of the pump (ratio of successful and total demands) was high and similar in both groups. Rescue analgesia was comparable. Doses of analgesics were greater in the 12-mL/25-min group (hourly bupivacaine dose = 13.9 +/- 5.3 [mean+/- SD] vs 9.4 +/- 4.1 mg). No differences were noted between groups for the severity of hypotension, ephedrine requirement, outcome of the delivery, and Apgar scores. ⋯ A patient-controlled epidural analgesia setting that allows a parturient to receive an increased analgesic dose improves satisfaction with patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of the incidence of the oculocardiac and oculorespiratory reflexes during sevoflurane or halothane anesthesia for strabismus surgery in children.
We examined changes in the cardiorespiratory system of small children during surgical correction of strabismus with a laryngeal mask airway and spontaneous respiration with sevoflurane or halothane inhaled anesthesia. Fifty-one children, 1-7 yr old, having outpatient strabismus correction were randomized to sevoflurane (S) or halothane (H) in 66% nitrous oxide at 1.3 minimum alveolar concentration. Children breathed spontaneously through a laryngeal mask airway and were not pretreated with anticholinergics. The oculocardiac reflex (OCR), defined as a 20% decrease in heart rate (HR) from baseline, dysrhythmias, or sinoatrial arrest concomitant with ocular muscle traction occurred less frequently with sevoflurane than with halothane (S 38%, H79%, P = 0.009). The baseline HR was higher with sevoflurane (S 114 +/- 13 bpm, H 101 +/- 15 bpm, P = 0.002). The lowest HR occurred with halothane (S 95 +/- 22 bpm, H 73 +/- 19 bpm, P = 0.001). The incidence of dysrhythmias was higher in the halothane group (S 4%, H 42%, P = 0.004). Reductions in minute ventilation and PETCO(2) accompanied OCRs. Airway irritability was present with halothane only (S 0, H 3). Eleven children, of whom the majority had received halothane, required measures to correct SpO(2) < 95% or PETCO(2) > 60 mm Hg during maintenance anesthesia (S 11%, H 32%). Sevoflurane may be a more suitable anesthetic than halothane for operations involving traction on the ocular muscles with spontaneous respiration in children because of reduced incidence of OCR, airway irritability, and ventilatory disturbances. ⋯ Some children experience a sudden slowing of the heart and impaired breathing when the surgeon pulls on the eye muscles during squint operations under anesthesia. Sevoflurane, a recently developed anesthetic vapor, may reduce this problem when compared with the established vapor halothane.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialReduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting by dimenhydrinate suppositories after strabismus surgery in children.
Although dimenhydrinate has been used for treatment and prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) since the fifties, there have been few controlled studies about its efficacy. We performed a double-blinded study of 301 children aged 4 to 10 yr who underwent strabismus surgery. Preanesthetic medication with midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) as well as application of either dimenhydrinate suppositories or a placebo preparation was performed 30 min before the induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced with thiopentone (5-10 mg/kg) and vecuronium (0.1 mg/kg) and maintained with halothane (1%-2%) in N(2)O/O(2) (65%/35%). The incidence of PONV, requirements for rescue dimenhydrinate, and time to recovery were recorded. The overall incidence of PONV was 60.1% in the placebo group and 30.7% in the dimenhydrinate group. In the dimenhydrinate group, children had to be observed in the recovery room significantly longer than those in the placebo group. Children having received dimenhydrinate were discharged from the recovery room with lower arousal scores. We conclude that the rectal administration of dimenhydrinate is effective for the prevention of PONV, although the sedative effect may require longer postoperative monitoring. ⋯ We performed a double-blinded, randomized study to investigate the effects of prophylactic rectal dimenhydrinate application on postoperative nausea and vomiting in children undergoing strabismus surgery. In comparison with placebo, dimenhydrinate reduced the incidence of postoperative vomiting from 60.1% to 30.7%.