Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
Meta AnalysisLocal anesthetic infiltration for postoperative pain relief after laparoscopy: a qualitative and quantitative systematic review of intraperitoneal, port-site infiltration and mesosalpinx block.
In a systematic review, we evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of peripheral local anesthetics (LA) compared with placebo or no treatment in the control of postoperative pain after laparoscopic surgery. A total of 41 trials with data from 2794 patients were considered appropriate for analysis. Of these 41 RCTs, 13 evaluated intraperitoneal LA after cholecystectomy, four RCTs assessed intraperitoneal LA after other procedures, eight RCTs evaluated port-site infiltration after various procedures, 12 RCTs evaluated mesosalpinx or fallopian tube block after sterilization, and four RCTs considered combined LA regimens. Outcome measures were pain scores, analgesic consumption, and time to first analgesic request. Efficacy was estimated by significant difference (P < 0.05), as reported in the original reports, and by calculation of the weighted mean difference of visual analog scale pain scores between treatment groups. Improved pain relief was observed in seven of the 13 RCTs of intraperitoneal LA after cholecystectomy and in four RCTs of other procedures. A statistically significant weighted mean difference of -13 mm visual analog scale (95% confidence intervals [CI]: -20 to -6) in favor of the treatment groups was observed after cholecystectomy. Three of eight trials of port-site infiltration showed significant differences but questionable clinical importance and validity in two; weighted mean difference was not statistically significant between treatment groups (95% CI -9 to 1). All RCTs of mesosalpinx or fallopian tube block after sterilization showed improved pain relief with a statistically significant weighted mean difference of -19 mm (95% CI -25 to -14) in favor of treatment groups. Data of combined regimens were positive, however, sparse. We conclude that there was evidence for a statistically significant but clinically questionable, important effect of intraperitoneal LA for postoperative pain control. There was evidence for a significant but short-lasting effect of mesosalpinx/fallopian tube block after sterilization, but there was a lack of evidence for any important effect of port-site infiltration. Data from combined regimens were too sparse for conclusions. ⋯ A systematic review summarizes, through transparent methodology, available information from randomized, controlled trials to produce the best available evidence-based estimate of a "true" clinical effect of an intervention. This systematic review confirms intraperitoneal and mesosalpinx local anesthetic block, not port-site infiltration, to have some impact on postoperative pain after laparoscopy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
Meta AnalysisPrevention of pain on injection with propofol: a quantitative systematic review.
The best intervention to prevent pain on injection with propofol is unknown. We conducted a systematic literature search (Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library, bibliographies, hand searching, any language, up to September 1999) for full reports of randomized comparisons of analgesic interventions with placebo to prevent that pain. We analyzed data from 6264 patients (mostly adults) of 56 reports. On average, 70% of the patients reported pain on injection. Fifteen drugs, 12 physical measurements, and combinations were tested. With IV lidocaine 40 mg, given with a tourniquet 30 to 120 s before the injection of propofol, the number of patients needed to be treated (NNT) to prevent pain in one who would have had pain had they received placebo was 1.6. The closest to this came meperidine 40 mg with tourniquet (NNT 1.9) and metoclopramide 10 mg with tourniquet (NNT 2.2). With lidocaine mixed with propofol, the best NNT was 2.4; with IV alfentanil or fentanyl, it was 3 to 4. IV lidocaine before the injection of propofol was less analgesic. Temperature had no significant effect. There was a lack of data for all other interventions to allow meaningful conclusions. The diameter of venous catheters and speed of injection had no impact on pain. ⋯ IV lidocaine (0.5 mg/kg) should be given with a rubber tourniquet on the forearm, 30 to 120 s before the injection of propofol; lidocaine will prevent pain in approximately 60% of the patients treated in this manner.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of urapidil, clonidine, meperidine and placebo in preventing postanesthetic shivering.
This placebo-controlled study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of urapidil compared with clonidine and meperidine in preventing postanesthetic shivering, which is common after anesthesia administration and may be very distressing. We studied 120 patients undergoing elective abdominal or orthopedic surgery under standardized general anesthesia. After surgery, patients were randomly assigned to one of four groups (each group n = 30) using a double-blinded protocol: Group A received 0.2 mg/kg urapidil; Group B, 3 microg/kg clonidine; Group C, 0.4 mg/kg meperidine; and Group D, saline 0.9% as placebo. Postanesthetic shivering was scored by using a five-point scale. Clonidine and meperidine significantly reduced the incidence and the severity of shivering in comparison with placebo, whereas there were no significant differences between the urapidil and placebo groups. Both clonidine and meperidine caused a significantly prolonged emergence time (13.4 +/- 5.8 and 13. 3 +/- 5.0 min, respectively) compared with placebo (10.4 +/- 5.3 min) and urapidil (11.4 +/- 2.9 min). We confirmed that both clonidine and meperidine are effective in preventing postanesthetic shivering, whereas urapidil, in our setting and dosage, was not effective. Patients who received clonidine or meperidine had a prolonged emergence time. In the dosage used, urapidil seems to be unable to prevent postanesthetic shivering. ⋯ Shivering (irregular muscle activity) is common after surgery and anesthesia. This study compared urapidil (an antihypertensive drug) as a prophylaxis with two established antishivering drugs (meperidine and clonidine) and placebo. In the dosage used, we were unable to show a significant benefit of urapidil.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe hemodynamic and adrenergic effects of perioperative dexmedetomidine infusion after vascular surgery.
We tested dexmedetomidine, an alpha(2) agonist that decreases heart rate, blood pressure, and plasma norepinephrine concentration, for its ability to attenuate stress responses during emergence from anesthesia after major vascular operations. Patients scheduled for vascular surgery received either dexmedetomidine (n = 22) or placebo (n = 19) IV beginning 20 min before the induction of anesthesia and continuing until 48 h after the end of surgery. All patients received standardized anesthesia. Heart rate and arterial blood pressure were kept within predetermined limits by varying anesthetic level and using vasoactive medications. Heart rate, arterial blood pressure, and inhaled anesthetic concentration were monitored continuously; additional measurements included plasma and urine catecholamines. During emergence from anesthesia, heart rate was slower with dexmedetomidine (73 +/- 11 bpm) than placebo (83 +/- 20 bpm) (P = 0.006), and the percentage of time the heart rate was within the predetermined hemodynamic limits was more frequent with dexmedetomidine (P < 0.05). Plasma norepinephrine levels increased only in the placebo group and were significantly lower for the dexmedetomidine group during the immediate postoperative period (P = 0.0002). We conclude that dexmedetomidine attenuates increases in heart rate and plasma norepinephrine concentrations during emergence from anesthesia. ⋯ The alpha(2) agonist, dexmedetomidine, attenuates increases in heart rate and plasma norepinephrine concentrations during emergence from anesthesia in vascular surgery patients.