Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialAmbulatory labor epidural analgesia: bupivacaine versus ropivacaine.
Dilute concentrations of bupivacaine combined with fentanyl have recently been used to initiate labor epidural analgesia in an attempt to balance adequate analgesia and minimal maternal motor blockade. Similar concentrations of ropivacaine have not been evaluated. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was designed to compare the efficacy of 20 mL of either 0.08% bupivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl or 0.08% ropivacaine plus 2 microg/mL fentanyl to initiate ambulatory labor epidural analgesia. Forty nulliparous women in early ( 0 but < 20 at 20 min. The time (mean +/- SD) to visual analog scale score = 0 was BF (n = 18): 12.0 +/- 4.5 min and RF (n = 19): 12.4 +/- 4.0 min (P > 0.05). Spontaneous micturition was observed in 65% (13 of 20) BF compared with 100% (20 of 20) RF (P < 0.01), and ambulation was demonstrated in 75% (15 of 20) BF compared with 100% (20 of 20) RF (P < 0.03). The incidence of forceps delivery was 35% (7 of 20) BF compared with 10% (2 of 20) RF (P < 0.04). The results of this study indicate that dilute ropivacaine combined with fentanyl effectively initiates epidural analgesia while concurrently preserving maternal ability to void and ambulate. ⋯ As compared with a similar dilute concentration of bupivacaine, 20 mL of dilute (0.08%) ropivacaine combined with fentanyl (2 microg/mL) effectively initiates epidural analgesia in nulliparous women in early, established labor while preserving their ability to micturate and ambulate. Of importance, it appears that a true ambulatory epidural analgesic for women in labor is now possible.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of remifentanil and alfentanil for use with propofol in patients undergoing minimally invasive coronary artery bypass surgery.
Most patients undergoing minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery can be awakened and tracheally extubated in the operating room. We have compared two techniques of total IV anesthesia in this patient population: 30 patients (aged 44 to 74 yr; 24 male) premedicated with temazepam were randomly assigned to receive either remifentanil-propofol or alfentanil-propofol. Anesthesia was induced with remifentanil 2 microg/kg or with alfentanil 40 microg/kg, with propofol, and maintained with remifentanil at 0.25 or 0.5 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) or alfentanil at 0.5 or 1 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). The stable maintenance infusion rate of propofol was adjusted for age. Times to awakening and tracheal extubation were recorded. Postoperatively, IV morphine provided by patient-controlled analgesia was used for 48 h. Times to awakening and tracheal extubation (mean +/- SD) were shorter (P < 0. 01) in patients receiving remifentanil, and interpatient variations in times to awakening and tracheal extubation smaller (awakening 25 +/- 7 vs 74 +/- 32 min, and extubation 27 +/- 7 vs 77 +/- 32 min). Analysis of variance revealed that postoperative consumption of morphine was dependent on both the intraoperative opioid and the time elapsed after surgery (P < 0.05): patient-controlled analgesia morphine use during the first 3 h after awakening was more in patients receiving remifentanil (P < 0.01). ⋯ Recovery of patients undergoing Minimally Invasive Direct Coronary Artery Bypass Surgery is significantly shorter and more predictable after total IV anesthesia with remifentanil-propofol than with alfentanil-propofol, which may be important if the goal is that patients will be awakened and tracheally extubated in the operating room.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2000
Case Reports Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialDoes ketamine have preemptive effects in women undergoing abdominal hysterectomy procedures?
Ketamine may produce "preemptive" analgesia when administered before surgically induced trauma. Therefore, we hypothesized that pre- versus postincisional administration of ketamine would improve pain control after abdominal hysterectomy procedures. Eighty-nine patients were randomly assigned to one of three treatment groups according to a placebo-controlled, double-blinded protocol: Group 1 (placebo) received saline 0.04 mL/kg IV immediately before and after surgery; Group 2 (preincision), received ketamine 0.4 mg/kg IV before skin incision and saline at the end of the operation; and Group 3 (postincision), received saline before skin incision, and ketamine 0.4 mg/kg IV was given after skin closure. The general anesthetic technique was standardized in all three treatment groups. During the first postoperative hour, Group 3 experienced significantly less pain than Groups 1 and 2, as assessed by using both visual analog and verbal rating scales. There were no significant differences between Groups 1 and 2 with respect to pain scores, postoperative opioid analgesic requirements, and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. We conclude that a single dose of ketamine 0.4 mg/kg IV fails to produce preemptive analgesic effects. ⋯ Even though ketamine 0.4 mg/kg IV has short-lasting acute analgesic effects, it failed to produce a preemptive effect when given before abdominal hysterectomy procedures.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of the costs and efficacy of ondansetron versus dolasetron for antiemetic prophylaxis.
The optimal dose and timing of 5-HT(3) antagonist administration for prophylaxis against postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) remains controversial. Although 5-HT(3) antagonists seem to be most effective when administered near the end of surgery, there are no data on the comparative efficacy or costs associated with the 5-HT(3) antagonists dolasetron and ondansetron when administered at the end of the operation. In this double-blinded study, 200 outpatients undergoing otolaryngologic procedures with a standardized general anesthetic received 4 (O4) or 8 mg (O8) of ondansetron or 12.5 (D12.5) or 25 mg (D25) of dolasetron IV within 30 min before the end of surgery. A blinded observer recorded the emetic episodes, maximum nausea score, recovery room resource and drug use, nursing time spent managing PONV, times to achieve discharge criteria from the Phase 1 and 2 recovery units, postdischarge emesis, and patient satisfaction. Total costs were calculated by using the perspective of a free-standing surgicenter. There were no differences in patient demographics, incidence of PONV, need for rescue medications, time spent in the recovery areas, unanticipated hospital admissions, or patient satisfaction among the four treatment groups. The mean total costs (95% confidence intervals) to prevent PONV in one patient were lowest in the D12.5 group: $23.89 (17.18-28.79) vs $37.81 (30.29-45.32), $33.91 (28.92-39.35), and $75.18 (61.13-89.24) for D25, O4, and O8, respectively. Excluding nursing labor costs did not alter this finding: $18.51 (14.18-22.85), $34.77 (28.03-41.49), $31.77 (28. 92-39.35), and $71.76 (58.17-85.35) for D12.5, D25, O4, and O8, respectively. We conclude that 12.5 mg of dolasetron IV is more cost effective than 4 mg of ondansetron IV for preventing PONV after otolaryngologic surgery and is associated with similar patient satisfaction. ⋯ When administered at the end of surgery, 12.5 mg of dolasetron IV is as effective as 25 mg of dolasetron IV, 4 mg of ondansetron IV, and 8 mg of ondansetron IV in preventing emetic symptoms after otolaryngologic surgery and was associated with similar patient satisfaction at a reduced cost. There were no differences in the antiemetic efficacy of the 4 and 8 mg doses of ondansetron.