Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialComparison of epidural fentanyl versus epidural sufentanil for analgesia in ambulatory patients in early labor.
Epidural sufentanil, after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose, provides adequate analgesia and allows for ambulation during early labor. Epidural fentanyl has not been evaluated in this setting. The current study was designed to determine whether there is an analgesic difference between epidural fentanyl and epidural sufentanil in laboring patients. Forty-six laboring nulliparous women, at <5-cm cervical dilation, who requested epidural analgesia were enrolled. After a 3-mL test dose of lidocaine with epinephrine, patients were randomized to receive either sufentanil 20 microg or fentanyl 100 microg. After administration of the analgesic, pain scores and side effects were recorded for each patient at 5, 10, 15, 20, and 30 min and every 30 min thereafter, by an observer blinded to the technique used. There were no demographic differences between the two groups. Pain relief was rapid for all patients. The mean durations of analgesia were similar between the sufentanil group (138 +/- 50 min) and the fentanyl group (124 +/- 42 min). Side effects were similar between the two groups. In early laboring patients, epidural fentanyl 100 microg, after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose, provides analgesia comparable to that of sufentanil 20 microg. ⋯ In early laboring patients, epidural fentanyl 100 microg, after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose, provides analgesia comparable to that of sufentanil 20 microg.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2000
Case ReportsIntraoperative use of inhaled PGI(2) for acute pulmonary hypertension and right ventricular failure.
Inhaled prostacyclin (PGI(2)) can be used as an effective pulmonary vasodilator intraoperatively to treat pulmonary hypertension and impending right ventricular failure.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA randomized, double-blinded comparison of ondansetron, droperidol, and placebo for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting after supratentorial craniotomy.
Nausea or vomiting occurs frequently after craniotomy. Because of the need for frequent postoperative neurological assessment, an effective antiemetic with minimal sedative side effects is needed. Therefore, we compared ondansetron to droperidol in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. A total of 60 adults requiring elective supratentorial craniotomy received standardized IV anesthesia with 4 mg of ondansetron, 0.625 mg of droperidol, or placebo at skin closure. The incidence of postoperative nausea, emesis, pain and sedation scores, and rescue antiemetic use were recorded at 0, 0.5, 1, 4, 8, 12, 24, and 48 h. All groups were demographically similar. Differences existed for cumulative 8, 12, and 24 h incidences of nausea (24 h, P = 0.03) and emesis (24 h, P = 0.04). Within 4 h, when maximal effect could be expected from treatment, 20% of the ondansetron group, 25% of the droperidol group and 50% of the placebo group received rescue antiemetic (P = 0.12). No differences in pain (P = 0.82) or sedation (P = 0.74) scores were detected. Both ondansetron and droperidol prevent nausea; however, only droperidol reduces emesis after supratentorial craniotomy. The dose of droperidol used was not more sedating than ondansetron. Sustained reduction in nausea and emesis over 24 h indicates a preemptive benefit of prophylactic antiemetic in this surgical population. ⋯ Nausea and vomiting after brain surgery are particularly troubling, because effective treatment may cause sedation, making postoperative neurological assessment difficult. Our study shows that both ondansetron and droperidol are effective in reducing nausea, and that droperidol is particularly effective in reducing vomiting. Neither drug caused more sedation than placebo.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe comparative dose-response effects of melatonin and midazolam for premedication of adult patients: a double-blinded, placebo-controlled study.
We designed this prospective, randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to compare the perioperative effects of different doses of melatonin and midazolam. Doses of 0.05, 0.1, or 0. 2 mg/kg sublingual midazolam or melatonin or placebo were given to 84 women, approximately 100 min before a standard anesthetic. Sedation, anxiety, and orientation were quantified before, 10, 30, 60, and 90 min after premedication, and 15, 30, 60, and 90 min after admission to the recovery room. Psychomotor performance of the patient was evaluated at these times also, by using the digit-symbol substitution test and Trieger dot test. Patients who received premedication with either midazolam or melatonin had a significant decrease in anxiety levels and increase in levels of sedation preoperatively compared with control subjects. Patients in the three midazolam groups experienced significant psychomotor impairment in the preoperative period compared with melatonin or placebo. After operation, patients who received 0.2 mg/kg midazolam premedication had increased levels of sedation at 90 min compared with 0.05 and 0. 1 mg/kg melatonin groups. In addition, patients in the three midazolam groups had impairment of performance on the digit-symbol substitution test at all times compared with the 0.05 mg/kg melatonin group. Premedication with 0.05 mg/kg melatonin was associated with preoperative anxiolysis and sedation without impairment of cognitive and psychomotor skills or affecting the quality of recovery. ⋯ Premedication with 0.05 mg/kg melatonin was associated with preoperative anxiolysis and sedation without impairment of cognitive and psychomotor skills or affecting the quality of recovery.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialFentanyl improves analgesia but prolongs the onset of axillary brachial plexus block by peripheral mechanism.
We evaluated the effects of fentanyl added to lidocaine for axillary brachial plexus block in 66 adult patients scheduled for elective hand and forearm surgery. In this double-blinded study, all patients received 40 mL of 1.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine, injected into the brachial plexus sheath using the axillary perivascular technique, and they were randomized into three groups. Group 1 was given lidocaine containing 2 mL of normal saline plus 2 mL of normal saline IV. Patients in Group 2 received lidocaine containing 100 microg fentanyl plus 2 mL of normal saline IV. Group 3 patients received lidocaine containing 2 mL of normal saline plus 100 microg fentanyl IV. Sensory and motor blockade were evaluated by using a pinprick technique and by measuring the gripping force, respectively. The success rate of sensory blockade for radial and musculocutaneous nerves and the duration of the sensory blockade significantly increased in Group 2 (323 +/- 96 min) as compared with Group 1 (250 +/- 79 min). However, onset time of analgesia was prolonged in every nerve distribution by adding fentanyl to brachial plexus block. IV fentanyl had no effect on the success rate, onset, or duration of blockade. We conclude that the addition of fentanyl to lidocaine causes an improved success rate of sensory blockade but a delayed onset of analgesia, although this may be accounted for by the decreased pH caused by the fentanyl. ⋯ It is still unclear whether the addition of a peripheral opioid is useful for nerve blockade in humans. Peripheral application of fentanyl to lidocaine for axillary brachial plexus blockade in this study provided an improved success rate of sensory blockade and prolonged duration.