Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe anesthetic and recovery profile of two doses (60 and 80 mg) of plain mepivacaine for ambulatory spinal anesthesia.
Reports of transient neurological symptoms with the use of subarachnoid lidocaine has generated interest in alternate local anesthetics of intermediate duration, such as mepivacaine. This prospective randomized, double-blinded, dose-response study examined the anesthetic and recovery profiles of 60- and 80-mg doses of preservative-free plain mepivacaine for ambulatory spinal anesthesia. Sixty patients undergoing ambulatory anterior cruciate ligament repair of the knee under spinal anesthesia were randomized into two groups; Group 1 (29 patients) received 4 mL of 1.5% (60-mg dose) and Group 2 (31 patients) received 4 mL of 2% (80-mg dose) of plain mepivacaine. All patients received a combined spinal-epidural anesthetic technique. The epidural catheter was used only in the event the surgery outlasted the duration of surgical anesthesia with subarachnoid mepivacaine. Epidural supplementation was administered in three patients (12%) in Group 1 and one patient (3%) in Group 2 when the sensory block regressed to L-1 with surgery expected to last longer than 15 min. The cephalad dermatome level of the block and degree of motor block was comparable in the two groups. Times to two-segment and T-10 regression were comparable in the two groups (112 +/- 26 min in Group 1 versus 122 +/- 28 min in Group 2). Time to L-1 regression was significantly longer in Group 2 (146 +/- 28 min in Group 1 versus 159 +/- 19 min in Group 2). All of the ambulatory milestones were significantly faster in Group 1. Side effects, such as hypotension and emesis were negligible, severe bradycardia and urinary retention did not occur, and none of the patients in the two groups reported transient neurological symptoms over 24 h. In conclusion, plain mepivacaine in a 60- or 80-mg dose is a suitable local anesthetic choice for ambulatory spinal anesthesia with respect to anesthetic, as well as recovery profiles. ⋯ We evaluated the anesthetic and recovery profiles of 60- and 80-mg doses of plain mepivacaine for ambulatory spinal anesthesia. Both doses produced comparable sensory and motor block. Sensory and motor regression and ambulatory milestones were 20-30 min longer with the 80-mg dose. Side effects were negligible and transient neurological symptoms were not reported during a 24-h follow-up.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialRetrobulbar versus systemic application of morphine during titratable regional anesthesia via retrobulbar catheter in intraocular surgery.
We investigated the effects of morphine on postoperative pain in patients undergoing intraocular surgery using a new indwelling catheter. Although morphine produced central analgesic effects, there was no evidence for the involvement of peripheral opioid receptors in the modulation of ocular pain.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialPostoperative recovery after desflurane, propofol, or isoflurane anesthesia among morbidly obese patients: a prospective, randomized study.
Recovery from anesthesia might be compromised in obese patients. Because of its pharmacological properties, desflurane might allow rapid postoperative recovery for these patients. We compared postoperative recovery for 36 obese patients randomized to receive either desflurane, propofol, or isoflurane to maintain anesthesia during laparoscopic gastroplasties. Anesthesia was induced with propofol and succinylcholine IV and was maintained with rocuronium, alfentanil, inhaled nitrous oxide, and the study drug. Immediate recovery (i.e., times from the discontinuation of anesthesia to tracheal extubation, eye opening, and the ability to state one's name) was measured. At the time of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) admission, arterial saturation and the ability of patients to move were recorded. In the PACU, intermediate recovery was measured by using sedation and psychometric evaluations, 30, 60, and 120 min postoperatively. Data were compared between groups by using the Kruskal-Wallis and chi(2) tests. Results were reported as means +/- SD. P: < 0.05, compared with desflurane, was considered significant. Immediate recovery occurred faster, and was more consistent, after desflurane than after propofol or isoflurane (times to extubation were 6 +/- 1 min, 13 +/- 8 min [P: < 0.05, compared with desflurane], and 12 +/- 6 min [P: < 0.05, compared with desflurane], respectively). At PACU admission, SpO(2) values were significantly higher and patient mobility was significantly better after desflurane than after isoflurane or propofol. Sedation was significantly less pronounced with desflurane at 30 and 120 min postoperatively. In morbidly obese patients, postoperative immediate and intermediate recoveries are more rapid after desflurane than after propofol or isoflurane anesthesia. This advantage of desflurane persists at least for 2 h after surgery and is associated with both an improvement in patient mobility and a reduced incidence of postoperative desaturation. ⋯ In morbidly obese patients, postoperative immediate and intermediate recoveries are more rapid and consistent after desflurane than after propofol or isoflurane anesthesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEmergence agitation after sevoflurane versus propofol in pediatric patients.
Sevoflurane may be associated with a high incidence of emergence agitation in preschool children. We tested the hypothesis that maintenance of anesthesia with propofol after sevoflurane induction would reduce the incidence of this excitatory behavior compared with continuing sevoflurane for maintenance. We conducted a randomized, single-blinded, two-period, cross-over study in 16 preschool age children undergoing repeated brief general anesthetics for eye examination. After sevoflurane induction, patients were randomly assigned to receive either sevoflurane or propofol anesthesia for maintenance. The alternative anesthetic was used for the maintenance of anesthesia on the second occasion. We compared the speed and quality of recovery characteristics of these anesthetics, as well as, overall parent satisfaction with anesthesia. Eight patients first received sevoflurane and the remaining eight patients first received propofol. Of the patients who received sevoflurane for the maintenance of anesthesia, 38% developed emergence agitation. In contrast, none developed emergence agitation when propofol was administered for maintenance of anesthesia. Despite emergence agitation, sevoflurane provided a shorter postanesthesia care unit stay than propofol. Parent satisfaction with anesthesia was greater with propofol than with sevoflurane. ⋯ In this cross-over study, we observed the incidence of emergence agitation with sevoflurane (38%) was significantly greater than with propofol (0%) in premedicated, preschool-aged children undergoing minor noninvasive surgery.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Sep 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialMultiple-injection axillary brachial plexus block: A comparison of two methods of nerve localization-nerve stimulation versus paresthesia.
We conducted this prospective study to compare the onset time and the success rate of a multiple-injection axillary brachial plexus block performed by using two methods of nerve localization: paresthesia elicitation or nerve stimulation. Each of the major nerves of the plexus was located by elicitation of a paresthesia (Group PAR; n = 50) or by nerve stimulation (Group PNS; n = 50) and injected with 10 mL of local anesthetic solution. Time to perform the block, onset time of the primary block, time to achieve readiness for surgery, and total anesthetic time were significantly shorter in Group PNS than in Group PAR. The incidence of complete block was larger in Group PNS than in Group PAR (91% vs 76%; P: < 0. 05), and this was related to a larger success rate for anesthetizing the radial and the musculocutaneous nerves (P: < 0.05). The frequency of venous puncture was larger in Group PAR (P: < 0.05). For multiple-injection axillary brachial plexus block, we conclude that nerve stimulation resulted in a greater success rate and a faster onset than paresthesia elicitation, and it should be considered when the radial and musculocutaneous nerve distributions are involved in the surgical area. ⋯ Two methods of nerve localization were compared when performing an axillary brachial plexus block by the multiple-injection technique. Nerve stimulation provided a faster onset and a greater incidence of complete block, related to a better success rate for anesthetizing the radial and the musculocutaneous nerves, than paresthesia elicitation.