Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA randomized, double-blinded comparison of intrathecal morphine, sufentanil and their combination versus IV morphine patient-controlled analgesia for postthoracotomy pain.
We compared the analgesic effect of lumbar intrathecal (IT) 0.5 mg morphine (Group M, n = 10), 50 microg sufentanil (Group S, n = 10), and their combination (Group S-M, n = 10) given before general anesthesia and patient-controlled analgesia with IV morphine (Group C, n = 19) in a randomized, double-blinded study performed in patients undergoing thoracotomy. Pain visual analog scale (VAS) and morphine consumption were assessed for 24 h. In Group S-M the number of patients initially titrated with IV morphine was less than in group C (30 vs 84%, P < 0.05). Morphine requirement was higher in Group C (71 +/- 30 mg) than in Groups S (46 +/- 34 mg, P < 0.05), M (38 +/- 31 mg, P < 0.05) and S-M (23 +/- 16 mg, P < 0.01). VAS scores were significantly decreased during the first 0-11 postoperative h at rest and during the first 0-8 postoperative h on coughing in Groups M and S-M rather than in Group C. The incidence of side effects was infrequent except for urinary retention. Preoperative IT morphine or combined sufentanil and morphine could be given as a booster to achieve rapidly effective analgesia in the immediate postoperative period. ⋯ As compared with IV patient-controlled analgesia, intrathecal morphine or combined sufentanil and morphine provided superior postoperative pain relief both at rest (11 h) and on coughing (8 h) than did IV patient-controlled analgesia morphine alone. IV morphine requirement was decreased during the first postoperative day after posterolateral thoracotomy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Editorial CommentHow can local anesthetic in the wound not help?
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialS(+)-ketamine for rectal premedication in children.
Our purpose for this prospective, randomized, and double-blinded study was to evaluate the anesthetic efficacy of S(+)-ketamine, an enantiomer of racemic ketamine, compared with a combination of S(+)-ketamine and midazolam, and plain midazolam for rectal premedication in pediatric anesthesia. Sixty-two children, ASA physical status I and II, scheduled for minor surgery, were randomly assigned to be given rectally one of the following: 1.5 mg/kg preservative-free S(+)-ketamine, a combination of 0.75 mg/kg preservative-free S(+)-ketamine and 0.75 mg/kg midazolam, or 0.75 mg/kg midazolam. Preoperative anesthetic efficacy was graded during a period of 20 min by using a five-point scale from 1 = awake to 5 = asleep. ⋯ Whereas the mask acceptance score was comparable in the three study groups, a 25% rate of complications during anesthesia induction via face was observed in the S(+)-ketamine study group (P < 0.05 versus other study groups). Our conclusions are that S(+)-ketamine for rectal premedication in the dose we chose shows a poor anesthetic effect and a frequent incidence of side effects during induction of anesthesia via face mask compared with the combination of midazolam/S(+)-ketamine and plain midazolam. Dose-response studies of S(+)-ketamine for rectal premedication in pediatric anesthesia may be warranted.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialPatient-controlled interscalene analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% versus bupivacaine 0.15% after major open shoulder surgery: the effects on hand motor function.
We compared the effects of patient-controlled interscalene analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% and patient-controlled interscalene analgesia (PCIA) with bupivacaine 0.15% on hand grip strength after major open shoulder surgery. Sixty patients scheduled for elective major shoulder surgery were prospectively randomized to receive in a double-blinded fashion either ropivacaine or bupivacaine through an interscalene catheter. Before surgery, all patients received an interscalene block (ISB) with either 40 mL of 0.6% ropivacaine or 40 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine. Six h after ISB, the patients received a continuous infusion of either 0.2% ropivacaine or 0.15% bupivacaine for 48 h. In both groups, the PCIA infusion rate was 5 mL/h plus a bolus of 4 mL with a lockout time of 20 min. Strength in the hand was assessed preoperatively, 24 h, and 48 h after ISB and 6 h after stopping the infusion of local anesthetic. The presence of paresthesia in the fingers was checked. Pain relief was assessed using a visual analog scale; side effects were noted, and the patients rated their satisfaction 54 h after the block. A significant decrease of strength in the hand was observed in the Bupivacaine group 24, 48, and 54 h after ISB (P < 0.05). Paresthesia was more frequently reported in the Bupivacaine group for the second and third fingers 48 h after ISB (P < 0.05) and in the first three fingers 6 h after discontinuation of the local anesthetic infusion (P: < 0.05). The pain score was similar in the two groups at all times, and patient satisfaction was comparable between the two groups. We conclude that the use of the PCIA technique with ropivacaine 0.2% or bupivacaine 0.15% provides a similar pain relief after major shoulder surgery. However, ropivacaine 0.2% is associated with better preservation of strength in the hand and less paresthesia in the fingers. ⋯ We compared the patient-controlled interscalene analgesia technique with ropivacaine 0.2% and bupivacaine 0.15% after major open shoulder surgery. For similar pain control ropivacaine is associated with better preservation of strength in the hand and less paresthesia in the fingers.