Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical TrialProlonged epidural infusions of ropivacaine (2 mg/mL) after colonic surgery: the impact of adding fentanyl.
We evaluated the safety and efficacy of a 72-h epidural infusion of ropivacaine and measured the impact of adding fentanyl 2 microg/mL to the required infusion rate, on the quality of postoperative pain relief and the incidence of side effects, after colonic surgery. One hundred fifty-five patients scheduled for elective colonic surgery were randomized in this trial. Epidural infusions of ropivacaine 2 mg/mL with fentanyl 2 microg/mL (R + F) and without fentanyl (R) were commenced during surgery and continued for 72 h postoperatively. This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, multi-center trial. The median infusion rate required was less in the R + F group (9.3 vs 11.5 mL/h, P < 0.001). Median pain scores at rest and on coughing were lower in the R + F group (P < 0.0001). The incidence of hypotension was more in the R + F group (P = 0.01). Time to readiness for discharge was delayed in the R + F group (median 6.6 vs 5.5 days, P = 0.012). The addition of fentanyl to ropivacaine resulted in decreased infusion rates and enhanced pain control; however, adverse effects were increased and readiness to discharge was delayed. ⋯ Epidural infusions of ropivacaine with and without fentanyl were administered to patients to control pain after colonic surgery. Patients who received ropivacaine with fentanyl had better pain control, increased side effects, and delayed readiness to discharge. This study questions the value of adding opioids to epidural infusions of local anesthetics.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical TrialThe efficacy and resource utilization of remifentanil and fentanyl in fast-track coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a prospective randomized, double-blinded controlled, multi-center trial.
We compared (a) the perioperative complications; (b) times to eligibility for, and actual time of the following: extubation, less intense monitoring, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital discharge; and (c) resource utilization of nursing ratio for patients receiving either a typical fentanyl/isoflurane/propofol regimen or a remifentanil/isoflurane/propofol regimen for fast-track cardiac anesthesia in 304 adults by using a prospective randomized, double-blinded, double-dummy trial. There were no differences in demographic data, or perioperative mortality and morbidity between the two study groups. The mini-mental status examination at postoperative Days 1 to 3 were similar between the two groups. The eligible and actual times for extubation, less intense monitoring, ICU discharge, and hospital discharge were not significantly different. Further analyses revealed no differences in times for extubation and resource utilization after stratification by preoperative risk scores, age, and country. The nurse/patient ratio was similar between the remifentanil/isoflurane/propofol and fentanyl/isoflu-rane/propofol groups during the initial ICU phase and less intense monitoring phase. Increasing preoperative risk scores and older age (>70 yr) were associated with longer times until extubation (eligible), ICU discharge (eligible and actual), and hospital discharge (eligible and actual). Times until extubation (eligible and actual) and less intense monitoring (eligible) were significantly shorter in Canadian patients than United States' patients. However, there was no difference in hospital length of stay in Canadian and United States' patients. We conclude that both anesthesia techniques permit early and similar times until tracheal extubation, less intense monitoring, ICU and hospital discharge, and reduced resource utilization after coronary artery bypass graft surgery. ⋯ An ultra-short opioid technique was compared with a standard fast-track small-dose opioid technique in coronary artery bypass graft patients in a prospective randomized, double-blinded controlled study. The postoperative recovery and resource utilization, including stratification of preoperative risk score, age, and country, were analyzed.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe intubating laryngeal mask airway after induction of general anesthesia versus awake fiberoptic intubation in patients with difficult airways.
We performed the current study to compare tracheal intubation (TI) using awake fiberoptic intubation (AFOI) and TI using the intubating laryngeal mask airway (ILMA) in patients with difficult airway. Our hypothesis was that patients with difficult airways could be safely intubated after induction of anesthesia using the ILMA. After ethics approval and informed consent, 38 patients who were identified to have difficult airways were randomly assigned to AFOI or TI using the ILMA. Patients in the AFOI group had the usual sedation and airway topicalization. Patients in the ILMA group were induced with propofol for ILMA insertion and succinylcholine for TI. The first TI attempt was done blindly via the ILMA and all subsequent attempts were performed with fiberoptic guidance. All patients in the ILMA group were successfully ventilated. Successful TI was achieved in all patients in both groups. However, in 10% of the patients in the ILMA group, TI was achieved by a second anesthesiologist who was more experienced with the use of the ILMA. In a postoperative questionnaire, patients in the ILMA group were more satisfied with their method of TI (P < 0.01). The ILMA is a useful device in the management of patients with difficult airways and may be a valuable alternative to AFOI when AFOI is contraindicated or in the patient with the unanticipated difficult airway. ⋯ The intubating laryngeal mask airway is a useful device in the management of patients with difficult airways and may be a valuable alternative to awake fiberoptic intubation (AFOI) when AFOI is contraindicated or in the patient with the unanticipated difficult airway.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialDuration of action of vecuronium after an intubating dose of rapacuronium, vecuronium, or succinylcholine.
Rapacuronium (RAP) is a new, rapid-onset, short-duration, nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocker. If RAP is used to facilitate endotracheal intubation, what will the duration of a subsequent maintenance dose of vecuronium (VEC) be? We investigated the duration of action of a maintenance dose of VEC after intubation with RAP, VEC, or succinylcholine (SUC). Adult surgical patients under general anesthesia were randomly allocated to receive a tracheal intubating dose of RAP 1.5 mg/kg, VEC 0.1 mg/kg, or SUC 1 mg/kg. The anesthetic was induced with propofol and maintained with propofol, nitrous oxide, and oxygen. Neuromuscular function was monitored with electromyography. Recovery of the intubating dose of neuromuscular blocker was allowed to occur spontaneously until the first twitch of the train-of-four (T1) reached 50% of baseline, and then VEC 0.025 mg/kg (0.5 x 95% effective dose [ED(95)]) was administered. The onset, duration, and recovery to T1 = 25% and 50% were recorded. The durations of action (recovery of T1 25%) after intubating doses of RAP, VEC, and SUC were 13.7 +/- 5.3, 43.2 +/- 13.2, and 9.2 +/- 3.7 min (mean +/- SD), respectively (P < 0.0001). The times to maximum depression of T1 after a maintenance dose of VEC (0.5 x ED(95)) were 5.4 +/- 2.9, 5.1 +/- 2.5, and 5.3 +/- 2.8 min (mean +/- SD) for the RAP, VEC, and SUC groups, respectively. Recoveries to T1 25% after VEC for the RAP, VEC, and SUC groups were 18.9 +/- 11.5, 21.5 +/- 8.03, and 12.8 +/- 8.4 min, and at T1 50% they were 21.5 +/- 9.1, 30.8 +/- 9.5, and 15.5 +/- 9.7 min (mean +/- SD), respectively (P < 0.001, RAP and VEC versus SUC). The duration of action of a maintenance dose of VEC was similar after an intubating dose of RAP or VEC but was shortened when preceded by an intubating dose of SUC. ⋯ The duration of action of a maintenance dose of vecuronium was longer after an endotracheal intubating dose of rapacuronium compared with succinylcholine.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPreoxygenation with tidal volume and deep breathing techniques: the impact of duration of breathing and fresh gas flow.
Various techniques of "preoxygenation" before anesthetic induction have been advocated, including tidal volume breathing (TVB) for 3-5 min, four deep breaths (DB) in 0.5 min, and eight DB in 1 min. However, no study has compared the effectiveness of these techniques, assessed extending deep breathing beyond 1 min, or investigated the influence of fresh gas flow (FGF) in the same subjects using a circle absorber system. In 24 healthy adult volunteers breathing oxygen from a circle absorber system by tight-fitting mask, we compared TVB/5 min and deep breathing at a rate of 4 DB/0.5 min for 2 min at 5, 7, and 10 L/min FGF. Inspired and end-tidal respiratory gases were measured at 0.5-min intervals. During TVB, end-tidal oxygen (ETO2) increased rapidly and plateaued by 2.5 min at 86%, 88%, and 88% with 5, 7 and 10 L/min FGF, respectively. ETO2 values of > or =90% were attained between 3 and 4 min. Four DB/0.5 min increased ETO2 to 75%, 77%, and 80% at 5, 7, and 10 L/min FGF. Eight DB/min resulted in ETO2 values of 82% and 87% at 7 and 10 L/min, respectively. Extending deep breathing to 1.5 and 2 min with 10 L/min FGF increased ETO2 by > or =90%, although a decrease in ETCo(2) was noted. We concluded that TVB/3-5 min was effective in achieving maximal "preoxygenation" whereas 4 DB/0.5 min resulted in submaximal "preoxygenation," and thus should be used only when time is limited. Increasing FGF from 5 to 10 L/min does not enhance "preoxygenation" with either TVB or 4 DB/0.5 min. Deep breathing yields maximal "preoxygenation" when extended to 1.5 or 2 min, and only when high (10 L/min) FGF is used. ⋯ Using a circle absorber system, normal breathing of oxygen for 3-5 min achieves optimal oxygenation of the lungs; whereas 4 deep breaths in 30 s does not. However, extending deep breathing to 1.5-2 min and using a high flow of oxygen improves oxygenation of the lungs to the same degree as normal breathing for 3-5 min. This may have important implications for patient safety.