Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialGabapentin for the treatment of pain in guillain-barré syndrome: a double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study.
Pain syndromes of Guillain-Barré are neuropathic as well as nociceptive in origin. We aimed to evaluate the therapeutic efficacy of gabapentin in relieving the bimodal nature of pain in Guillain-Barré syndrome in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled, crossover study in 18 patients admitted to the intensive care unit for ventilatory support. Patients were assigned to receive either gabapentin (15 mg. kg(-1). d(-1) in 3 divided doses) or matching placebo as initial medication for 7 days. After a 2-day washout period, those who previously received gabapentin received placebo, and those previously receiving placebo received gabapentin as in the initial phase. Fentanyl 2 micro g/kg was used as a rescue analgesic on patient demand or when the pain score was >5 on a numeric rating scale of 0-10. The numeric rating score, sedation score, consumption of fentanyl, and adverse effects were noted, and these observed variables were compared. The numeric pain score decreased from 7.22 +/- 0.83 to 2.33 +/- 1.67 on the second day after initiation of gabapentin therapy and remained low during the period of gabapentin therapy (2.06 +/- 0.63) (P < 0.001). There was a significant decrease in the need for fentanyl from Day 1 to Day 7 during the gabapentin therapy period (211.11 +/- 21.39 to 65.53 +/- 16.17 [ micro g]) in comparison to the placebo therapy period (319.44 +/- 25.08 to 316.67 +/- 24.25 [ micro g]) (P < 0.001). ⋯ Gabapentin, an antiepileptic drug, has been used effectively for different types of pain management. This study demonstrates that gabapentin has minimal side effects and is an alternative to opioids and nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs for management of the bimodal nature of pain of Guillain-Barré Syndrome patients.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of three antiemetic combinations for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.
In this study we compared the efficacy and safety of three antiemetic combinations in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ninety ASA status I-II women, aged 18-65 yr, undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. A standardized anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia (intrathecal morphine plus IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine) were used in all patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1, n = 30), dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2, n = 30), or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and placebo 12 h later (Group 3, n = 30). A complete response, defined as no PONV in 48 h, occurred in 80% of patients in Group 1, 70% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 2 (P = 0.004 versus Groups 1 and 3). The incidences of side effects and other variables that could modify the incidence of PONV were similar among groups. In conclusion, ondansetron, in combination with droperidol or dexamethasone, is more effective than dexamethasone in combination with droperidol in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery with intrathecal morphine plus IV PCA with morphine for postoperative analgesia. ⋯ The combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone or droperidol was significantly better than the combination of dexamethasone plus droperidol in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, with intrathecal and IV morphine (patient-controlled analgesia) for management of postoperative pain.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 2002
Case ReportsNear tracheal extubation because of edema of the face and tongue.
Edema of the face and tongue can cause migration of the endotracheal tube out of the trachea. The present case illustrates the importance of preventing this potentially disastrous complication because reintubation might be impossible when the edema is severe.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 2002
Maximum minute ventilation test for the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway.
One of the distinguishing features of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is that it can cause upper airway obstruction, even when it is correctly inserted behind the cricoid cartilage. We used a hyperventilation test, the maximum minute ventilation test (MMV test), to aid in the diagnosis of upper airway obstruction after PLMA insertion. The patient was briefly hyperventilated for 15 s yielding a MMV value equal to 4 x (breaths/15 s) x (exhaled tidal volume). MMV values were collected in 317 adult women and men over 6 mo. Critical MMV values were obtained in 17 of 317 patients, 15 of 317 (4.7%) of which were due to insertion of the PLMA. The PLMA was removed in seven of 317 (2.2%) patients. The most common cause of upper airway obstruction due to the PLMA was laryngeal obstruction. This refers to compression of supraglottic and glottic structures with resulting narrowing and compromise of the airway. A second, much less common, form of airway obstruction was bilateral cuff infolding with or without downfolding of the epiglottis. Finally, we discuss the margin of safety for minute ventilation, defined as the excess of the MMV over and above basal minute ventilation requirements for the patient. With critical MMV, the margin of safety is drastically reduced or nonexistent. ⋯ One of the distinguishing features of the ProSeal laryngeal mask airway (PLMA) is that it can cause upper airway obstruction, even when it is correctly inserted behind the cricoid cartilage. We used a hyperventilation test, the maximum minute ventilation test, to aid in the diagnosis of upper airway obstruction after PLMA insertion.