Anesthesia and analgesia
-
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.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 2002
The effects of intrathecal administration of an antagonist for prostaglandin E receptor subtype EP(1) on mechanical and thermal hyperalgesia in a rat model of postoperative pain.
Despite substantial advances in understanding acute pain mechanisms and in the treatment of pain, postoperative pain, especially mechanically evoked pain (incident pain), is generally not effectively treated. Tissue injury and inflammation increase the release of prostaglandin E(2) in the spinal cord, contributing to the development of hyperalgesia. We designed the present study to determine whether the intrathecal administration of an antagonist for prostaglandin E(2) receptor subtype EP(1), ONO-8711, has an analgesic effect on incision-induced mechanical and thermal hyperalgesia. A 1-cm longitudinal skin incision was made in the plantar aspect of the rat foot. The withdrawal threshold to mechanical stimulation and the withdrawal latency to thermal stimulation applied adjacent to the wound of the hindpaw were investigated. Both mechanical and thermal hyperalgesia were observed at 2 h and 24 h after the incision had been made. ONO-8711 (50, 80, 100 micro g) or saline was administered intrathecally. ONO-8711 significantly increased the withdrawal thresholds to mechanical stimulation, but not to thermal stimulation, in a dose- and time-dependent manner. We conclude that EP(1) receptor-mediated sensitization of the spinal dorsal horn may contribute to the generation of mechanical, but not thermal, hyperalgesia and that an EP(1) receptor antagonist administered intrathecally is a potential analgesic for postoperative pain, especially mechanically evoked pain (incident pain). ⋯ We examined the effects of an intrathecally administered selective EP(1) receptor antagonist on mechanical and thermal hyperalgesia in a postoperative pain model. The intrathecal EP(1) receptor antagonist inhibited the mechanical, but not thermal, hyperalgesia, indicating the potential for an EP(1) receptor antagonist to be used as an analgesic for postoperative pain, especially incident pain.
-
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.