Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2002
Letter Case ReportsKnotting of an epidural catheter like a tie.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialNew landmarks for the anterior approach to the sciatic nerve block: imaging and clinical study.
In this study, we assessed the reliability of the inguinal crease and femoral artery as anatomic landmarks for the anterior approach to the sciatic nerve and determined the optimal position of the leg during this approach. An imaging study was conducted before the clinical study. The sciatic nerve was located twice in 20 patients undergoing ankle or foot surgery, once with the leg in the neutral position and once with the leg in the externally rotated position. The patient was lying supine. A 22-gauge, 150-mm insulated b-beveled needle connected to a nerve stimulator was inserted 2.5 cm distal to the inguinal crease and 2.5 cm medial to the femoral artery and was directed posteriorly and laterally with a 10 degrees -15 degrees angle relative to the vertical plane. The sciatic nerve was located in all patients at a depth of 10.6 +/- 1.8 cm when the leg was in the neutral position and 10.4 +/- 1.5 cm when the leg was in the externally rotated position (not significant). In the neutral position and in the externally rotated position, the time needed to identify anatomic landmarks was 28 +/- 15 s and 26 +/- 14 s, respectively (not significant), and the time needed to locate the sciatic nerve was 79 +/- 53 s and 46 +/- 25 s (P < 0.006), respectively. We conclude that the inguinal crease and femoral artery are reliable and effective anatomic landmarks for the anterior approach to the sciatic nerve and that the optimal position of the leg is the externally rotated position. ⋯ This new anterior approach to the sciatic nerve using the inguinal crease and femoral artery as landmarks is an easy and reliable technique.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe relative motor blocking potencies of epidural bupivacaine and ropivacaine in labor.
Minimal local analgesic concentrations (MLAC) have been used to determine the epidural analgesic potencies of bupivacaine and ropivacaine. There are no reports of the motor blocking potencies of these drugs. We sought to determine the motor block MLAC of both drugs and their relative potency ratio. Sixty ASA physical status I and II parturients were randomized to one of two groups, during the first stage of labor. Each received a 20-mL bolus of epidural bupivacaine or ropivacaine. The first woman in each group received 0.35%. Up-down sequential allocation was used to determine subsequent concentrations at a testing interval of 0.025%. Effective motor block was defined as a Bromage score <4 within 30 min. The up-down sequences were analyzed by using the Dixon and Massey method and probit regression to quantify the motor block minimal local analgesic concentration. Two-sided P < 0.05 defined significance. The motor block minimal local analgesic concentration for bupivacaine was 0.326% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.285-0.367) and for ropivacaine was 0.497% (95% CI, 0.431-0.563) (P = 0.0008). The ropivacaine/bupivacaine potency ratio was 0.66 (95% CI, 0.52-0.82). This is the first MLAC study to estimate the motor blocking potencies of bupivacaine and ropivacaine. Ropivacaine was significantly less potent for motor block, at 66% that of bupivacaine. ⋯ The results of this study demonstrate that epidural ropivacaine is less potent than epidural bupivacaine in producing motor blockade during labor. The motor block potency relation is similar to the sensory potency ratio for these two drugs.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialSmall-dose dexamethasone reduces nausea and vomiting after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a comparison of tropisetron with saline.
Dexamethasone is an effective antiemetic drug, but the efficacy of small-dose dexamethasone 5 mg on the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy has not been evaluated. We, therefore, evaluated the prophylactic effect of small-dose dexamethasone (5 mg) on PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Tropisetron and saline served as controls. One-hundred-twenty patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were enrolled in a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. At the induction of anesthesia, the Dexamethasone group received IV dexamethasone 5 mg, the Tropisetron group received IV tropisetron 2 mg, and the Placebo group received IV saline. We found that both dexamethasone and tropisetron significantly decreased the following variables: the total incidence of PONV (P < 0.01), more than four vomiting episodes (P < 0.05), and the proportions of patients requiring rescue antiemetics (P < 0.05). The differences between the Dexamethasone and Tropisetron groups were not significant. We conclude that prophylactic IV dexamethasone 5 mg significantly reduces the incidence of PONV in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. At this dose, dexamethasone is as effective as tropisetron 2 mg and is more effective than placebo. ⋯ We evaluated the prophylactic effect of small-dose dexamethasone (5 mg) on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Tropisetron (2 mg) and saline served as controls. We found that dexamethasone 5 mg (IV) significantly reduced the incidence of PONV in these patients, and, at this dose, dexamethasone was as effective as tropisetron and was more effective than placebo.