Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2002
Meta AnalysisThe efficacy and safety of transdermal scopolamine for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting: a quantitative systematic review.
The role of scopolamine administered via transdermal therapeutic systems in the prevention of postoperative vomiting, nausea, and nausea and vomiting is unclear. We performed a systematic search for full reports of randomized comparisons of transdermal scopolamine with inactive control. Dichotomous data were extracted. In the meta-analysis, relative risks and numbers-needed-to-treat/harm were calculated with 95% confidence intervals (CI). In 23 trials, 979 patients received transdermal scopolamine, and 984 patients received placebo. Sensitivity analyses were performed using restricted data for truncated control event rates (40%-80%) and for large trials. With these data, the relative risks for postoperative vomiting (five reports), nausea (five reports), nausea and vomiting (eight reports), and rescue treatment (three reports) were 0.69 (95% CI, 0.58-0.82), 0.69 (95% CI, 0.54-0.87), 0.76 (95% CI, 0.66-0.88), and 0.68 (95% CI, 0.54-0.85), respectively. This means that of 100 patients who receive transdermal scopolamine, approximately 17 will not experience postoperative vomiting who would have done so had they all received a placebo. However, 18 of 100 patients will have visual disturbances, eight will report dry mouth, two will report dizziness, one will be classified as being agitated, and 1-13 patients who are prescribed transdermal scopolamine will not use it correctly. The timing of application does not alter efficacy. ⋯ Of 100 patients who receive transdermal scopolamine, approximately 17 will not vomit in the postoperative period who would have done so had they all received a placebo. However, 18 of 100 patients will have visual disturbances, and eight will report dry mouth. Incorrect use further limits its efficacy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2002
Review Comparative StudyThe analgesic effects of intraperitoneal and incisional bupivacaine with epinephrine after total abdominal hysterectomy.
The objective of our study was to see if incisional and intraperitoneal bupivacaine with epinephrine produces analgesia after total abdominal hysterectomy. Forty-six ASA physical status I and II patients received a standardized anesthetic, patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) morphine, and rectal paracetamol 1 g every 6 h. Patients were randomized to receive 50 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% with epinephrine 5 microg/mL or 50 mL of normal saline. Thirty milliliters and 20 mL of treatment solution were administered into the peritoneum and incision, respectively, before wound closure. Seventeen and 16 patients in the Placebo and Bupivacaine groups, respectively, completed the study. The reasons for withdrawal were PCA malfunction, PCA discontinued too early, nausea, chest infection, intraabdominal drain insertion, and protocol violation. There were no significant differences between the Bupivacaine and Placebo groups in age, height, weight, or duration of surgery. Pain on movement was significantly more intense in the Placebo group than in the Bupivacaine group on awakening. Morphine consumption (interquartile range) over 24 h was 62 mg (53-85 mg) in the Placebo group compared with 44 mg (33-56 mg) in the Bupivacaine group (P < 0.01). This significant difference was attributable to the larger morphine consumption in the Placebo group in the first 4 postoperative h. We conclude that a combination of intraperitoneal and incisional bupivacaine with epinephrine provides significant morphine-sparing analgesia for 4 h after total abdominal hysterectomy. ⋯ A combination of intraperitoneal and incisional bupivacaine with epinephrine may be recommended because it provides significant morphine-sparing analgesia for 4 h after total abdominal hysterectomy.