Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Nov 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe site of action of epidural fentanyl in humans: the difference between infusion and bolus administration.
Most published studies suggesting that epidural fentanyl acts predominantly at spinal sites administered the drug as a bolus injection, whereas most studies suggesting that it acts predominantly at supraspinal sites administered the drug as an infusion. In this study we tested the hypothesis that the mode of administration (bolus versus infusion) of epidural fentanyl determines its site of action. Ten healthy volunteers were enrolled in this randomized, double-blinded, cross-over study. On separate study days fentanyl was administered into the epidural space as a bolus (0.03 mg followed by 0.1 mg 210 min later) and as an infusion (0.03 mg/h followed by 0.1 mg/hr 210 min later for 200 min). Using a thermal and electrical experimental pain model, the heat ( degrees C) and electrical current (mA) causing maximum tolerable pain were assessed repetitively over a period of 420 min. The analgesic efficacy measures were obtained at a lumbar and a cranial dermatome. Plasma fentanyl concentrations were determined throughout the study. Epidural bolus administration of fentanyl resulted in segmental analgesia (leg > head), whereas the epidural infusion of fentanyl produced nonsegmental analgesia (leg = head). There was a significant linear relationship between the analgesic effect and the plasma concentration of fentanyl for the epidural infusion but not for the epidural bolus administration of fentanyl. These findings support our hypothesis and might explain the apparent conflict in the literature regarding the site of action of epidural fentanyl. ⋯ In an experimental pain study in volunteers, epidural fentanyl caused segmental analgesia when administered as a bolus and nonsegmental systemic analgesia when administered as a continuous infusion. This finding may help resolve the long-standing controversy surrounding the site of action of epidural fentanyl.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Nov 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe use of a continuous popliteal sciatic nerve block after surgery involving the foot and ankle: does it improve the quality of recovery?
Popliteal sciatic nerve block is a commonly used technique for surgery involving the foot and ankle. However, pain can be difficult to control as the local anesthetic block wears off. Therefore, we hypothesized that extending the block by using a continuous infusion of bupivacaine (0.25%) would provide improved pain management and might facilitate the recovery process after foot or ankle surgery. In this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study, 24 consenting patients undergoing foot or ankle surgery with a standardized general anesthetic technique were studied. Before surgery, a popliteal sciatic nerve block was performed in all patients with an 18-gauge Tuohy epidural needle and a peripheral nerve stimulator. After injection of bupivacaine 0.25% 30 mL and placement of a 20-gauge catheter, patients were randomly assigned to receive either 0.9% saline (control) or bupivacaine 0.25% at a constant rate of 5 mL/h for up to 48 h after surgery. An 11-point verbal rating scale (0 = no pain to 10 = worst pain imaginable) was used to assess the severity of pain. Opioid analgesic use was recorded at specific time intervals after surgery. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 24 h, 48 h, 72 h, and 1 week after surgery to assess pain scores, as well as patient satisfaction with their pain management and quality of recovery, by using a 100-point verbal rating scale (1 = highly dissatisfied to 100 = highly satisfied). In the bupivacaine group, there was a statistically significant reduction in the maximal pain scores (>50%) and in opioid use (>60%) during the postoperative period compared with the control group. Patient satisfaction with postoperative pain management (95 +/- 3 versus 77 +/- 13) and quality of recovery (96 +/- 7 versus 83 +/- 14) was significantly improved in the bupivacaine group (versus control). In addition, 40% of the patients in the bupivacaine group (versus none in the control group) were able to be discharged home on the day of surgery (P = 0.087). In conclusion, a continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% decreased postoperative pain and the need for opioid analgesic rescue medication after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle, leading to improved patient satisfaction and quality of recovery. ⋯ A continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% (versus saline) at the popliteal fossa by using a simple elastomeric pump is an effective method of decreasing postoperative pain, reducing the opioid analgesic requirement, and increasing patient satisfaction with pain management after orthopedic surgery involving the foot and ankle. More importantly, the use of the continuous sciatic nerve block in the popliteal fossa facilitated an earlier discharge after lower extremity surgery.