Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialProphylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting with oral, long-acting dimenhydrinate in gynecologic outpatient laparoscopy.
Dimenhydrinate is an inexpensive antiemetic with few side effects available as an oral, long-acting (LA) formulation (Gravol L/A) containing 25 mg of immediate and 50 mg of sustained release drug. We designed this double-blind comparison trial to assess the efficacy of dimenhydrinate LA versus droperidol alone and the combination for prophylaxis of nausea, vomiting, and retching in outpatient gynecologic laparoscopy. One-hundred-forty-one women were randomized into 3 groups: 1) droperidol (placebo capsule preoperatively and IV droperidol 0.625 mg before induction), 2) dimenhydrinate LA preoperatively and IV placebo before induction, or 3) combination. Information regarding nausea, vomiting, retching, pain, and sedation was recorded in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) and collected by telephone for the presence of symptoms: on arrival home; at bedtime; upon arising, and at lunchtime the following day. The overall incidence of complete treatment failure (rescue medication in PACU or nausea, vomiting, or retching at any time point) was 28 of 46 (61%), 28 of 48 (58%), and 22 of 47 (47%); and for treatment failure vomiting (rescue medication in PACU or vomiting or retching at any time point) was 16 of 46 (35%), 11 of 48 (23%), and 5 of 47 (11%), for the droperidol, dimenhydrinate, and combination groups, respectively (P = 0.007 for droperidol versus combination). There were no differences in sedation or pain. Preoperative administration of an oral dose of LA dimenhydrinate in combination with droperidol when compared with droperidol alone effectively reduced the incidence of vomiting but not nausea in women undergoing elective outpatient gynecologic laparoscopy. ⋯ Dimenhydrinate is an inexpensive antiemetic with few side effects available as a long-acting oral formulation. Women undergoing outpatient gynecologic laparoscopy were given droperidol, an effective antiemetic, dimenhydrinate alone, or the combination of the two drugs. Dimenhydrinate plus droperidol significantly reduced the overall incidence of vomiting, but not nausea, when compared with droperidol alone.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEvaluation of the neuroprotective effects of S(+)-ketamine during open-heart surgery.
We compared the effect of S(+)-ketamine to remifentanil, both in combination with propofol, on the neurocognitive outcome after open-heart surgery in 106 patients. A battery of neurocognitive tests was administered before surgery and 1 and 10 wk after surgery. Fourteen patients (25%) in the control group and 10 patients (20%) in the S(+)-ketamine group had 2 or more tests with a cognitive deficit (decline by at least one preoperative SD of that test in all patients) 10 wk after surgery (P = 0.54). Z-scores were calculated for all tests. No significantly better performance could be detected in the S(+)-ketamine group, except for the Trailmaking B test 10 wk after surgery. We conclude that S(+)-ketamine offers no greater neuroprotection compared with remifentanil during open-heart surgery. ⋯ N-methyl-D-aspartic acid receptors play an important role during ischemic brain injury. We could not demonstrate that S(+)-ketamine resulted in greater neuroprotective effects compared with remifentanil during cardiopulmonary bypass procedures when both were combined with propofol.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2004
Multicenter Study Comparative StudyAdverse gastrointestinal complications after cardiopulmonary bypass: can outcome be predicted from preoperative risk factors?
Adverse gastrointestinal (GI) outcome after cardiac surgery is an infrequent event but is a clinically important health care problem because of associated increased morbidity and mortality. The ability to identify patients at greatest risk before surgery may be helpful in planning appropriate perioperative management strategies. We examined the pre- and intraoperative characteristics of 2417 patients from 24 diverse United States medical centers enrolled in the Multicenter Study of Perioperative Ischemia Study who were undergoing cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass as predictors for adverse GI outcome. Resource utilization was evaluated for patients with and without adverse GI outcomes. Adverse GI outcomes occurred in 5.5% of patients (133 of 2417), increased in-hospital mortality 6.5-fold, prolonged the mean intensive care unit length of stay by 1 wk, and more than doubled the mean postoperative hospital stay (P < 0.0001). Predictors of adverse GI outcome included decreased left ventricular function, hyperbilirubinemia, thrombocytopenia, prolonged partial thromboplastin time, prior cardiovascular surgery, combined coronary artery bypass graft surgery and intracardiac or proximal aortic surgery, pharmacological cardiovascular support, and intraoperative transfusion. The literature suggests that adverse GI outcome after cardiac surgery is secondary to poor splanchnic perfusion, which many of these risk factors may predict. Therefore, patients deemed to be at risk before surgery may benefit from tightly controlled hemodynamic management and other strategies that optimize perioperative organ perfusion. ⋯ We identified the preoperative and intraoperative predictors associated with an increased incidence of postoperative gastrointestinal complications after cardiac surgery using cardiopulmonary bypass. Because these complications are associated with frequent morbidity and mortality, these predictors may be helpful in identifying patients at increased risk so that risk stratification can be modified and perioperative management can be appropriately adjusted.
-
Factor V Leiden (FVL) is the most common known inherited cause of thrombophilia; it is present in approximately 5% of the Caucasian population. Although the risk of venous thrombosis associated with this polymorphism in various medical settings is well described, its effect on perioperative risk is only beginning to be explored. ⋯ This review will describe the physiology of the FVL mutation, briefly clarify its risk in the nonsurgical setting, and assess current data regarding FVL in noncardiac and cardiac surgery. Finally, a summary of current clinical evidence and a plan for more detailed investigation of this potentially significant risk factor will be proposed.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jun 2004
Comparative StudyIntrathecal midazolam I: a cohort study investigating safety.
Despite conflicting evidence regarding the safety of intrathecal midazolam from animal investigations, its clinical use is increasing. We investigated the potential of intrathecal midazolam to produce symptomatology suggestive of neurological damage. This study compared two cohorts of patients who received intrathecal anesthesia with or without intrathecal midazolam (2 mg). Eighteen risk factors were evaluated with respect to symptoms representing potential neurological complications. The definitions of these symptoms were made wide to maximize the chance of counting patients with neurological sequelae after intrathecal injections. Eleven-hundred patients were followed up prospectively during the first postoperative week by a hospital chart review and 1 mo later by a mailed questionnaire. Symptoms suggestive of neurological impairment, including motor or sensory changes and bladder or bowel dysfunction, were investigated. Intrathecal midazolam was not associated with an increased risk of neurologic symptoms. In contrast, neurologic symptoms were found to be increased by age >70 yr (relative risk, 8.72) and the occurrence of a blood-stained spinal tap (relative risk, 8.07). The administration of intrathecal midazolam, 2 mg, did not increase the occurrence of neurologic or urologic symptoms, as suggested by some preclinical animal experimentation. ⋯ Intrathecal midazolam provides segmental analgesia, but conflicting animal studies have cast doubts on its safety. This investigation studied the effect of intrathecal midazolam by observing two cohorts of patients. In clinical practice, intrathecal midazolam (2 mg) did not increase adverse neurological symptoms compared with conventional therapies.