Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPeripheral antihyperalgesic effect of morphine to heat, but not mechanical, stimulation in healthy volunteers after ultraviolet-B irradiation.
The objective of this study was to evaluate direct peripheral analgesic effects of morphine using a peripheral model of hyperalgesia and the technique of IV regional anesthesia (IVRA), thus allowing the differentiation between central and peripheral mechanisms of action. Two spots on the ventral sides of both forearms in 12 volunteers were irradiated with ultraviolet (UV)-B to induce thermal and mechanical hyperalgesia. One day after the induction of the inflammatory reaction, 40 mL of morphine hydrochloride 0.01% was administered via IVRA. Calibrated heat and phasic mechanical stimuli were applied to differentially determine impairments of tactile and nociceptive perception. Touch and phasic mechanical stimuli of noxious intensity to normal skin did not reveal altered responsiveness caused by morphine. In contrast, the administration of morphine significantly increased heat pain thresholds in the UV-B-pretreated skin areas. The peripheral antihyperalgesic effects of morphine were demonstrated only in inflamed skin areas. Direct central analgesic effects were ruled out by the lack of measurable plasma concentrations of morphine and its metabolites. Morphine 0.01% significantly diminished thermal, but not mechanical, hyperalgesia by a peripheral mode of action, which suggests inhibition of effector pathways leading to heat, but not mechanical, sensitization. ⋯ The peripheral analgesic effects of morphine were studied using modified IV regional anesthesia. When administered 1 day after the induction of dermal inflammation, morphine 0.01% diminished heat, but not primary mechanical, hyperalgesia. Therefore, suppression of mechanical hyperalgesia seen in previous studies could be predominantly due to inhibition of secondary (central) mechanical hyperalgesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe safety and effectiveness of remifentanil as an adjunct sedative for regional anesthesia.
We assessed the sedative potential of continuous infusions of remifentanil with a validated composite alertness scale in 160 patients (ASA physical status I or II) undergoing hip replacement surgery with spinal block (n = 61) or hand surgery using brachial plexus block (n = 93). They were randomized to receive one of the following initial dose regimens in double-blinded fashion: placebo or 0.04, 0.07, or 0.1 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) remifentanil subsequently titrated to effect. Additional midazolam IV was allowed for adequate sedation as required. The combined analysis of both surgery groups revealed a dose-related increase in achievement of sedation level > or =2 within 15 min of the start of the study drug infusion; all remifentanil dose comparisons with placebo reached significance (P < 0.001). The remifentanil 50% effective dose for a composite sedation level > or =2 within 15 min of the start of drug infusion was estimated as 0.043 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) (95% confidence interval 0.01, 0.059). The requirement for midazolam decreased with increasing remifentanil dose compared with placebo (P < 0.001). The median time to return to alertness after the end of infusion was 10-12 min in the remifentanil groups and 5 min in the placebo group. Significant incidences of nausea, pruritus, sweating, and respiratory depression were reported during remifentanil infusions compared with placebo. The data suggest that remifentanil may be useful for supplementation of regional anesthesia, provided that ventilation is carefully monitored. ⋯ In this dose-finding, placebo-controlled study, remifentanil infusions were used to provide sedation during spinal and brachial plexus regional anesthesia. The 50% effective dose for achievement of sedation was 0.043 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). Return to alertness occurred after 10-12 min (median time). Remifentanil infusions can be used to supplement regional anesthesia, but this requires careful monitoring of ventilation.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialCost analysis of target-controlled infusion-based anesthesia compared with standard anesthesia regimens.
With the development of new computer-assisted target-controlled infusion (TCI) systems and the availability of short-acting anesthetics, total IV anesthesia (TIVA) has become increasingly popular. The aim of this study was to compare costs of TCI-based anesthesia with two standard anesthesia regimens. Sixty patients undergoing elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly divided into three groups. Group 1 (TIVA/TCI) received TIVA using a propofol-based TCI system and continuous administration of remifentanil; Group 2 (isoflurane) underwent inhaled anesthesia with isoflurane, fentanyl, and N2O; Group 3 (standard propofol) received fentanyl and N2O and a continuous infusion of propofol using a standard delivery system. Maintenance doses for anesthetics were adjusted according to the patient's need. Isoflurane consumption was measured by weighing the vaporizer by using a precision weighing machine. Duration of surgery and of anesthesia was similar in the three groups. Time from stopping administration of anesthetics until tracheal extubation (6+/-2 min) and stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU; 70+/-12 min) were shorter in Group 1 than in the Groups 2 (15+/-3 and 87+/-13 min, respectively) and 3 (10+/-4 and 81+/-14 min, respectively) (P < 0.05). Episodes of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the PACU and on the surgical ward were less common in Group 1 than in the other two groups. Intraoperative costs were higher in Group 1 ($62.19/patient; $0.55/min of anesthesia) than in Groups 2 ($16.97/patient; $0.13/min of anesthesia) and 3 ($34.68/patient; $0.32/min of anesthesia). Cost for discarded anesthetic drugs accounted for almost 18% of total intraoperative costs in Group 1. We conclude that TIVA/TCI anesthesia using propofol/remifentanil was associated with the highest intraoperative costs but the fewest postoperative side effects. An overall cost-effectiveness analysis of new anesthetic regimens must balance the direct cost of anesthetics and beneficial effects leading to improved patients' comfort. ⋯ In today's climate of cost-consciousness, careful economic evaluation of new anesthetic regimens is necessary. A target-controlled infusion (TCI)-based total IV anesthesia (TIVA) regimen using propofol and remifentanil was compared with a standard propofol anesthesia regimen and an inhaled anesthetic technique using isoflurane. Target-controlled infusion/total IV anesthesia was associated with the largest intraoperative costs but allowed the most rapid recovery from anesthesia, was associated with fewest postoperative side effects, and permitted earlier discharge from the postanesthesia care unit.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialRecovery characteristics of sevoflurane and halothane in preschool-aged children undergoing bilateral myringotomy and pressure equalization tube insertion.
This double-blinded study was undertaken to prospectively evaluate the role of halothane and sevoflurane and the use of IV ketorolac on the anesthetic emergence in a group of children undergoing bilateral myringotomy with pressure equalization tube procedures. Two-hundred ASA physical status I and II patients were premedicated with nasal midazolam (0.2 mg/kg) and randomized to one of four groups (Group 1 - halothane and ketorolac; Group 2 - halothane and placebo; Group 3 - sevoflurane and ketorolac; Group 4 - sevoflurane and placebo). A blinded nurse observer characterized the quality of the anesthetic emergence and recorded the incidence of emesis and the use of pain medications in the recovery room. There were no differences in age, weight, previous anesthetic experience, or duration of anesthesia among the four groups. There was no difference in the incidence of emergence agitation for patients anesthetized with sevoflurane compared with halothane, regardless of whether they received ketorolac or placebo. Regardless of the anesthetic, the incidence of emergence agitation was significantly less in patients who received ketorolac compared with patients who received placebo. The incidence of emesis in the recovery room, the total 24-h incidence of emesis, and the use of at-home pain medications were similar in all four groups. ⋯ We conclude that the incidence of emergence agitation in children undergoing ultrashort anesthetic procedures is similar for sevoflurane and halothane and that ketorolac markedly diminishes emergence agitation and/or pain behavior.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialEpidural analgesia with local anesthetics after abdominal surgery: earlier motor recovery with 0.2% ropivacaine than 0.175% bupivacaine.
The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study was to compare pain relief, side effects, and ability to ambulate during epidural anesthesia with ropivacaine 0.2% plus sufentanil versus bupivacaine 0.175% plus sufentanil after major gastrointestinal surgery. Epidural catheters were inserted at T8-11, and 30 microg of sufentanil with 15 mL of ropivacaine 0.75% (Group 1, n = 42) or bupivacaine 0.5% (Group 2, n = 44) was injected. General anesthesia was induced, a continuous epidural infusion (5 mL/h) was then begun with 1 microg/mL sufentanil plus ropivacaine 0.2% (Group 1) or bupivacaine 0.175% (Group 2). Postoperatively, the infusion rate was adjusted to individual requirements. Patients were also able to receive additional 2-mL bolus doses every 20 min. Demographic data (except for gender and height), analgesia, drug dosage, and side-effects, including motor blockade (Bromage score), were similar in both groups, but mobilization recovered more quickly in Group 1. Gender, age, ASA physical status, duration of surgery, and intraoperative blood loss had no effect on mobilization. We conclude that epidural analgesia is effective and safe with both regimens. There is not necessarily a correlation between the Bromage score and the desired outcome of mobilization. The ability to walk postoperatively is hastened if ropivacaine is used instead of bupivacaine. ⋯ Regarding pain relief and side effects, epidural analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% and sufentanil 1 microg/mL yields pain scores and pain intensity comparable to those for the well evaluated combination of bupivacaine 0.175% and sufentanil 1 microg/mL. However, earlier recovery of the ability to walk unassisted in patients receiving the combination of ropivacaine and sufentanil may result in their earlier rehabilitation.