Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe use of lidocaine for preventing the withdrawal associated with the injection of rocuronium in children and adolescents.
We designed this study to examine the incidence and degree of movement after the administration of rocuronium in children and adolescents and to measure the treatment effect of lidocaine for its prevention. One hundred patients (aged 5-18 yr) were randomly assigned to two groups. After general anesthesia was induced with 5 mg/kg thiopental sodium and manual occlusion of venous outflow was performed, one group of patients received 0.1 mL/kg 1% lidocaine i.v.. A second group received 0.1 mL/kg of isotonic sodium chloride solution as a placebo control. Venous outflow occlusion was held for 15 s, released, and immediately followed by the administration of rocuronium 1 mg/kg i.v.. The patient's response to rocuronium injection was graded using a 4-point scale. We observed that the incidence of withdrawal was 84% in the placebo group and was significantly decreased to 46% in patients pretreated with lidocaine (P < 0.001). This study demonstrates that the i.v. injection of rocuronium is commonly associated with a withdrawal reaction in anesthetized pediatric patients and that this reaction can be attenuated or eliminated by pretreatment with i.v. lidocaine. ⋯ Pain on injection of rocuronium in pediatric patients can be alleviated by pretreatment with i.v. lidocaine.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1999
Multicenter Study Clinical TrialNerve stimulator and multiple injection technique for upper and lower limb blockade: failure rate, patient acceptance, and neurologic complications. Study Group on Regional Anesthesia.
To evaluate the failure rate, patient acceptance, effective volumes of local anesthetic solution, and incidence of neurologic complications after peripheral nerve block performed using the multiple injection technique with a nerve stimulator, we prospectively studied 3996 patients undergoing combined sciatic-femoral nerve block (n = 2175), axillary blocks (n = 1650), and interscalene blocks (n = 171). The success rate and mean injected volumes of local anesthetic were: 93% with 22.6 +/- 4.5 mL in the axillary, 94% with 24.5 +/- 5.4 mL in the interscalene, and 93% with 28.1 +/- 4.4 mL in the sciatic-femoral nerve blocks. Patients receiving combined sciatic-femoral nerve block showed more discomfort during block placement and worse acceptance of the anesthetic procedure than patients receiving brachial plexus anesthesia. During the first month after surgery, 69 patients (1.7%) developed neurologic dysfunction on the operated limb. Complete recovery required 4-12 wk in all patients but one, who required 25 wk. The only variable showing significant association with the development of postoperative neurologic dysfunction was the tourniquet inflation pressure (<400 mm Hg compared with >400 mm Hg, odds ratio 2.9, 95% confidence intervals 1.6-5.4; P < 0.001). We conclude that using the multiple injections technique with a nerve stimulator results in a success rate of >90% with a volume of <30 mL of local anesthetic solution and an incidence of transient neurologic complication of <2%. ⋯ Based on a prospective evaluation of 3996 consecutive peripheral nerve blocks, the multiple injection technique with nerve stimulator allows for up to 94% successful nerve block with <30 mL of local anesthetic solution. Although the data collection regarding neurologic dysfunction was limited, the withdrawal and redirection of the stimulating needle was not associated with an increased incidence of neurologic complications. Sedation/analgesia should be advocated during block placement to improve patient acceptance.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe cost-effectiveness of methohexital versus propofol for sedation during monitored anesthesia care.
We designed this study to test the hypothesis that methohexital is a cost-effective alternative to propofol for sedation during local anesthesia. Sixty consenting women undergoing breast biopsy procedures under local anesthesia were randomly assigned to receive an infusion of either propofol (50 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) or methohexital (40 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)). The sedative infusion rate was titrated to maintain an observer's assessment of alertness/sedation (OAA/S) score of 3 (with 1 = awake/alert to 5 = asleep). Fentanyl 25 microg i.v. was administered as a "rescue" analgesic during the operation. We assessed the level of sedation (OAA/S score), vital signs, time to achieve an OAA/S score of 3 at the onset and a score of 1 after discontinuing the infusion, discharge times, perioperative side effects, and patient satisfaction. The direct cost of methohexital was lower than that of propofol, based on the milligram dosage infused during the operation. The sedative onset (to achieve an OAA/S score of 3) and the recovery (to return to an OAA/S score of 1) times, as well as discharge times, did not differ between the two groups. Patients receiving methohexital had a significantly lower incidence of pain on initial injection compared with those receiving propofol (10% vs 23%). Because the use of methohexital (29.4 +/- 2.7 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) for sedation during breast biopsy procedures has a similar efficacy and recovery profile to that of propofol (36.8 +/- 15.9 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)) and is less costly based on the amount infused, it seems to be a cost-effective alternative to propofol for sedation during local anesthesia. However, when the cost of the drug infused and drug wasted was calculated, there was no difference in the overall drug cost. ⋯ When administered to maintain a stable level of sedation during local anesthesia, methohexital is an acceptable alternative to propofol. However, the overall drug costs were similar with the two drugs.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1999
Comparative Study Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical TrialTracheal extubation of deeply anesthetized pediatric patients: a comparison of isoflurane and sevoflurane.
We studied the emergence characteristics of unpremedicated children tracheally extubated while deeply anesthetized ("deep extubation") with isoflurane or sevoflurane. Forty children were assigned to one of two groups, Group I or Group S. At the end of the operation, Group I patients were extubated while breathing 1.5 times the minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration (MAC) of isoflurane. Group S patients were tracheally extubated while breathing 1.5 times the MAC of sevoflurane. Recovery characteristics and complications were noted. Group S patients were arousable sooner than Group I patients (10.1 + 6.5 vs 16.3 + 9.9 min). Later arousal scores and times to discharge were the same. There were no serious complications in either group. Breath-holding was more common in Group I. We conclude that the overall incidence of airway problems and desaturation episodes was similar between groups. Emergency delirium was common in both groups (32% overall: 40% for Group I, 25% for Group S). ⋯ Deep extubation of children can be safely performed with either isoflurane or sevoflurane. After deep tracheal extubation, airway problems occur but are easily managed. Return to an arousable state occurred more quickly with sevoflurane, although time to meeting discharge criteria was not different between the two groups. Emergence delirium occurs frequently with either technique.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialEvaluating T-wave amplitude as a guide for detecting intravascular injection of a test dose in anesthetized children.
Previous reports have suggested that accidental intravascular injection of an epinephrine-containing test dose increases T-wave amplitude in anesthetized children. We designed this study to prospectively determine whether changes in T-wave amplitude could be a reliable indicator for detecting intravascular injection. We studied 32 ASA physical status I infants and children (3.4 +/- 1.7 yr) undergoing elective minor surgeries during 1.0 minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration of sevoflurane and 67% nitrous oxide in oxygen. After the i.v. administration of atropine 0.01 mg/kg, the patients were randomly assigned to receive either saline (n = 16) or a test dose consisting of 1% lidocaine (0.1 mL/kg) with 1:200,000 epinephrine (0.5 microg/kg, n = 16) via a peripheral vein to simulate the intravascular injection of the test dose. Heart rate (HR) and systolic blood pressure (SBP) were recorded every 20 and 30 s, respectively, and the T-wave amplitude of lead II was continuously recorded for subsequent analysis. Of the 16 children receiving the test dose, 16, 13, and 16 developed increases in HR, SBP, and T-wave amplitude > or = 10 bpm, > or = 15 mm Hg, and > or = 25%, occurring at 30 +/- 7, 70 +/- 31, and 20 +/- 5 s, respectively. Because no patient receiving saline met these criteria, sensitivity, specificity, and positive and negative predictive values were all 100% based on the criteria using the T-wave amplitude and the peak HR. Our results suggest that changes in T-wave amplitude are as effective as HR for detecting the intravascular injection of an epinephrine-containing test dose in sevoflurane-anesthetized children. ⋯ To determine whether an epidurally administered local anesthetic is unintentionally injected into a blood vessel, a small dose of epinephrine is often added to a local anesthetic. We found that increases in T-wave amplitude by > or = 25% in lead II monitor electrocardiography are as effective as a heart rate increase > or = 10 bpm for detecting intravascular injection in sevoflurane-anesthetized children.