Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe optimal test dose of epinephrine for epidural injection with lidocaine solution in awake patients premedicated with oral clonidine.
We attempted to determine the optimal test dose of epinephrine for use with epidural anesthesia in awake patients premedicated with clonidine. Eighty-eight adult patients were randomized into two groups [oral premedication with clonidine 5 microg/kg (CLON) or no premedication (CONT)]. Before induction of general anesthesia, heart rate (HR) and blood pressure (BP) were measured for 3 min after the i.v. injection of 3 mL of 1.5% lidocaine containing epinephrine (0, 1.25, 2.5, 5, 7.5, or 15 microg) in a randomized, double-blind manner. We calculated 95% confidence intervals for the peak HR and BP increases induced by each dose of epinephrine. At 7.5 microg, epinephrine induced a significantly greater increase in HR and BP in CLON than in CONT. The 95% confidence interval for the HR change induced by 7.5 microg of epinephrine in CLON was nearly the same as the accepted standard dose of epinephrine (15 microg) in CONT. We conclude that premedication with clonidine enhances HR and BP responses to the i.v. administration of epinephrine-containing epidural test solutions. Consequently, 7.5 microg of epinephrine may be sufficient to enable detection of accidental injection into a blood vessel in awake patients premedicated with clonidine 5 microg/kg. ⋯ Clonidine, a commonly used preanesthetic medication, alters patients' cardiovascular responses to drugs such as epinephrine. Our randomized, double-blind study suggests that, in awake patients receiving oral clonidine premedication, 7.5 microg of epinephrine (half the usual dose) is adequate as an indicator of accidental injection into the epidural vessels during epidural anesthesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialTracheal intubation with rocuronium using the "timing principle".
We compared the endotracheal intubating conditions after rocuronium, using the "timing principle," with those after succinylcholine. The timing principle entails administration of a single bolus dose of nondepolarizing muscle relaxant, followed by an induction drug at the onset of clinical weakness. Forty-five patients were randomly assigned to three groups. Patients allocated to Groups 1 and 2 received rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg. At the onset of clinical weakness (onset of ptosis), anesthesia was induced with thiopental 4-6 mg/kg; intubation was accomplished after 45 s in Group 1 and after 60 s in Group 2. Patients in Group 3 received vecuronium (0.01 mg/kg) 3 min before the administration of thiopental and succinylcholine 1.5 mg/kg, and their tracheas were intubated 60 s later by a blind anesthesiologist. Intubating conditions were assessed according to a grading scale and were either good (5 patients in Groups 1 and 2, 4 patients in Group 3) or excellent (10 patients in Groups 1 + 2, 11 patients in Group 3) in all patients. Patients were interviewed postoperatively, and all were satisfied with the induction of anesthesia. We conclude that rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg provides good to excellent intubating conditions 45 and 60 s after the induction of anesthesia using the timing principle. ⋯ We compared the ease with which a breathing tube could be placed in patients using three techniques. The standard technique (succinylcholine) was compared with two others in which a muscle-relaxing drug (rocuronium) was administered just before the anesthetic drug (so-called timing principle). No difference among the techniques was observed.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1998
Awareness with recall during general anesthesia: incidence and risk factors.
We studied the associated factors and incidence of awareness during general anesthesia and the nature of subsequent psychiatric disorders. Patients older than 12 yr undergoing surgery under general anesthesia in a secondary care hospital during 1 yr were included in the study. The doses of anesthetics were calculated for the patients with and without awareness. There were 4818 operations under general anesthesia; 2612 (54%) patients were interviewed. Ten (0.4% of those interviewed) patients were found to have undisputed awareness, and there were nine (0.3%) patients with possible awareness. The doses of isoflurane (P < 0.01) and propofol (P < 0.05) were smaller in patients with awareness. Five patients with awareness underwent a psychiatric evaluation. One patient experienced sleep disturbances afterward, but the other four patients did not have any after effects. In conclusion, awareness is a rare complication of general anesthesia associated with small doses of anesthetics. ⋯ In an interview of 2612 patients after general anesthesia, 10 (0.4%) patients with awareness and 9 (0.3%) patients with possible awareness were found. A predisposing factor was small doses of the principal anesthetic. In a psychiatric interview, a large proportion of the patients with awareness were found to have suffered from depression in the past.