Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Meta Analysis Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe comparative effects of postoperative analgesic therapies on pulmonary outcome: cumulative meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials.
We performed meta-analyses of randomized, control trials to assess the effects of seven analgesic therapies on postoperative pulmonary function after a variety of procedures: epidural opioid, epidural local anesthetic, epidural opioid with local anesthetic, thoracic versus lumbar epidural opioid, intercostal nerve block, wound infiltration with local anesthetic, and intrapleural local anesthetic. Measures of forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), forced vital capacity (FVC), vital capacity (VC), peak expiratory flow rate (PEFR), PaO2, and incidence of atelectasis, pulmonary infection, and pulmonary complications overall were analyzed. Compared with systemic opioids, epidural opioids decreased the incidence of atelectasis (risk ratio [RR] 0.53, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.33-0.85) and had a weak tendency to reduce the incidence of pulmonary infections (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.18-1.53) and pulmonary complications overall (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.20-1.33). Epidural local anesthetics increased PaO2 (difference 4.56 mm Hg, 95% CI 0.058-9.075) and decreased the incidence of pulmonary infections (RR 0.36, 95% CI 0.21-0.65) and pulmonary complications overall (RR 0.58, 95% CI 0.42-0.80) compared with systemic opioids. Intercostal nerve blockade tends to improve pulmonary outcome measures (incidence of atelectasis: RR 0.65, 95% CI 0.27-1.57, incidence of pulmonary complications overall: RR 0.47, 95% CI 0.18-1.22), but these differences did not achieve statistical significance. There were no clinically or statistically significant differences in the surrogate measures of pulmonary function (FEV1, FVC, and PEFR). These analyses support the utility of epidural analgesia for reducing postoperative pulmonary morbidity but do not support the use of surrogate measures of pulmonary outcome as predictors or determinants of pulmonary morbidity in postoperative patients. ⋯ When individual trials are unable to produce significant results, it is often because of insufficient patient numbers. It may be impossible for a single institution to study enough patients. Meta-analysis is a useful tool for combining the data from multiple trials to increase the patient numbers. These meta-analyses confirm that postoperative epidural pain control can significantly decrease the incidence of pulmonary morbidity.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEconomic considerations of the use of new anesthetics: a comparison of propofol, sevoflurane, desflurane, and isoflurane.
Cost control in anesthesia is no longer an option; it is a necessity. New anesthetics have entered the market, but economic differences in comparison to standard anesthetic regimens are not exactly known. Eighty patients undergoing either subtotal thyroidectomy or laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly divided into four groups, with 20 patients in each group. Group 1 received propofol 1%/sufentanil, Group 2 received desflurane/sufentanil, Group 3 received sevoflurane/sufentanil, and Group 4 received isoflurane/sufentanil (standard anesthesia) for anesthesia. A fresh gas flow of 1.5-2 L/min and 60% N2O in oxygen was used for maintenance of anesthesia, and atracurium was given for muscle relaxation. Concentrations of volatile anesthetics, propofol, and sufentanil were varied according to the patient's perceived need. Isoflurane, desflurane, and sevoflurane consumption was measured by weighing the vaporizers with a precision weighing machine. Biometric data, time of surgery, and time of anesthesia were similar in the four groups. Times for extubation and stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) were significantly longer in the isoflurane group. Use of sufentanil and atracurium did not differ among the groups. Propofol patients required fewer additional drugs in the PACU (e.g., antiemetics), and thus showed the lowest additional costs in the PACU. Total (intra- and postoperative) costs were significantly higher in the propofol group ($30.73 per patient; $0.24 per minute of anesthesia). The costs among the inhalational groups did not differ significantly (approximately $0.15 per minute of anesthesia). We conclude that in today's climate of cost savings, a comprehensive pharmacoeconomic approach is needed. Although propofol-based anesthesia was associated with the highest cost, it is doubtful whether the choice of anesthetic regimen will lower the costs of an anesthesia department. ⋯ Cost analysis of anesthetic techniques is necessary in today's economic climate. Consumption of the new inhaled drugs sevoflurane and desflurane was measured in comparison to a standard anesthetic regimen using isoflurane and an IV technique using propofol. Propofol-based anesthesia was associated with the highest costs, whereas the costs of the new inhaled anesthetics sevoflurane and desflurane did not differ from those of a standard, isoflurane-based anesthesia regimen.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPrevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting with a combination of granisetron and droperidol.
In this randomized, double-blind study, we compared the efficacy and safety of granisetron plus droperidol with each antiemetic alone for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in 150 female patients scheduled for elective major gynecological surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive i.v. either granisetron 2.5 mg (Group G), droperidol 1.25 mg (Group D), or granisetron 2.5 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg (Group GD) immediately before the induction of anesthesia (n = 50 in each group). A standard anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia were used. Complete response, defined as no PONV and no administration of rescue antiemetic medication during the first 24 h after anesthesia, was 84% in Group G, 54% in Group D, and 96% in Group GD (P = 0.046 versus Group G, P = 0.001 versus Group D). No clinically important adverse effects were observed in any group. In conclusion, the combination of granisetron and droperidol is more effective than each antiemetic alone for complete response in patients undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery. ⋯ We compared the efficacy of granisetron plus droperidol with each antiemetic alone for the prevention of nausea and vomiting after gynecological surgery. The granisetron/droperidol combination was the most effective against these emetic symptoms.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialFactors that predict the use of positive inotropic drug support after cardiac valve surgery.
Left ventricular dysfunction is common after cardiac surgery and is often treated with positive inotropic drugs (PIDs). We hypothesized that the use of PIDs after cardiac valve surgery would have significant associations with the valvular pathophysiology and surgical procedure, and unlike the case for patients undergoing coronary artery surgery, would be unrelated to duration of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) or of aortic clamping. One hundred forty-nine consenting patients undergoing cardiac valve surgery were studied. Patients with hepatic or renal failure, or New York Heart Association class IV cardiac symptoms, were excluded. Patients were considered to have received PIDs if they received an infusion of amrinone, dobutamine, epinephrine, or dopamine (> or = 5 microg x kg[-1] x min[-1]). PIDs were received by 78 patients (52%). In a univariate model, older age, history of congestive heart failure, decreasing left ventricular ejection fraction, longer durations of CPB, and concurrent coronary artery surgery significantly increased the likelihood of PID support. There was also significant variation by anesthesiologist in the administration of PIDs. The specific diseased valve and valvular stenosis or insufficiency did not influence the likelihood of receiving PID support. In a multivariable model, age, history of congestive heart failure, decreasing left ventricular ejection fraction, and anesthesiologist were significantly associated with the likelihood of PID support, but duration of CPB and concurrent coronary artery surgery were not. In conclusion, patient age and ventricular function, as well as physician preferences, predicted the need for inotropic drug support; however, neither the specific valvular lesion, nor duration of CPB were strongly predictive in a multivariable model. ⋯ We evaluated factors related to use of positive inotropic drugs after cardiac valve surgery. The likelihood of a patient receiving these drugs increases with advancing age and with more severe preoperative left ventricular dysfunction, but was not influenced by the specific diseased valve or the duration of cardiopulmonary bypass.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialProphylactic ephedrine attenuates the hemodynamic response to propofol in elderly female patients.
In this study, we compared the effect of prophylactic administration of ephedrine against the hypotensive effect of propofol in elderly female patients scheduled for minor gynecological procedures. Ninety patients aged 60 yr or older were randomly allocated to one of three groups of 30 patients each to receive either normal saline, ephedrine 0.1 mg/kg, or ephedrine 0.2 mg/kg i.v. 1 min before the induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced and maintained with propofol and fentanyl. Hemodynamic variables were measured before and 2, 5, 10, 15, 30, and 60 min after induction. The decrease in blood pressure and heart rate (HR) was significantly less in each of the ephedrine groups (P < 0.001). Furthermore, the decrease was less in the large-dose group compared with the small-dose group (P < 0.05). Twelve patients in the control group experienced a decrease in systolic blood pressure to < 80 mmHg, compared with only one patient in the ephedrine groups (P < 0.001). In conclusion, the prophylactic injection of ephedrine significantly attenuated, but did not completely abolish, the decrease in blood pressure associated with induction of anesthesia with fentanyl and propofol. Ephedrine 0.2 mg/kg was slightly more effective than ephedrine 0.1 mg/kg. ⋯ The prophylactic effect of ephedrine to counteract the hypotensive effect of propofol induction of anesthesia was investigated in three groups of elderly female patients given 0.1 or 0.2 mg of ephedrine or placebo before induction. Both ephedrine doses markedly attenuated, but neither of them abolished, the decrease in blood pressure.