Anaesthesia and intensive care
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe effect of the biopatch, a chlorhexidine impregnated dressing, on bacterial colonization of epidural catheter exit sites.
We performed a prospective, randomized study in 55 ASA I to 3 women undergoing elective gynaecological surgery followed by postoperative epidural analgesia. We compared the incidence of bacterial colonization at the epidural exit site following catheter removal between a control group and an experimental group who received a chlorhexidine impregnated dressing (Biopatch, Johnson and Johnson, Arlington, TX, U. ⋯ Positive culture results were found in 11 of 27 (40.1%) patients in the control group compared with one of 29 (3.4%) patients whose epidural catheters were dressed with the Biopatch. We concluded that the Biopatch was effective in reducing bacterial colonization of the epidural catheter exit site.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialPropofol anaesthesia via target controlled infusion or manually controlled infusion: effects on the bispectral index as a measure of anaesthetic depth.
Target controlled infusions (TCI) of propofol allow anaesthetists to target constant blood concentrations and respond promptly to signs of inappropriate anaesthetic depth. Studies comparing propofol TCI with manually controlled infusion (MCI) reported similar control of anaesthesia, but did not use an objective measure of anaesthetic depth. We therefore tested whether the Bispectral Index (BIS), an electroencephalographic (EEG) variable, is more stable during propofol TCI or MCI. ⋯ There was no difference in absolute performance errors during maintenance of anaesthesia with propofol TCI or MCI (23 +/- 11% vs 23 +/- 9%; P=0.97). The two groups did not differ significantly in performance error, wobble, divergence on haemodynamic changes. We conclude that TCI and MCI result in similar depth of anaesthesia and haemodynamic stability when titrated against traditional clinical signs.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2001
Comparative StudyPost dural puncture headache following combined spinal epidural or epidural anaesthesia in obstetric patients.
A retrospective review of obstetric anaesthesia charts was performed for all parturients receiving regional anaesthesia over a 22-month period. The incidence of headache, post dural puncture headache (PDPH) and various other complications of regional anaesthesia that had been prospectively assessed were noted, as was the anaesthetic technique used (epidural or combined spinal epidural (CSE)). ⋯ Following a CSE technique, the epidural catheter more reliably produced effective analgesia/anaesthesia as compared with a standard epidural technique (1.49% versus 3.18% incidence of replaced catheters respectively). We conclude, based on the results of this retrospective review, that CSE is acceptable with respect to the occurrence of PDPH and that it is possible it is advantageous in relation to the correct placement of the epidural catheter
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA randomized trial comparing two laryngeal mask airway insertion techniques.
This study was undertaken to compare laryngoscopic-guided LMA insertion with a standard insertion technique. A total of 149 patients undergoing elective general surgical and orthopaedic procedures were randomly divided into two groups. ⋯ There were no statistically significant differences found. The laryngoscope may aid laryngeal mask airway insertion in some circumstances.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialLaryngeal mask vs intubating laryngeal mask: insertion and ventilation by inexperienced resuscitators.
The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) has been shown to be useful in airway maintenance during resuscitation. The intubating laryngeal mask (ILM) is a modified LMA permitting both ventilation and rapid endotracheal intubation. We aimed to compare the LMA and the ILM with regard to ease of insertion and successful ventilation by inexperienced personnel. ⋯ Reasons for failure included inability to insert the ILM past the teeth and insertion of the LMA upside down. There were no clinically relevant differences in the mean time to airway insertion and successful ventilation (62.6 vs 62 seconds) or expired tidal volume (781 vs 767 ml) for the LMA and ILM respectively. We conclude that the ILM is as easily inserted and effectively used as an LMA by novices and, because it allows the option offacilitating endotracheal intubation, may be the preferred device for maintaining an airway during resuscitation.