Articles: postoperative-pain.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEpidural levobupivacaine 0.1% or ropivacaine 0.1% combined with morphine provides comparable analgesia after abdominal surgery.
Ropivacaine appears attractive for epidural analgesia because it produces less motor block than racemic bupivacaine. The potential benefits of levobupivacaine with regard to motor blockade require further investigations. In this study, we compared the efficacy, dose requirements, side effects, and motor block observed with epidural levobupivacaine and ropivacaine when given in combination with small-dose morphine for 60 h after major abdominal surgery. Postoperatively, 50 patients were randomly allocated, in a double-blinded manner, to patient-controlled epidural analgesia with the same settings and without basal infusion, using 0.1% levobupivacaine or 0.1% ropivacaine. Both were combined with an epidural infusion of 0.1 mg/h morphine. Pain scores, side effects, motor block, and local anesthetic consumption were measured for 60 h. Pain scores measured on a 100-mm visual analog scale were approximately 20 mm at rest and 40 mm during mobilization in both groups. Bromage scores were 1 for all patients after the fourth postoperative hour. Consumption of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine were similar: 344 +/- 178 mg levobupivacaine versus 347 +/- 199 mg ropivacaine 48 h postoperatively. On postoperative day 2, 19 patients in the ropivacaine group versus 12 in the levobupivacaine group were able to ambulate (P < 0.05). No difference was noted concerning incidence of side effects. We conclude that when used as patient-controlled epidural analgesia and combined with small-dose epidural morphine, 0.1% levobupivacaine and 0.1% ropivacaine produce comparable postoperative analgesia with a similar incidence of side effects. ⋯ Small concentrations (0.1%) of epidural levobupivacaine and ropivacaine combined with morphine (0.1 mg/h) produce comparable analgesia and have similar side effects for similar dose requirements.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe median effective dose of nefopam and morphine administered intravenously for postoperative pain after minor surgery: a prospective randomized double-blinded isobolographic study of their analgesic action.
The aim of this study was to characterize the nature of analgesic interaction between nefopam and morphine administered i.v. for postoperative pain after minor surgery. To do so, we defined the median effective analgesic dose (ED(50)) for each drug and also the median ED(50) of their combination and compared them using the isobolographic method. Determination of median effective doses was performed by the up-and-down sequential drug administration in a two-stage study. First, in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study, we enrolled 60 patients with mild to moderate pain after minor surgery; this was followed by an open study enrolling 30 patients. The end-point was a pain score less than 3 on a Numerical Pain Scale (0-10). Initial doses were 16 mg in group N, 5 mg in group M, and 7.5 mg of N combined with 2.5 mg of M in group N+M. The testing interval was 2 mg in group N, 1 mg in group M, and 1.5 mg of N combined with 0.5 mg of M in group N+M. ED(50) (95% confidence interval) was 5 mg (4-6 mg) for morphine, 18 mg (16-18 mg) for nefopam, and 4 mg (3.5-4.5 mg) with 12 mg (10.5-13.5 mg) for the combination of morphine and nefopam administered at a 3:1 dose ratio. Isobolographic analysis demonstrated a significant infra-additive interaction. The incidence of side effects did not differ significantly among morphine, nefopam, and their combination. These findings suggest that the combination of nefopam and morphine does not offer any advantage compared to each drug administered i.v. or alone after minor surgery. This study is the first to define the ED(50) of nefopam and morphine in postoperative patients. In conclusion, the addition of nefopam has a morphine-sparing effect, but the combination is infra-additive. ⋯ Pharmacologic interaction between nefopam and morphine shows infra-additivity but their combination may be clinically useful as morphine consumption is decreased in postoperative patients.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
Epidural neostigmine produces analgesia but also sedation in women after cesarean delivery.
Intrathecal neostigmine produces analgesia but also nausea, limiting its utility. In contrast, epidural administration of neostigmine has been suggested to produce postoperative analgesia without nausea in nonpregnant patients. The purpose of this study was to examine the dose range for efficacy and side effects of epidural neostigmine in women at cesarean delivery receiving combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. ⋯ Epidural neostigmine produced modest analgesia in women after cesarean delivery. In contrast with previous reports, which focused primarily on nausea, these data suggest that epidural neostigmine can also produce mild sedation for several hours. These data suggest a limited role for single bolus-administration epidural neostigmine for analgesia after cesarean delivery. They also support future study of epidural neostigmine for obstetric analgesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2004
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialDoes a preemptive block of the great auricular nerve improve postoperative analgesia in children undergoing tympanomastoid surgery?
We performed a double-blinded randomized controlled trial to evaluate the efficacy of preemptive analgesia in children undergoing tympanomastoid surgery. Children were divided into two groups: group block-block (BB) received a preemptive great auricular nerve block (GAN-block) with 0.25% bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine before incision followed by a second GAN-block with 0.25% bupivacaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine 1 h before the end of the procedure. Group sham block-block (SB-B) received a preemptive GAN-block with normal saline before surgical incision followed by a GAN-block with 0.25% bupivacaine with 1:200000 epinephrine 1 h before the completion of the procedure. All patients were evaluated for pain with the objective pain score (OPS) by a blinded observer. There was no difference in pain rescue requirements in the postanesthesia care unit (BB versus SB-B, 1 of 20 versus 3 of 20, P= 0.60) or in the short-stay unit (BB versus SB-B, 5 of 20 versus 11 of 20, P = 0.107) or for the entire hospital stay (P = 0.20). There was no significant difference between groups in the time to first rescue pain medication (BB versus SB-B, 226 +/- 71 min versus 201 +/- 94 min). There was no significant difference between groups regarding vomiting in the postoperative period (P = 0.52). We conclude that a preoperative GAN-block does not offer significant advantages for postoperative pain relief in children undergoing tympanomastoid surgery. ⋯ This double-blinded randomized controlled trial compared the efficacy of preemptive analgesia with a peripheral nerve block of the great auricular nerve for decreasing postoperative pain in children undergoing tympanomastoid surgery. Preemptive analgesia did not improve the quality or duration of postoperative analgesia in our cohort.