Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 1999
Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe hemodynamic effects of anesthetic induction in vascular surgical patients chronically treated with angiotensin II receptor antagonists.
The use of angiotensin II receptor subtype-1 antagonists (ARA), recently introduced as antihypertensive drugs, is becoming more prevalent. We studied the prevalence and severity of hypotension after the induction of general anesthesia in 12 patients treated with ARA until the morning of surgery. The hemodynamic response to induction was compared with that of patients treated with beta-adrenergic blockers (BB) and/or calcium channel blockers (CB) (BB/CB group, n = 45) and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors (ACEI) (ACEI group, n = 27). A standardized anesthesia induction protocol was followed for all patients. Hypotension occurred significantly (p < or = 0.05) more often in ARA-treated patients (12 of 12) compared with BB/CB-treated patients (27 of 45) or with ACEI-treated patients (18 of 27). There was a significantly (P < or = 0.001) increased ephedrine requirement in the ARA group (21+/-3 mg) compared with the BB/CB group (10+/-6 mg) or the ACEI group (7+/-4 mg). Hypotension refractory to repeated ephedrine or phenylephrine administration occurred significantly (P < or = 0.05) more in the ARA group (4 of 12) compared with the BB/CB group (0 of 45) or the ACEI group (1 of 27), but it was treated successfully by using a vasopressin system agonist. Treatment with angiotensin II antagonism until the day of surgery is associated with severe hypotension after the induction of anesthesia, which, in some cases, can only be treated with an agonist of the vasopressin system. ⋯ Hypotensive episodes occur more frequently after anesthetic induction in patients receiving Angiotensin II receptor subtype-1 antagonists under anesthesia than with other hypotensive drugs. They are less responsive to the vasopressors ephedrine and phenylephrine. The use of a vasopressin system agonist was effective in restoring blood pressure when hypotension was refractory to conventional therapy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 1999
Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe pain visual analog scale: is it linear or nonlinear?
The visual analog scale (VAS) is a tool widely used to measure pain, yet controversy surrounds whether the VAS score is ratio or ordinal data. We studied 52 postoperative patients and measured their pain intensity using the VAS. We then asked them to consider different amounts of pain (conceptually twice as much and then half as much) and asked them to repeat their VAS rating after each consideration (VAS2 and VAS3, respectively). Patients with unrelieved pain had their pain treated with IV fentanyl and were then asked to rate their pain intensity when they considered they had half as much pain. We compared the baseline VAS (VAS1) with VAS2 and VAS3. The mean (95% confidence interval) for VAS2:1 was 2.12 (1.81-2.43) and VAS3:1 was 0.45 (0.38-0.52). We conclude that the VAS is linear for mild-to-moderate pain, and the VAS score can be treated as ratio data. ⋯ A change in the visual analog scale score represents a relative change in the magnitude of pain sensation. Use of the VAS in comparative analgesic trials can now meaningfully quantify differences in potency and efficacy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of levobupivacaine 0.125%, fentanyl 4 microg/mL, or their combination for patient-controlled epidural analgesia after major orthopedic surgery.
Levobupivacaine, the isolated S(-) isomer of bupivacaine, is less cardiotoxic than racemic bupivacaine in animal studies. We studied the effectiveness of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with either levobupivacaine 0.125% or fentanyl 4 microg/mL alone, or a combination of levobupivacaine and fentanyl in 65 patients after total joint arthroplasty in a prospective, random, double-blinded fashion. Intraoperatively, all patients received 20 mL of 0.75% levobupivacaine. Study medication was infused at an initial rate of 4 mL/h, with additional medication available on patient demand (2 mL/10 min). The combination of levobupivacaine and fentanyl produced better analgesia (longer time to first PCEA request; P = 0.007 combination versus fentanyl and P = 0.006 combination versus levobupivacaine) than either drug alone. Patients in the levobupivacaine groups had appreciable sensory blockade to pinprick with minimal motor impairment. Resting and dynamic visual analog scale pain scores were lower in the combination group than in the plain fentanyl group at 6 (P = 0.022 and 0.036) and 12 h (P = 0.002 and 0.001). The 24-h overall patient- and investigator-rated visual analog scale pain scores were also lower in the combination group (resting P = 0.007, dynamic P = 0.005). There was no significant difference among the groups in the incidence of postoperative nausea (26.2%), pruritus (9.2%), hypotension (23.1%), or sedation (0%). We conclude that the analgesic effects of levobupivacaine 0.125% and fentanyl (4 microg/mL) are additive and beneficial for the management of orthopedic surgical pain by the PCEA method. Patients in this study began demand-dosing later, reported lower pain scores, and had no greater risk of adverse events than those who were given either levobupivacaine or fentanyl alone. ⋯ We demonstrated a significant additive effect of the combination of levobupivacaine (0.125%) and fentanyl (4 microg/mL), compared with either drug alone, when using patient-controlled epidural analgesia in patients after total joint arthroplasty.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Dec 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe failure of negative pressure rewarming (Thermostat) to accelerate recovery from mild hypothermia in postoperative surgical patients.
The Thermostat device (Aquarius Medical Corp., Phoenix, AZ) is used in a new technique to accelerate recovery from hypothermia by mechanically distending blood vessels in the hand, thereby increasing transfer of exogenous heat to the body core. We evaluated the use of the Thermostat device in patients with mild postoperative hypothermia (< 36 degrees C). We studied adult patients undergoing elective surgery, general anesthesia, and neuromuscular blockade. Patients with an initial postoperative tympanic membrane temperature < 36 degrees C were randomized into two groups: 1) Thermostat, which consisted of a hypothermia warming mitt/seal and thermal exchange chamber for 60 min, and 2) conventional treatment, which consisted of warm blankets and/or radiant heat. Of the 191 patients enrolled, 60 (31%) developed hypothermia and were randomized to receive the Thermostat (n = 30) or conventional methods (n = 30). Fourteen patients in the Thermostat group and 17 patients in the conventional group rewarmed to 36 degrees C before discharge from the recovery room (P is not significant). There were no differences in vital signs, rewarming time, time to discharge from the recovery room, or postoperative temperature between groups. We conclude that patients with mild postoperative hypothermia rewarmed in a similar fashion, regardless of whether the Thermostat or conventional methods were used. ⋯ We found that a commercially available negative pressure rewarming device (Thermostat; Aquarius Medical Corp., Phoenix, AZ) was not effective in accelerating rewarming in postoperative hypothermic surgical patients after general anesthesia.