Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1999
Cardiovascular autonomic dysfunction and hemodynamic response to anesthetic induction in patients with coronary artery disease and diabetes mellitus.
Autonomic neuropathy is a major complication of diabetes mellitus and is reported to be associated with increased perioperative hemodynamic instability. We investigated the relationship between autonomic dysfunction and hemodynamic response to anesthetic induction in diabetic and nondiabetic patients with coronary artery disease. We studied 60 patients scheduled for coronary artery surgery, 30 suffering from diabetes mellitus. Preoperative evaluation included traditional cardiovascular autonomic function tests (coefficient of variation of 150 beat-to-beat intervals in heart rate at rest, heart rate response to deep breathing, and heart rate and arterial blood pressure response to standing), spectral analysis of blood pressure and heart rate variability (HRV), and the computation of spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity. After premedication with clorazepate, anesthesia was induced with sufentanil (0.5 microg/kg), etomidate (0.1-0.2 mg/kg), and vecuronium (0.1 mg/kg). Heart rate and blood pressure before anesthetic induction and before and after tracheal intubation were compared between groups. Autonomic function tests, spectral analysis of HRV, and spontaneous baroreflex sensitivity revealed significant differences between patient groups. Most diabetic patients (n = 23) had one or more abnormal test results, in contrast to most nondiabetic patients, who did not show signs of autonomic neuropathy (n = 23). There was no relationship between cardiovascular autonomic function and hemodynamic behavior during anesthetic induction. The blood pressure response to anesthetic induction was not different between patient groups, even when comparing the subgroups with and without abnormal autonomic function tests. These findings indicate that increased hemodynamic instability during anesthetic induction is not obligatory in patients with diabetes mellitus and autonomic dysfunction. ⋯ This study indicates that increased hemodynamic instability during anesthetic induction is not obligatory in patients with coronary artery disease and autonomic dysfunction.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · May 1999
Does epinephrine improve the diagnostic accuracy of aspiration during labor epidural analgesia?
Aspiration reliably detects almost all IV multiorifice epidural catheters. Although a supplemental epinephrine 15-microg test dose may detect the rare IV catheter that does not yield blood on aspiration, false-positive epinephrine responses may cause some women to unnecessarily undergo repeat epidural catheter insertion. We evaluated 532 consecutive eligible patients requesting neuraxial labor analgesia. Patients were excluded if they had a contraindication to epinephrine or if they received intrathecal sufentanil/bupivacaine. Multiorifice catheters were inserted 4-6 cm into the epidural space as part of an epidural (n = 305) or combined spinal-epidural (n = 270) technique. We used aspiration, a lidocaine/epinephrine test dose, and bolus injection or infusion of dilute bupivacaine/sufentanil solutions to systematically determine IV, intrathecal, or epidural catheter location. Aspiration alone detected 47 of 48 intravascular catheters. There were 10 positive epinephrine responses: 2 were true positives, 7 were falsely positive (subsequent local anesthetic injection/infusion produced bilateral sensory change and analgesia), and 1 catheter was removed without further testing. Aspiration detected almost all intravascular catheters. Although the epinephrine test dose did detect one catheter that proved to be in a blood vessel, 87.5% of positive responses occurred in women without intravascular catheters. ⋯ Epidural catheters may enter a blood vessel. Many clinicians use epinephrine to detect these catheters. Because aspiration alone detects almost all IV multiorifice catheters in laboring women, a subsequent epinephrine test dose may be unnecessary.