Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of epidural analgesia with 0.125% ropivacaine with fentanyl versus 0.125% bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor.
We previously found that the extent of an epidural motor block produced by 0.125% ropivacaine was clinically indistinguishable from 0.125% bupivacaine in laboring patients. By adding fentanyl to the 0. 125% ropivacaine and bupivacaine solutions in an attempt to reduce hourly local anesthetic requirements, we hypothesized that differences in motor block produced by the two drugs may become apparent. Fifty laboring women were randomized to receive either 0. 125% ropivacaine with fentanyl 2 microg/mL or an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanyl using patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with settings of: 6-mL/hr basal rate, 5-mL bolus, 10-min lockout, 30-mL/h dose limit. Analgesia, local anesthetic use, motor block, patient satisfaction, and side effects were assessed until the time of delivery. No differences in verbal pain scores, local anesthetic use, patient satisfaction, or side effects between groups were observed; however, patients administered ropivacaine/fentanyl developed significantly less motor block than patients administered bupivacaine/fentanyl. Ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL produces similar labor analgesia with significantly less motor block than an equivalent concentration of bupivacaine/fentanyl. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the PCEA technique remains to be determined. ⋯ By using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique, ropivacaine 0.125% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL produces similar analgesia with significantly less motor block than a similar concentration of bupivacaine with fentanyl during labor. Whether this statistical reduction in motor block improves clinical outcome or is applicable to anesthesia practices which do not use the patient-controlled epidural analgesia technique remains to be determined.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialSedative, amnestic, and analgesic properties of small-dose dexmedetomidine infusions.
This research determined the safety and efficacy of two small-dose infusions of dexmedetomidine by evaluating sedation, analgesia, cognition, and cardiorespiratory function. Seven healthy young volunteers provided informed consent and participated on three occasions with random assignment to drug or placebo. Heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, ETCO(2), O(2) saturation, and processed electroencephalogram (bispectral analysis) were monitored. ⋯ IMPLICATIPNS: The alpha(2) agonist, dexmedetomidine, has sedation and analgesic properties. This study quantified these effects, as well as cardiorespiratory, memory and psychomotor effects, in healthy volunteers. Dexmedetomidine infusions resulted in reversible sedation, mild analgesia, and memory impairment without cardiorespiratory compromise.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of epidural levobupivacaine 0.75% with racemic bupivacaine for lower abdominal surgery.
Levobupivacaine, the S(-) isomer of bupivacaine, is less cardiotoxic than racemic bupivacaine. In this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study of epidural anesthesia, the onset, extent, and duration of sensory and motor block produced by 0.75% levobupivacaine (20 mL, 150 mg) was compared with that of 0.75% racemic bupivacaine in 56 patients undergoing elective lower abdominal surgery. The time to onset of adequate sensory block (T10 dermatome) was similar in both treatment groups (13.6 +/- 5.6 min for levobupivacaine and 14.0 +/- 9.9 min for bupivacaine), with an average peak block height of T5 reached at 24.3 +/- 9.4 and 26.5 +/- 13.2 min, respectively. Time to complete regression of sensory block was significantly longer with levobupivacaine (550.6 +/- 87.6 min) than bupivacaine (505.9 +/- 71.1 min) (P = 0.016). Abdominal muscle relaxation was adequate for the scheduled procedure in all patients, and there were no significant differences between the groups in rectus abdominis muscle scores (P = 0.386) and quality of muscle relaxation as determined by the surgeon and anesthesiologist (P = 0. 505 and 0.074, respectively). In conclusion, both 0.75% levobupivacaine and 0.75% bupivacaine produced effective epidural anesthesia and their effects were clinically indistinguishable. ⋯ The results of this study indicate that the sensory and motor block produced by 0.75% levobupivacaine is equivalent to that of 0.75% racemic bupivacaine. Both local anesthetics are well tolerated and effective in producing epidural anesthesia for patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialIs an infusion pump necessary to safely administer remifentanil?
We sought to determine if remifentanil could be administered as safely and effectively from an IV drip as from a calculator pump, because not all anesthesiologists have access to a calculator pump. Forty healthy adults undergoing outpatient knee arthroscopy were premedicated with midazolam, 2 mg. Total IV anesthesia was induced with propofol by bolus (2 mg/kg) and maintained by a continuous infusion of propofol and remifentanil. On a randomized, double-blinded basis, they received, IV, either remifentanil (50 microg/mL) by syringe from an infusion pump or from a bag of saline containing remifentanil 20 microg/mL through a minidrip set. The remifentanil infusion syringe pump rate was 0.4 microg. kg(-1). min(-1) until skin incision and then 0.2 microg. kg(-1). min(-1), whereas that from the bag/minidrip set was set to approximate the delivery rate from the pump. Both a syringe pump and bag/minidrip set infusion were administered to each patient but only one contained remifentanil, that one being determined in a randomized, double-blinded manner. There were no differences in demographic data, time to recovery of open eyes, response to command, ability to speak (approximately 7 min), total dose and time of administration of propofol and remifentanil, the incidence of intraoperative hypotension and bradycardia, and postoperative shivering. We demonstrated that remifentanil can be administered as safely and effectively from a bag with a minidrip set as from a syringe in a calculator infusion pump, provided the anesthesiologist is paying attention to the drip rate from the bag. ⋯ Because remifentanil is rapidly degraded in the body, it can be safely and effectively administered from a bag through a minidrip set. We showed that there was no difference with this less expensive method of administration than from the more precise method of a calculator infusion pump.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Mar 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialReversal of rapacuronium block during propofol versus sevoflurane anesthesia.
We studied the antagonism of rapacuronium with edrophonium-atropine during propofol- or sevoflurane- based anesthesia in 60 healthy outpatients. After the induction of anesthesia with standardized doses of propofol and fentanyl, rapacuronium 1.5 mg/kg was administered to facilitate tracheal intubation. Patients were randomized to receive either a propofol infusion (100 microg. kg(-1). min(-1)) or sevoflurane (1.0%, end-tidal) in combination with nitrous oxide 66% for maintenance of anesthesia. Neuromuscular block was monitored by using electromyography at the wrist and reversed with edrophonium 1.0 mg/kg and atropine 0.015 mg/kg when the first twitch (T(1)) response of the train-of-four (TOF) stimulation recovered to 25% of the baseline value. The clinical duration of action (i.e., time to 25% T(1) recovery) was similar during both propofol (13.1 +/- 3.6 min) and sevoflu-rane (13.7 +/- 4.4 min) anesthesia. The time from 25% T(1) recovery to TOF ratio of 0.8 was also similar with propofol (3.4 +/- 2.1 min) and sevoflurane (5.9 +/- 8.7 min) (P > 0.05). Although none of the patients in the propofol group required more than 9 min to achieve a TOF ratio of 0. 8, two patients receiving sevoflurane required 31 min and 37 min. Adequate antagonism of rapacuronium block with edrophonium can be achieved within 10 min during propofol anesthesia. However, more prolonged recovery may occur in the presence of sevoflurane. ⋯ We studied the reversal of rapacuronium-induced block with edrophonium and found that the residual rapacuronium block can be readily antagonized during propofol-based anesthesia. However, reversal of rapacuronium appears to be less predictable during sevoflurane-based anesthesia.