Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
The accuracy and precision of body temperature monitoring methods during regional and general anesthesia.
We tested the hypotheses that accuracy and precision of available temperature monitoring methods are different between spinal anesthesia (SA) and general anesthesia (GA), and that patients receiving SA are at equal risk for hypothermia as those receiving GA. Patients scheduled for radical retropubic prostatectomy were enrolled. Either GA (n = 16) or SA (n = 16) was given according to patient and clinician preference. Temperatures were monitored with thermocouple probes at the tympanic membrane, axilla, rectum, and forehead skin surface. Tympanic temperatures were also measured with an infrared device, and forehead skin temperatures were monitored with two brands of liquid crystal thermometer strips. Accuracy and precision of these monitoring methods were determined by using tympanic membrane temperature, measured by thermocouple, as the reference core temperature (T(c)). At the end of surgery, T(c) was similar between SA (35.0 +/- 0.1 degrees C) and GA (35.2 +/- 0.1 degrees C) (P = 0.44). Accuracy and precision of each temperature monitoring method were similar between SA and GA. Rectal temperature monitoring offered the greatest combination of accuracy and precision. All other methods underestimated T(c). These findings suggest that patients receiving SA or GA are at equal and significant risk for hypothermia, and should have their temperatures carefully monitored, recognizing that most monitoring methods underestimate T(c). ⋯ Body temperature should be monitored during spinal anesthesia because patients are at significant risk for hypothermia. Rectal temperature is a valid method of measuring core temperature, whereas other methods tend to underestimate true core temperature.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
Meta AnalysisLocal anesthetic infiltration for postoperative pain relief after laparoscopy: a qualitative and quantitative systematic review of intraperitoneal, port-site infiltration and mesosalpinx block.
In a systematic review, we evaluated randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of peripheral local anesthetics (LA) compared with placebo or no treatment in the control of postoperative pain after laparoscopic surgery. A total of 41 trials with data from 2794 patients were considered appropriate for analysis. Of these 41 RCTs, 13 evaluated intraperitoneal LA after cholecystectomy, four RCTs assessed intraperitoneal LA after other procedures, eight RCTs evaluated port-site infiltration after various procedures, 12 RCTs evaluated mesosalpinx or fallopian tube block after sterilization, and four RCTs considered combined LA regimens. Outcome measures were pain scores, analgesic consumption, and time to first analgesic request. Efficacy was estimated by significant difference (P < 0.05), as reported in the original reports, and by calculation of the weighted mean difference of visual analog scale pain scores between treatment groups. Improved pain relief was observed in seven of the 13 RCTs of intraperitoneal LA after cholecystectomy and in four RCTs of other procedures. A statistically significant weighted mean difference of -13 mm visual analog scale (95% confidence intervals [CI]: -20 to -6) in favor of the treatment groups was observed after cholecystectomy. Three of eight trials of port-site infiltration showed significant differences but questionable clinical importance and validity in two; weighted mean difference was not statistically significant between treatment groups (95% CI -9 to 1). All RCTs of mesosalpinx or fallopian tube block after sterilization showed improved pain relief with a statistically significant weighted mean difference of -19 mm (95% CI -25 to -14) in favor of treatment groups. Data of combined regimens were positive, however, sparse. We conclude that there was evidence for a statistically significant but clinically questionable, important effect of intraperitoneal LA for postoperative pain control. There was evidence for a significant but short-lasting effect of mesosalpinx/fallopian tube block after sterilization, but there was a lack of evidence for any important effect of port-site infiltration. Data from combined regimens were too sparse for conclusions. ⋯ A systematic review summarizes, through transparent methodology, available information from randomized, controlled trials to produce the best available evidence-based estimate of a "true" clinical effect of an intervention. This systematic review confirms intraperitoneal and mesosalpinx local anesthetic block, not port-site infiltration, to have some impact on postoperative pain after laparoscopy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe use of a ketamine-propofol combination during monitored anesthesia care.
Supplemental analgesics are commonly used to enhance analgesia and improve patient comfort during procedures performed under local anesthesia and sedation. Because the use of ketamine as an analgesic adjunct to propofol sedation has not been well established, we evaluated its impact on analgesia, sedation, and recovery after ambulatory surgery. One hundred female outpatients undergoing breast biopsy procedures under local anesthesia participated in this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study. After premedication with midazolam, 2 mg IV, patients received an infusion of a solution containing propofol (9.4 mg/mL) in combination with either placebo (saline) (Group 1) or ketamine, 0.94 mg/mL (Group 2), 1.88 mg/mL (Group 3), or 2.83 mg/mL (Group 4). The sedative infusion rate was varied to maintain a deep level of sedation (Observer Assessment of Alertness/Sedation score 4) and normal respiratory and hemodynamic functions. Sufentanil, 2.5 microg IV, "rescue" boluses were used as needed to treat patients' responses (if any) to local anesthetic infiltration or surgical stimulation. Ketamine produced a dose-dependent reduction in the "rescue" opioid requirements. However, there was an increase in postoperative nausea and vomiting, psychomimetic side effects, and delay in discharge times with the largest ketamine dosage (Group 4). The adjunctive use of ketamine during propofol sedation provides significant analgesia and minimizes the need for supplemental opioids. The combination of propofol (9.4 mg/mL)/ketamine (0.94-1.88 mg/mL) provides effective sedation/analgesia during monitored anesthesia care. ⋯ Ketamine, when used in subhypnotic dosages, may be an useful adjuvant to propofol sedation.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of urapidil, clonidine, meperidine and placebo in preventing postanesthetic shivering.
This placebo-controlled study was performed to evaluate the efficacy of urapidil compared with clonidine and meperidine in preventing postanesthetic shivering, which is common after anesthesia administration and may be very distressing. We studied 120 patients undergoing elective abdominal or orthopedic surgery under standardized general anesthesia. After surgery, patients were randomly assigned to one of four groups (each group n = 30) using a double-blinded protocol: Group A received 0.2 mg/kg urapidil; Group B, 3 microg/kg clonidine; Group C, 0.4 mg/kg meperidine; and Group D, saline 0.9% as placebo. Postanesthetic shivering was scored by using a five-point scale. Clonidine and meperidine significantly reduced the incidence and the severity of shivering in comparison with placebo, whereas there were no significant differences between the urapidil and placebo groups. Both clonidine and meperidine caused a significantly prolonged emergence time (13.4 +/- 5.8 and 13. 3 +/- 5.0 min, respectively) compared with placebo (10.4 +/- 5.3 min) and urapidil (11.4 +/- 2.9 min). We confirmed that both clonidine and meperidine are effective in preventing postanesthetic shivering, whereas urapidil, in our setting and dosage, was not effective. Patients who received clonidine or meperidine had a prolonged emergence time. In the dosage used, urapidil seems to be unable to prevent postanesthetic shivering. ⋯ Shivering (irregular muscle activity) is common after surgery and anesthesia. This study compared urapidil (an antihypertensive drug) as a prophylaxis with two established antishivering drugs (meperidine and clonidine) and placebo. In the dosage used, we were unable to show a significant benefit of urapidil.