Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of remifentanil and fentanyl in patients undergoing surgery for intracranial mass lesions.
We compared the effects of remifentanil versus fentanyl during surgery for intracranial space-occupying lesions. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either remifentanil (0.5 microg. kg(-1). min(-1) IV during the induction of anesthesia reduced to 0.25 microg. kg(-1). min(-1) after endotracheal intubation; n = 49) or fentanyl (dose per usual practice of the anesthesiologist; n = 54). Anesthesia maintenance doses of isoflurane, nitrous oxide, and opioid were at the anesthesiologist's discretion for both groups. There were no differences between opioid groups for the frequency of responses (hemodynamic, movement, and tearing) to intubation, pinhead holder placement, skin incision, or closure of the surgical wound. Adverse event frequencies were similar between groups. Times to follow verbal commands (P < 0.001) and tracheal extubation (P = 0. 04) were more rapid for remifentanil. The percentage of patients with a normal recovery score (were alert or arousable to quiet voice, were oriented, were able to follow commands, had motor function unchanged from their preoperative evaluation, were not agitated, and had modified Aldrete Scores of 9-10) at 10 min after surgery was more for remifentanil (45% vs 18%; P = 0.005). By 20 min, no difference between groups existed (P = 0.27). Anesthesiologists used more isoflurane in the fentanyl group (4.22 vs 1.93 minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration hours). Neurosurgeons, blinded to treatment group, favored the use of remifentanil. Similar frequencies of light anesthesia responses and other adverse events suggest that intraoperative depths of anesthesia were similar in the two groups. Under these conditions, emergence was more rapid with remifentanil. This is consistent with the necessity for less isoflurane use in the remifentanil group and the intrinsic rapid clearance of this opioid. ⋯ Patients given remifentanil-based anesthesia for craniotomy had faster recovery times from anesthesia than did those given fentanyl-based anesthesia.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialTranexamic acid reduces red cell transfusion better than epsilon-aminocaproic acid or placebo in liver transplantation.
We evaluated the efficacy of the prophylactic administration of epsilon-aminocaproic acid and tranexamic acid for reducing blood product requirements in orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) in a prospective, double-blinded study performed in 132 consecutive patients. Patients were randomized to three groups and given one of three drugs prophylactically: tranexamic acid, 10 mg. kg(-1). h(-1); epsilon-aminocaproic acid, 16 mg. kg(-1). h(-1), and placebo (isotonic saline). Perioperative management was standardized. Coagulation tests, thromboelastogram, and blood requirements were recorded during OLT and in the first 24 h. There were no differences in diagnosis, Child score, or preoperative coagulation tests among groups. Administration of packed red blood cells was significantly reduced (P = 0.023) during OLT in the tranexamic acid group, but not in the epsilon-aminocaproic acid group. There were no differences in transfusion requirements after OLT. Thromboembolic events, reoperations, and mortality were similar in the three groups. Prophylactic administration of tranexamic acid, but not epsilon-aminocaproic acid, significantly reduces total packed red blood cell usage during OLT. ⋯ In a randomized study of 132 consecutive patients undergoing liver transplantation, we found that tranexamic acid, but not epsilon-aminocaproic acid, reduced intraoperative total packed red blood cell transfusion.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialFast-tracking after immersion lithotripsy: general anesthesia versus monitored anesthesia care.
Both monitored anesthesia care (MAC) and general anesthesia (GA) offer advantages over epidural anesthesia for immersion lithotripsy. We compared propofol-based MAC and desflurane-based GA techniques for outpatient lithotripsy. After receiving midazolam 2 mg IV, 100 subjects were randomly assigned to one of two anesthetic treatment groups. In the MAC group, propofol 50-100 microg. kg(-1). min(-1) IV was titrated to maintain an observer's assessment of alertness/sedation score of 2-3 (5 = awake/alert to 1 = asleep). Remifentanil 0.05 microg.kg(-1). min(-1) IV supplemented with 0.125 microg/kg IV boluses, was administered for pain control. In the GA group, anesthesia was induced with propofol 1.5 mg/kg IV and remifentanil 0.125 microg/kg IV and maintained with desflurane (2%-4% inspired) and nitrous oxide (60%). Tachypnea (respiratory rate >20 breaths/min) was treated with remifentanil 0.125 microg/kg IV boluses. In the GA group, droperidol (0.625 mg IV) was administered as a prophylactic antiemetic. Recovery times and postoperative side effects were assessed up to 24 h after the procedure. Compared with MAC, the use of GA reduced the opioid requirement and decreased movements and episodes of desaturation (<90%) during the procedure. Although the GA group took longer to return to an observer's assessment of alertness/sedation score of 5, discharge times were similar in both groups. We conclude that GA can provide better conditions for outpatient immersion lithotripsy than MAC sedation without delaying discharge. ⋯ A desflurane-based general anesthetic technique using the cuffed oropharyngeal airway device was found to be a highly acceptable alternative to propofol-based monitored anesthesia care sedation for outpatient immersion lithotripsy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jul 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialProphylactic intravenous ondansetron reduces the incidence of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus in patients undergoing cesarean delivery.
Pruritus is a common side effect of intrathecal morphine injection for postoperative pain control. Its incidence is especially high in patients undergoing cesarean delivery. We investigated the effectiveness of ondansetron in preventing intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus in such patients. We included 60 consecutive nonbreastfeeding women who were scheduled for elective cesarean delivery. After the administration of spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine and intrathecal morphine 0.15 mg injection, the patients were randomly divided into three groups. Group 1 received placebo (normal saline) IV injection, Group 2 diphenhydramine 30 mg IV injection, and Group 3 ondansetron 0.1 mg/kg IV injection. The incidence of pruritus was significantly lower in the ondansetron group (25%) when compared with that in the placebo group (85%) and in the diphenhydramine group (80%) (both P < 0.05). The postoperative pain score and time to flatus passage were not significantly different among the three groups. There were no headache or extrapyramidal signs associated with ondansetron use. In conclusion, ondansetron prophylaxis significantly reduced the incidence of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus in patients undergoing cesarean delivery. ⋯ Ondansetron prophylaxis significantly decreases the incidence of pruritus, a common side effect of intrathecal morphine used to treat postcesarean delivery pain.