Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Clinical TrialThe minimum alveolar concentration of enflurane for laryngeal mask airway extubation in deeply anesthetized children.
The end-tidal anesthetic gas concentration required to prevent the anesthetized patient from coughing or moving during or immediately after the laryngeal mask airway (LMA) extubation is not known. We sought to determine the minimum alveolar concentration of enflurane required for the removal of the LMA in children. We studied 21 nonpremedicated children between 4 and 11 yr of age, ASA physical status I, undergoing procedures below the umbilicus. General anesthesia was induced with a mask by using sevoflurane, nitrous oxide, and oxygen, and the LMA was inserted. Anesthesia was maintained with enflurane, nitrous oxide, and oxygen. At the end of surgery, a predetermined end-tidal enflurane concentration was achieved, and the LMA was removed. Each concentration at which the LMA extubation was attempted was predetermined by the up-and-down method (with 0.1% as a step size). When LMA removal was accomplished without coughing, clenching teeth, or gross purposeful muscular movements during or within 1 min after removal, it was considered a successful LMA removal. Removal was considered to be unsuccessful in patients who developed breath holding or laryngospasm during or immediately after LMA removal. The minimum alveolar concentration of enflurane at which 50% of children had a successful LMA removal was found to be 1.02% (95% CL, 0.95%-1.11%), and the 95% effective dose for successful extubation was 1.14% (95% CL, 1.07%-1.66%). In conclusion, the LMA removal may be accomplished without coughing or moving at 1.02% end-tidal enflurane concentration in 50% of anesthetized children aged 4-11 yr. ⋯ There may be fewer problems associated with the laryngeal mask airway extubation when patients are deeply anesthetized. The purpose of this study was to determine the minimum concentration of enflurane for successful removal of the laryngeal mask in children.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA randomized, double-blinded comparison of intrathecal morphine, sufentanil and their combination versus IV morphine patient-controlled analgesia for postthoracotomy pain.
We compared the analgesic effect of lumbar intrathecal (IT) 0.5 mg morphine (Group M, n = 10), 50 microg sufentanil (Group S, n = 10), and their combination (Group S-M, n = 10) given before general anesthesia and patient-controlled analgesia with IV morphine (Group C, n = 19) in a randomized, double-blinded study performed in patients undergoing thoracotomy. Pain visual analog scale (VAS) and morphine consumption were assessed for 24 h. In Group S-M the number of patients initially titrated with IV morphine was less than in group C (30 vs 84%, P < 0.05). Morphine requirement was higher in Group C (71 +/- 30 mg) than in Groups S (46 +/- 34 mg, P < 0.05), M (38 +/- 31 mg, P < 0.05) and S-M (23 +/- 16 mg, P < 0.01). VAS scores were significantly decreased during the first 0-11 postoperative h at rest and during the first 0-8 postoperative h on coughing in Groups M and S-M rather than in Group C. The incidence of side effects was infrequent except for urinary retention. Preoperative IT morphine or combined sufentanil and morphine could be given as a booster to achieve rapidly effective analgesia in the immediate postoperative period. ⋯ As compared with IV patient-controlled analgesia, intrathecal morphine or combined sufentanil and morphine provided superior postoperative pain relief both at rest (11 h) and on coughing (8 h) than did IV patient-controlled analgesia morphine alone. IV morphine requirement was decreased during the first postoperative day after posterolateral thoracotomy.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe clinical relevance of embolic events detected by transesophageal echocardiography during cemented total hip arthroplasty: a randomized clinical trial.
The first aim of this prospective clinical study was to characterize the relationship between embolic events observed during cemented total hip arthroplasty using transesophageal echocardiography (TEE), and changes in cardiopulmonary function. The second aim was to assess the efficiency of a modified cementing technique that was developed to reduce the risk of embolism. The modification consists in a vacuum drainage placed in the proximal femur to reduce the increase of intramedullary pressure during insertion of the prosthesis. One hundred twenty patients were randomized into two groups. Group 1 received a total hip arthroplasty cemented conventionally, whereas Group 2 was cemented with the modified technique. Continuous TEE, hemodynamic monitoring, and blood gas analysis were done during the perioperative period. Severe embolic events were imaged during the insertion of the femoral component and the reduction of the hip joint. Embolism occurred in 93.3% of patients operated on with the conventional cementing technique, compared with 13.3% of patients operated on with the modified technique (P < 0.05). Intraoperative shunt values during insertion of the femoral component increased from 8.2% to 10.3% (P < 0.05) in Group 1 patients, whereas there was no significant change in Group 2 patients. We observed no clinical signs of fat embolism syndrome in any study patient. The results of the study indicate that embolic events observed using TEE can cause increased pulmonary shunt values during hip arthroplasty, especially in patients with systemic disease (ASA physical status III). The modified surgical technique effectively reduced the incidence of embolization during cemented hip arthroplasty. ⋯ Use of conventional cementing techniques is associated with echocardiographic evidence of embolism in 93% of patients and with a significant increase in pulmonary shunting. The incidence of embolism and change in shunting are reduced with a modified cementing technique that limits increases in intramedullary pressure.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Editorial CommentHow can local anesthetic in the wound not help?