Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialOndansetron is no more effective than supplemental intraoperative oxygen for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting.
Supplemental oxygen maintained during and for 2 h after colon resection halves the incidence of nausea and vomiting. Whether supplemental oxygen restricted to the intraoperative period is sufficient remains unknown. Similarly, the relative efficacy of supplemental oxygen and ondansetron is unknown. We tested the hypothesis that intraoperative supplemental oxygen reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Patients (n = 240) undergoing gynecological laparoscopy were given a standardized isoflurane anesthetic. After induction, they were randomly assigned to the following three groups: routine oxygen administration with 30% oxygen, balance nitrogen (30% Oxygen group), supplemental oxygen administration with 80% oxygen, balance nitrogen (80% Oxygen group), and Ondansetron 8 mg (immediately after induction), combined with 30% oxygen, balance nitrogen (Ondansetron group). The overall incidence of nausea and/or vomiting during the initial 24 postoperative h was 44% in the patients assigned to 30% oxygen and 30% in the Ondansetron group, but only 22% in those given 80% oxygen. The incidence was thus halved by supplemental oxygen and was significantly less than with 30% oxygen. There were, however, no significant differences between the 30% oxygen and ondansetron groups, or between the ondansetron and 80% oxygen groups. We conclude that supplemental oxygen effectively prevents postoperative nausea and vomiting after gynecological laparoscopic surgery; furthermore, ondansetron is no more effective than supplemental oxygen. ⋯ Supplemental oxygen reduces the risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) as well or better than 8 mg of ondansetron. Because oxygen is inexpensive and essentially risk-free, supplemental oxygen is a preferable method of reducing PONV.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialNegative pressure rewarming vs. forced air warming in hypothermic postanesthetic volunteers.
We compared changes in core temperature and systemic heat balance with a new negative pressure/warming device (Vital Heat(R) ) that uses negative pressure combined with heat to facilitate warming in vasoconstricted postoperative patients to those resulting from passive insulation or forced air. Seven healthy volunteers were anesthetized and cooled to a tympanic membrane temperature near 34 degrees C. Anesthesia was discontinued and shivering was prevented by using meperidine. ⋯ Core temperature increased no faster with Vital Heat warming (1.3 +/- 0.4 degrees C) than with a cotton blanket (1.2 +/- 0.4 degrees C). In contrast, core temperature increased more rapidly with forced air warming (2.6 +/- 0.6 degrees C). In this study we show that calories from a negative pressure rewarming device are largely constrained to the forearm and that heat does not flow to the core thermal compartment.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialShould the angiotensin II antagonists be discontinued before surgery?
Angiotensin II antagonists (AIIA) are part of a new rational treatment of hypertension. Because adverse circulatory effects during anesthesia can occur in patients chronically treated with angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, some clinicians discontinue them at least 24 h before operation. No data are available concerning AIIA administration in patients scheduled for vascular surgery performed under general anesthesia. The aim of this prospective randomized study was to compare hemodynamics during induction of anesthesia in patients chronically treated with AIIA and those of patients not receiving this drug on the morning before operation. Thirty-seven patients chronically treated with AIIA for hypertension were randomly assigned to two groups: Group I: AIIA discontinued on the day before surgery (n = 18); Group II: AIIA given 1 h before anesthesia (n = 19). Patients received sufentanil 0.4 microg/kg, propofol 1.5 mg/kg, and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg. During the procedure, the anesthesiologist was required to maintain systolic blood pressure and heart rate within 30% of baseline values using intravascular fluid administration and vasoconstric- tors (e.g. , ephedrine, phenylephrine, or terlipressin). Hemodynamic variables were recorded each 1 min. Hemodynamic study ended at incision. The number and duration of hemodynamic events were collected, and total doses of vasoactive drugs were noted in each group. Systolic arterial pressure was significantly decreased in Group II at 5, 15 and 23 min after induction of anesthesia (*P < 0.05). In this group, the decrease in systolic arterial pressure was associated with more frequent episodes of hypotension (AIIA withdrawn: 1 +/- 1; AIIA given: 2 +/- 1; P < 0.01), with a larger number of patients developing at least 1 episode of hypotension (AIIA withdrawn: 12; AIIA given: 19; P < 0.01), and a longer duration of an episode of hypotension (AIIA withdrawn: 3 +/- 4 min; AIIA given: 8 +/- 7 min; P < 0.01), and an increased need for vasoactive drugs. In conclusion, blockade of the renin-angiotensin system increases the potential hypotensive effect of anesthetic induction. A severe hypotensive episode, requiring vasoconstrictor treatment, occurs after induction of general anesthesia in patients chronically treated with AIIA. Recommendations to discontinue AIIA drugs on the day before the surgery may be justified. ⋯ This prospective randomized study demonstrated that more severe hypotensive episodes, requiring vasoconstrictor treatment, occur after induction of general anesthesia in patients chronically treated with AIIA and receiving this drug on the morning before operation, in comparison with those in whom AIIA were discontinued on the day before operation. Recommendations to discontinue these drugs on the day before the surgery may be justified.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialFast-track office-based anesthesia: a comparison of propofol versus desflurane with antiemetic prophylaxis in spontaneously breathing patients.
Compared to propofol, maintenance of anesthesia with desflurane provided significantly better intraoperative conditions during office-based surgery. In addition, desflurane with routine antiemetic prophylaxis was associated with a faster early recovery and similar incidence of postoperative side effects.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Jan 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe dose-range effects of sufentanil added to 0.125% bupivacaine on the quality of patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor.
To determine the minimal sufentanil concentration required to improve the quality of patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor, we compared the efficacy of a combination of 0.125% bupivacaine with 1:800,000 epinephrine and different concentrations of sufentanil in a double-blinded randomized study. Concentrations were no sufentanil (n = 66), 0.078 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 65), 0.156 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 65), 0.312 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 65), and 0.468 microg/mL sufentanil (n = 67). The patient-controlled epidural analgesia setting was a 12-mL bolus dose and a 25-min lockout interval. Pain was scored at 5-6 cm, 7-8 cm, and full cervical dilation by using a 10-cm visual analog scale. At full cervical dilation, the pain scores were lower in the groups receiving a solution of at least 0.156 microg/mL sufentanil. Few differences were observed when using the larger concentrations, except for increased pruritus intensity. The duration of labor and the mode of delivery were similar in each group. Rescue analgesia, which consisted of 6 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine, was infrequent and comparable between groups. The use of the pump did not differ between groups. Adding a small concentration of sufentanil to 0.125% bupivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor improved the quality of analgesia but did not modify the bupivacaine requirement. Reducing the sufentanil concentrations to 0.156 microg/mL decreased the pruritus intensity without reducing analgesia. ⋯ Adding a small concentration of sufentanil to 0.125% bupivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor improved the quality of analgesia but did not modify the bupivacaine requirement. Reducing the sufentanil concentrations to 0.156 microg/mL decreased the pruritus intensity without reducing analgesia.