Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2001
Scheduling a delay between different surgeons' cases in the same operating room on the same day using upper prediction bounds for case durations.
At some surgical suites, elective cases are only scheduled if they can be completed during regularly scheduled hours. At such a surgical suite, a surgeon may be scheduled to perform one or more cases in an operating room (OR), to be followed by another surgeon who will perform one or more cases. Scheduling a delay between the two surgeons' cases will improve the likelihood that the second surgeon's case(s) will start on time. We show that the mathematics of calculating a scheduled delay between the different surgeons' cases in the same OR on the same day is that of calculating an upper prediction bound for the duration of the second surgeon's case(s). We test an analytical expression for the upper prediction bound for the last one case of the day in an OR, and a Monte Carlo simulation method for the last two cases. We show that these 90% upper prediction bounds are at least as long as the actual durations for 90% +/- 0.2% of single cases and 92% +/- 0.6% of pairs of cases. We conclude that our methodology can be used to calculate an appropriate, and reasonably accurate, scheduled delay between two surgeons' cases in the same OR on the same day. ⋯ We show how to use a statistical analysis of historical case duration data to calculate an appropriate and accurate scheduled delay between two surgeons' cases in the same operating room on the same day.
-
Propofol has an antiemetic effect that may be mediated by gamma-aminobutyric acid (GABA) influences on the serotonin system, the mechanism of which is not known. We used three techniques, immunohistochemistry, High Performance Liquid Chromatography, and electrophysiology, to define propofol's effects on the rat's brainstem. Paired male Wistar rats received propofol, 20 mg/kg/hr, or Intralipid for 6 h. The brains were then subjected to immunohistochemical analysis of serotonin. In a separate experiment after a propofol or Intralipid infusion, cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) was extracted from the fourth ventricle and analyzed for the amount of serotonin and 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid. Electrophysiological neuronal recordings were made in the area postrema (AP) in response to propofol with and without a GABA or serotonin antagonist. Results showed that immunohistochemical staining for serotonin in the propofol rats was significantly increased (28 +/- 12%) in the dorsal raphe and decreased in the AP (17 +/- 6%) compared with control. There were no significant changes in the isoflurane-anesthetized animals. Both serotonin and 5-hydroxyindoleacetic acid in the CSF of the fourth ventricle at the level of the AP were significantly reduced by 63% and 36%, respectively. Both propofol and pentobarbital injections reduce AP neuronal activity, but only the propofol response was blocked by bicuculline, a GABA antagonist. We conclude that the reduced levels of serotonin in the AP and the CSF may explain the antiemetic property of propofol. Propofol may also directly act on AP neurons via a GABA(A) receptor to reduce their activity. ⋯ Propofol may produce its antiemetic effect by depleting the area postrema of serotonin as well as by a direct gamma-aminobutyric acid-mediated inhibition.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2001
Meta Analysis Comparative StudyA lack of evidence of superiority of propofol versus midazolam for sedation in mechanically ventilated critically ill patients: a qualitative and quantitative systematic review.
Propofol and midazolam are often used for sedation in the intensive care unit. The aim of this systematic review was to estimate the efficacy and harm of propofol versus midazolam in mechanically ventilated patients. A systematic search (Medline, Cochrane Library, Embase, bibliographies), any language, up to June 1999 was performed for reports of randomized comparisons of propofol with midazolam. Data from 27 trials (1624 adults) were analyzed. The average duration of sedation varied between 4 and 339 h. In 10 trials, the duration of adequate sedation was longer with propofol (weighted mean difference 2.9 h; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.2-5.6 h). In 13 trials (mostly postoperative), sedation lasted 4 to 35 h; in 9 of those, average weaning time from mechanical ventilation with propofol was 0.8-4.3 h; with midazolam it was 1.5-7.2 h (weighted mean difference 2.2 h [95% CI, 0.8 to 3.7 h]). In 8 trials, sedation lasted 54 to 339 h; there was a lack of evidence for difference in weaning times. Arterial hypotension (relative risk 2.5 [95% CI, 1.3 to 4.5]; number-needed-to-treat, 12), and hypertriglyceridemia (relative risk 12.1 [95%CI, 2.9 to 49.7]; number-needed-to-treat, 6) occurred more often with propofol. The duration of adequate sedation time is longer with propofol compared with midazolam. In postoperative patients with sedation <36 h, weaning is faster with propofol. ⋯ The duration of adequate sedation time is longer with propofol compared with midazolam. In postoperative patients with sedation < 36 h, weaning is faster with propofol.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Apr 2001
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of ropivacaine with fentanyl to bupivacaine with fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia.
Ropivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) may facilitate postoperative patient mobilization because it causes less motor block than bupivacaine. Forty patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomized in a double-blinded manner to the following: 0.05% bupivacaine/4 microg fentanyl, 0.1% bupivacaine/fentanyl, 0.05% ropivacaine/fentanyl, or 0.1% ropivacaine/fentanyl for standardized PCEA. We measured pain scores, side effects, and PCEA consumption for 42 h. Lower-extremity motor function was assessed with electromyography and isometric force dynamometry. Analgesia was equivalent among groups. Local anesthetic use was more in the 0.1% Ropivacaine and 0.1% Bupivacaine groups (77% increase, P = 0.001). Motor function decreased during PCEA (10%-35% decrease from preoperative, P < 0.001) and was equivalent among groups. Eight patients were transiently unable to ambulate. These patients used more local anesthetic (45 vs 33 mg mean, P < 0.05) with additional decrease in motor function (32%, P < 0.004) compared with ambulating patients. Other side effects were mild and equivalent among solutions. PCEA with bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/fentanyl as 0.05% or 0.1% solutions appears clinically equipotent. Lower-extremity motor function decreases, but is unlikely to result in prolonged inability to ambulate. Use of a 0.05% solution may be advantageous to decrease local anesthetic use and prevent transient motor block. ⋯ Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/fentanyl as either 0.05% or 0.1% solutions are clinically similar. Lower-extremity motor function will decrease with the use of any of these combinations, but is unlikely to result in the inability to walk.