Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialTemperature control and recovery of bowel function after laparoscopic or laparotomic colorectal surgery in patients receiving combined epidural/general anesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia.
We compared the effects of a laparoscopic (n = 23) versus laparotomic (n = 21) technique for major abdominal surgery on temperature control in 44 patients undergoing colorectal surgery during a combined epidural/general anesthesia. A thoracic epidural block up to T4 was induced with 6-10 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine; general anesthesia was induced with thiopental, fentanyl, and atracurium IV and maintained with isoflurane. Core temperature was measured with a bladder probe and recorded every 15 min after the induction. In both groups, core temperature decreased to 35.2 degrees C (range, 34 degrees C-36 degrees C) at the end of surgery. After surgery, normothermia returned after 75 min (60-120 min) in the Laparoscopy group and 60 min (45-180 min) in the Laparotomy group (P = 0.56). No differences in postanesthesia care unit discharge time were reported between the two groups. The degree of pain during coughing was smaller after laparoscopy than laparotomy from the 24th to the 72nd observation times (P < 0.01). Morphine consumption was 22 mg (2-65 mg) in the Laparotomy group and 5 mg (0-45 mg) in the Laparoscopy group (P = 0.02). The time to first flatus was shorter after laparoscopy (24 h [16-72 h]) than laparotomy (72 h [26-96 h]) (P = 0.0005), and the first intake of clear liquid occurred after 48 h (24-72 h) in the Laparoscopy group and after 96 h (90-96 h) in the Laparotomy group (P = 0.0005). Although laparoscopic surgery provides positive effects on the degree of postoperative pain and recovery of bowel function, the reduction in heat loss produced by minimizing bowel exposure with laparoscopic surgery does not compensate for the anesthesia-related effects on temperature control, and active patient warming must also be used with laparoscopic techniques. ⋯ This prospective, randomized, controlled study demonstrates that laparoscopic colorectal surgery results in less postoperative pain and earlier recovery of bowel function than conventional laparotomy but does not reduce the risk for perioperative hypothermia. Accordingly, active warming must be provided to patients also during laparoscopic procedures.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of 0.1% and 0.2% ropivacaine and bupivacaine combined with morphine for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery.
Ropivacaine (ROPI), which is less toxic and produces less motor block than bupivacaine (BUPI), seems attractive for epidural analgesia. Few data are available concerning dose requirements of epidural ROPI when combined with morphine. In this study, we compared the dose requirements and side effects of ROPI and BUPI combined with small-dose morphine after major abdominal surgery. Postoperatively, 60 patients were randomly allocated (double-blinded manner) to four groups: patient-controlled epidural analgesia with the same settings using 0.1% or 0.2% solution of ROPI or BUPI combined with an epidural infusion of 0.1 mg/h of morphine. Pain scores, side effects, motor block, and local anesthetic consumption were measured for 60 h. Pain scores and the incidence of side effects did not differ among the groups. Consumption of ROPI and BUPI were similar in both 0.1% groups. Doubling the concentration significantly reduced the consumption (milliliters) of BUPI (P < 0.05) but not of ROPI. Consequently, using ROPI 0.2% significantly increased the dose administered as compared with ROPI 0.1% (ROPI 0.1% = 314 +/- 151 mg and ROPI 0.2% = 573 +/- 304 mg at Hour 48; P < 0.05). Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with the 0.1% or 0.2% solution of ROPI or BUPI combined with epidural morphine resulted in comparable analgesia. As compared with ROPI 0.1%, the use of ROPI 0.2% increased consumption of local anesthetic without improving analgesia. ⋯ Small-dose (0.1%) ropivacaine and bupivacaine have similar potency and result in comparable analgesia and incidence of side effects.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Clinical TrialAprotinin versus placebo in major orthopedic surgery: a randomized, double-blinded, dose-ranging study.
We conducted a prospective, multicenter, double-blinded, dose-ranging study to compare the risk/benefit ratio of large- and small-dose aprotinin with placebo after major orthopedic surgery. Fifty-eight patients were randomized into three groups: Large-Dose Aprotinin (4 M kallikrein inactivator unit [KIU] bolus before surgery followed by a continuous infusion of 1 M KIU/h until the end of surgery), Small-Dose Aprotinin (2 M KIU bolus plus 0.5 M KIU/h), and Placebo. Bleeding was measured and calculated. Bilateral ascending venography was systematically performed on the third postoperative day. Measured and calculated blood loss decreased in the Large-Dose Aprotinin group (calculated bleeding, whole blood, hematocrit 30%, median [range], 2,023 mL [633-4,113] as compared with placebo, 3,577 mL [1,670-21,758 mL]). The total number of homologous and autologous units was also significantly decreased in the Large-Dose Aprotinin group (2 U [0-5 U] as compared with placebo, 4 U [0-42 U]). No increase in deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism was observed in the aprotinin groups. Large-dose aprotinin was safe and effective in dramatically reducing the measured and calculated bleeding and the amount of transfused red blood cell units after major orthopedic surgery. ⋯ Large doses of aprotinin decrease blood loss and transfusion amount in major orthopedic surgery.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialA comparison of three anesthetic techniques in patients undergoing craniotomy for supratentorial intracranial surgery.
Several anesthetic techniques have been used successfully to provide anesthesia for resection of intracranial supratentorial mass lesions. One technique used to enhance recovery involves changing anesthesia from vapor-based to propofol-based for cranial closure. However, there are no data to support a beneficial effect of this approach in the immediate postoperative period after craniotomy. We evaluated 3 anesthetic techniques in 60 patients undergoing elective surgery for supratentorial mass lesions. Patients were randomly assigned to three anesthesia study groups: propofol infusion, isoflurane inhalation, and these two techniques combined. In the combination group, once the dura was closed, isoflurane was discontinued and propofol infusion simultaneously started. We studied intra- and postoperative hemodynamics and several recovery variables for 2 h after the end of anesthesia. Baseline and average intraoperative blood pressure and heart rate values did not differ among the groups. Heart rate and blood pressure increased similarly in all groups in response to intubation and pin placement and postoperatively. None of the recovery event times (open eyes, extubation, follow commands, oriented, Aldrete score) or psychomotor test performance differed significantly. We conclude that the sequential administration of isoflurane and propofol did not provide earlier recovery and cognition than the intraoperative use of isoflurane alone. ⋯ We evaluated three anesthetic techniques with and without propofol in patients undergoing elective surgery for supratentorial mass lesions by using a prospective, randomized clinical study design and found that the three anesthetics did not differ in intra- or postoperative hemodynamic stability or early postoperative recovery variables.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Aug 2002
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialAn evaluation of the analgesic efficacy of intravenous regional anesthesia with lidocaine and ketorolac using a forearm versus upper arm tourniquet.
Intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) using a forearm tourniquet may be a potentially safer technique compared with using an upper arm tourniquet. Ketorolac is a useful adjuvant to lidocaine for IVRA. In this study, we assessed the analgesic efficacy of administering IVRA lidocaine and ketorolac with either a forearm or upper arm tourniquet for outpatient hand surgery. Upper arm IVRA was established using 40 mL of a solution containing 200 mg of lidocaine and ketorolac 20 mg (0.5 mg/mL). Forearm IVRA was established using 20 mL of a solution containing 100 mg of lidocaine and ketorolac 10 mg (0.5 mg/mL). Onset and duration of sensory block as well as postoperative pain and analgesic use were recorded. The patients who received forearm IVRA had a significantly longer period during which they required no analgesics (701 +/- 133 min) compared with 624 +/- 80 min for the upper arm IVRA ketorolac patients (P = 0.032). Onset of sensory block was similar between the two groups; however, recovery of sensation was significantly longer in the Forearm IVRA (22 +/- 5 min) group compared with the Upper Arm IVRA (13 +/- 3 min) group (P < 0.05). There were no differences in postoperative analgesic use or pain scores between the two groups. We conclude that forearm IVRA with lidocaine and ketorolac provides safe and effective perioperative analgesia for patients undergoing ambulatory hand surgery. This technique results in a longer duration of sensory block and prolonged postoperative analgesia compared with upper arm IVRA while using one-half the doses of both lidocaine and ketorolac. ⋯ Forearm tourniquet intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) with 50% less lidocaine and ketorolac provides for both a longer duration of sensory block and prolonged postoperative analgesia compared with upper arm IVRA.