Anesthesia and analgesia
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe pharmacokinetics and analgesic efficacy of larger dose rectal acetaminophen (40 mg/kg) in adults: a double-blinded, randomized study.
Analgesic acetaminophen plasma concentrations are not known. We investigated in a randomized, double-blinded study the pharmacokinetics and analgesic efficacy of small- (AS; 20 mg. kg(-1)) and larger- (AL; 40 mg/kg) dose rectal acetaminophen and compared it with the combination (C) of rectal diclofenac (100 mg) and acetaminophen (20 mg/kg) in 65 women undergoing hysterectomy. Suppositories were administered after the induction of a standardized general anesthesia. Pain (measured by using a 10-cm visual analog scale) and morphine consumption (patient-controlled analgesia) were repeatedly assessed for 24 h. Acetaminophen plasma concentrations were measured by using a fluorescence polarization immunoassay. Antipyretic plasma concentrations (10-20 mg/L) after 40 mg/kg acetaminophen were not associated with improved analgesia or decreased opioid requirements; 20 mg/kg acetaminophen produced subtherapeutic plasma levels (<10 mg/L). Maximal plasma concentrations of 17.2 and 10.4 mg/L (P < 0.01, analysis of variance) were achieved after 4.2 and 3.6 h for the AL and AS groups, respectively. The only difference in clinical outcome was lower visual analog scale scores after acetaminophen/diclofenac (C 2.0 versus AS 3.2 and AL 3.4) 4 h after the induction (P < 0.05, analysis of variance). Acetaminophen pharmacokinetics in adults were similar to those observed in children. Analgesic plasma concentrations are likely to be higher than antipyretic plasma levels, which were only attained after twice the recommended rectal dose was administered. Analgesic plasma concentrations have yet to be determined but may be higher than those associated with antipyresis. ⋯ Acetaminophen pharmacokinetics were comparable in adults and children. Plasma concentrations known to reduce fever did not produce better pain relief and were only achieved after twice the conventional dose was administered. Analgesic plasma concentrations have yet to be determined but may be higher than those associated with antipyresis.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialThe use of esmolol, nicardipine, or their combination to blunt hemodynamic changes after laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation.
Laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation (LTI) often provoke an undesirable increase in blood pressure (BP) and/or heart rate (HR). We tested the premise that nicardipine (NIC) and esmolol (ESM) in combination (COMB) would oppose both. Adult surgical patients received pretreatment (randomized) with IV bolus NIC 30 microg/kg (n = 31), ESM 1.0 mg/kg (n = 34), or COMB (one-half dose each, n = 32). Peak BP and HR after LTI were compared with controls (CONT; n = 35) with no pretreatment. Anesthetic induction was standardized: IV thiopental (5-7 mg/kg), fentanyl (1-2 microg/kg), and succinylcholine (1.5 mg/kg). Systolic (S), diastolic (D), and mean (M) BP and HR awake before pretreatment (baseline) were similar in all test groups. No patient was treated for hypotension, bradycardia, or tachycardia after pretreatment or anesthetic induction. Peak HR after LTI was increased versus baseline in CONT and all test groups, but did not differ from CONT among the test groups. Peak SBP and DBP increased versus baseline in CONT, and with ESM and NIC, but not COMB. Peak SBP, DBP, and MBP were increased with ESM versus COMB, and peak DBP with ESM versus NIC. Compared with no pretreatment before the IV induction of general anesthesia, the peak increase in BP after LTI is best blunted by the combination of nicardipine and ESM, compared with either drug alone. No single drug or combination in the doses tested opposed increased HR. ⋯ Compared with no pretreatment before the IV induction of general anesthesia, the peak increase in blood pressure after laryngoscopy and tracheal intubation is best blunted by the combination of nicardipine and esmolol, compared with either drug alone. No single drug or combination in the doses tested opposed increased heart rate.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPatient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor: the effects of the increase in bolus and lockout interval.
Most studies use a bolus size of <6 mL of 0.125% bu- pivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) during labor. In this double-blinded, randomized study, we compared the efficacy of a larger bolus injected via a PCEA pump to a conventional PCEA setting. By using a combination of 0.125% bupivacaine with 1:800,000 epinephrine and 0.625 microg/mL sufentanil, the first PCEA setting was typical (4 mL/8 min), whereas the other combined a 12-mL bolus dose and a 25-min lockout interval, i.e., similar maximal hourly dose. Rescue analgesia was provided with 6 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine. Patient satisfaction and pain were scored on verbal and visual analog scales. Data were analyzed from 103 parturients in the 12-mL/25-min group and 100 in the 4-mL/8-min group. In the 12-mL/25-min group, the median pain score on a 0- to 10-cm visual analog scale was lower at 6-cm cervical dilation (1 [range = 0-8] vs 3 [0-8]) and at delivery (1 [0-10] vs 2 [0-10]). Satisfaction was also better (70% vs 38% "excellent" opinions, at 6-cm cervical dilation). Use of the pump (ratio of successful and total demands) was high and similar in both groups. Rescue analgesia was comparable. Doses of analgesics were greater in the 12-mL/25-min group (hourly bupivacaine dose = 13.9 +/- 5.3 [mean+/- SD] vs 9.4 +/- 4.1 mg). No differences were noted between groups for the severity of hypotension, ephedrine requirement, outcome of the delivery, and Apgar scores. ⋯ A patient-controlled epidural analgesia setting that allows a parturient to receive an increased analgesic dose improves satisfaction with patient-controlled epidural analgesia during labor.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialPrevention of hypotension by a single 5-mg dose of ephedrine during small-dose spinal anesthesia in prehydrated cesarean delivery patients.
To evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic ephedrine for the prevention of hypotension associated with spinal anesthesia, 50 parturients undergoing cesarean delivery received either ephedrine 5 mg or saline IV in a double-blinded fashion immediately after the induction of spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia was performed with hyperbaric bupivacaine 6.6 mg combined with sufentanil 3.3 microg as part of a combined spinal-epidural technique. All patients received 1000 mL of lactated Ringer's solution and 500 mL of hydroxyethylstarch 6% before the spinal injection. Additional ephedrine boluses (5 mg) were administered IV when the systolic blood pressure or heart rate decreased by more than 30% from baseline values, when systolic blood pressure became <100 mm Hg, or when patients complained of nausea or feeling faint. The height of the block was equal in the groups; however, more patients in the placebo group were found to develop hypotension (58% vs 25%, P < 0. 05). Only 2 (8%) patients in the ephedrine group developed hypotension with systolic blood pressure values <90 mm Hg, whereas 10 patients (42%) in the saline group experienced hypotension of this severity (P < 0.05). In addition, there was a higher incidence of nausea in the placebo-treated patients. The total amount of ephedrine administered did not differ between groups. These findings suggest that the incidence and severity of hypotension are significantly reduced by the IV administration of a prophylactic dose of 5 mg ephedrine in patients receiving small-dose spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. ⋯ Ephedrine is the drug most often used to correct hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in healthy patients. A single IV dose of 5 mg decreases the occurrence and limits the severity of hypotension in prehydrated subjects receiving a small-dose spinal local anesthetic-opioid combination.
-
Anesthesia and analgesia · Feb 2000
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialReduction of postoperative nausea and vomiting by dimenhydrinate suppositories after strabismus surgery in children.
Although dimenhydrinate has been used for treatment and prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) since the fifties, there have been few controlled studies about its efficacy. We performed a double-blinded study of 301 children aged 4 to 10 yr who underwent strabismus surgery. Preanesthetic medication with midazolam (0.5 mg/kg) as well as application of either dimenhydrinate suppositories or a placebo preparation was performed 30 min before the induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced with thiopentone (5-10 mg/kg) and vecuronium (0.1 mg/kg) and maintained with halothane (1%-2%) in N(2)O/O(2) (65%/35%). The incidence of PONV, requirements for rescue dimenhydrinate, and time to recovery were recorded. The overall incidence of PONV was 60.1% in the placebo group and 30.7% in the dimenhydrinate group. In the dimenhydrinate group, children had to be observed in the recovery room significantly longer than those in the placebo group. Children having received dimenhydrinate were discharged from the recovery room with lower arousal scores. We conclude that the rectal administration of dimenhydrinate is effective for the prevention of PONV, although the sedative effect may require longer postoperative monitoring. ⋯ We performed a double-blinded, randomized study to investigate the effects of prophylactic rectal dimenhydrinate application on postoperative nausea and vomiting in children undergoing strabismus surgery. In comparison with placebo, dimenhydrinate reduced the incidence of postoperative vomiting from 60.1% to 30.7%.