European journal of anaesthesiology
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
A comparison of propofol and isoflurane anaesthesia: the need for ephedrine and glycopyrrolate.
Sixty patients, ASA I-III, presenting for elective colonic surgery were studied to assess the stability of blood pressure and heart rate during anaesthesia with three equally potent anaesthetic techniques. Patients in group I (n = 20) received thiopentone induction, isoflurane and nitrous oxide; patients in group II (n = 20) received total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol; and patients in group III (n = 20) received intravenous propofol supplemented with nitrous oxide. Fentanyl and vecuronium were used in all three groups. ⋯ The drug was administered after intubation but before skin incision in the majority of cases (9/11). Glycopyrrolate was given to significantly more patients in group III (P < 0.025) to treat bradycardia, and in 21 of a total of 34 patients given glycopyrrolate it was administered before surgery. With the use of these additional drugs, there were no differences in the number of patients with 5 min episodes of hypotension, hypertension, tachycardia or bradycardia.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Speed of onset of analgesic effect of intravenous ketorolac compared to morphine and placebo.
The speed of onset of analgesia following intravenous ketorolac, morphine and placebo was investigated in a single-dose, double-blind, randomized, parallel group study of 105 patients. The onset of analgesia was defined as the time at which the pain intensity score reached 50% of the baseline score in 25% of patients. ⋯ Pain reduction by at least 50% occurred in 25% of patients within 40 min (placebo), 15 min (morphine 5 mg), 6 min (morphine 10 mg) and 20 min (ketorolac 10 mg). The pain reduction time for morphine (10 mg) was significantly shorter than that for ketorolac (P = 0.01) or placebo (P < 0.01).
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Continuous spinal anaesthesia versus single dosing. A comparative study.
Continuous and single dose spinal anaesthesia were compared in a prospective randomized fashion in 108 patients undergoing orthopaedic surgery. Continuous spinal anaesthesia was via a 20 gauge polyamide multiperforated catheter introduced through an 18 gauge Tuohy needle. Single-dose spinal anaesthesia was performed with a 24 guage x 103 mm Sprotte spinal needle. ⋯ Hypotension was more frequent in those receiving single doses (P < 0.05). Caudal rotation of the outlet needle orifice to advance the catheter correlated with inadequate analgesia (P < 0.01, r = 0.38). There were no significant differences in the incidence of post-operative complications.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical Trial
Use of EEG spectral edge as index of equipotency in a comparison of propofol and isoflurane for maintenance of general anaesthesia.
Propofol and isoflurane were compared for haemodynamic stability and recovery time as main anaesthetic agents for maintenance in a total of 43 ASA I and II patients in uncomplicated operations lasting at least 30 min. The premedication (oral diazepam), induction (thiopentone-fentanyl-suxamethonium) and maintenance protocol (N2O-O2 2:1 litre min-1, fentanyl and vecuronium in incremental doses) were identical for all patients. In one group of 20 patients, propofol was used in continuous intravenous (i.v.) infusion (starting dose 3 mg kg-1 h-1), while in the second group of 23 patients, isoflurane was administered in a starting concentration of 1%. ⋯ The incidence of mean blood pressure deviations/case in the propofol group was less than half of those occurring in the isoflurane group (0.45 vs. 0.96 P = 0.04). The mean duration of blood pressure deviation from baseline value was 5.5 min in the propofol group vs. 16.8 min in the isoflurane group (P = 0.01). The recovery intervals were significantly shorter in the propofol group (P < 0.05).(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial Controlled Clinical Trial
Neuromuscular and cardiovascular effects of neostigmine and methyl-atropine administered at different degrees of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular block.
The neuromuscular and cardiovascular effects of neostigmine, 40 micrograms kg-1, and methyl-atropine, 7 micrograms kg-1, administered at different degrees of rocuronium-induced (600 micrograms kg-1) neuromuscular block were evaluated. In one group of patients spontaneous recovery was awaited (Group A; n = 20). Neostigmine and methyl-atropine were administered 2 minutes after rocuronium (Group B; n = 20) or at 25% twitch recovery (Group C; n = 20). ⋯ The initial rate of recovery (time until a TOF ratio of 0.2) in group B, i.e. 14.2 (4.5) [12.1-16.3] min, was significantly faster than in group C, i.e. 28.7 (5.3) [26.3-31.1] min. However, the time until clinically sufficient recovery (time until a TOF ratio of 0.7) was similar for groups B, i.e. 29.3 (9.5) [24.9-33.7] min and group C, i.e. 31.8 (5.6) [29.2-34.4] min, both significantly different from that of group A, i.e. 53.2 (14.5) [46.5-59.9] min. The increase in heart rate following neostigmine/methyl-atropine was more pronounced in the group reversed at 2 min after rocuronium (P < 0.01).