Anaesthesia and intensive care
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialLevobupivacaine versus racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for urological surgery.
Racemic bupivacaine is the most common local anaesthetic used intrathecally. This prospective, randomized, double-blind study compared the clinical efficacy and motor block of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 0.5% racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for urological surgery. The surgery required an upper level of sensory block of at least the tenth thoracic dermatome. ⋯ There were no significant differences between the two groups in the quality of sensory and motor block or in haemodynamic change. Anaesthesia was adequate and patient satisfaction good in all cases. We conclude that 0.5% levobupivacaine can be used as an alternative to 0.5% racemic bupivacaine in spinal anaesthesia for surgery when a sensory block to at least T10 is required.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialCombination of adenosine with prilocaine and lignocaine for brachial plexus block does not prolong postoperative analgesia.
Adenosine analogues have been used by subarachnoid injection for the treatment of inflammatory and neuropathic pain. There is no data on the use of adenosine in peripheral nerve blocks. The aim of the present study was to determine the analgesic efficacy of adenosine in combination with a local anaesthetic solution for brachial plexus (BP) block. ⋯ Time to first pain sensation from block was not significantly longer in the adenosine group (379 +/- 336 min) compared with controls (304 +/- 249 min, mean +/- SD, P = 0.14). Time to first analgesic requirements and analgesic consumption in the first 24 hours were also similar in both study groups. In the present study, the addition of adenosine to local anaesthetic in brachial plexus block did not significantly extend the duration of analgesia.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe influence of a blood conserving device on anaemia in intensive care patients.
The contribution of iatrogenic blood loss through diagnostic testing to the anaemia of critical illness remains controversial. We measured the effect of an arterial line blood conservation device upon blood loss and anaemia in adult intensive care patients. This randomized controlled trial of 160 patients in a major Intensive Care Unit (ICU) compared a blood conservation device (Venous Arterial Blood Management Protection Plus, VAMP Plus system, Baxter Healthcare) (VAMP group) to a standard arterial pressure line set attached to an arterial catheter (control group). ⋯ Both groups had a similar (median [range]) change in Hb during ICU admission (VAMP-7 [-84 to +21] g/l; Control -4 [-67 to +40] g/l; P = 0.33). The VAMP patients lost significantly less blood for diagnostic testing while in ICU (VAMP 63 [0 to 787] ml; Control 133 [7 to 1227] ml; P = 0.001). We conclude that the VAMP Plus system significantly reduced iatrogenic blood loss in critically ill patients, but this reduction did not affect the fall in Hb that accompanies critical illness.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Oct 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEpidural catheter migration: a comparison of tunnelling against a new technique of catheter fixation.
We investigated the efficacy of a new technique of epidural catheter fixation that relies on a strip of adhesive foam transfixed by a securing suture. We compared this technique to a tunnelled technique in a prospective, randomized trial (n = 25 in each group). Epidural catheter depth was recorded at the time of insertion and at the time of removal. ⋯ Clinically significant movement was noted in eight patients (32%) in the tunnelled group and seven patients (28%) in the sutured group (P = 0.75). Movement of the epidural catheter did not correlate with analgesic failure. The sutured technique provided similar protection against migration to tunnelling but any potential advantages were offset by concerns about a significantly higher incidence of erythema around the catheter exist site in the sutured group (1 vs 6 patients, P = 0.04).
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Oct 2003
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialParaesthesiae during needle-through-needle combined spinal epidural versus single-shot spinal for elective caesarean section.
The aim of this study was to compare the incidence of paraesthesiae during spinal needle insertion in a needle-through-needle combined spinal-epidural (CSE) versus a single-shot spinal (SSS) technique. Eighty-nine women presenting for elective caesarean section at a tertiary referral obstetric unit were randomized to receive either needle-through-needle CSE or SSS. Equipment used was a 16 gauge/26 gauge combined spinal-epidural kit and a 26 gauge pencil-point spinal needle with introducer (both Sims Portex, Australia) The presence and distribution of paraesthesiae was recorded by an observer at spinal needle insertion and again on day one postoperatively. ⋯ Seventeen of forty-six (37%) women in the needle-through-needle CSE group and four of forty-three (9%) in the SSS group had paraesthesiae upon spinal needle insertion (P < 0.05, Chi-squared test). No patient had persistent neurological symptoms at postoperative day one. We postulate that the higher incidence of paraesthesiae with needle-through-needle CSE may be related to deeper penetration of the subarachnoid space with this technique.