Anaesthesia and intensive care
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Apr 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialEpidural 0.2% ropivacaine for labour analgesia: parturient-controlled or continuous infusion?
In this randomized, open study, we compared the incidence of lower limb motor block associated with epidural labour analgesia provided by parturient-controlled method (PCEA) with continuous infusion (CIEA) using 0.2% ropivacaine. The PCEA group (n = 20) received a demand-only regimen (bolus 5 ml, lockout 15 minutes). The rate of infusion of the CIEA group (n = 20) was 8 ml/h. ⋯ The total volume of ropivacaine used per hour was also lower in the PCEA group (median 8.75 vs 10.5 ml, P < 0.05). No difference in the maternal or fetal outcome was detected. We conclude that PCEA with ropivacaine is an effective mode of analgesia which is dose-sparing and produces less motor block in comparison with CIEA.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Apr 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialAlfentanil co-induction for laryngeal mask insertion.
We assessed the effect of two different doses of alfentanil (5 and 10 micrograms.kg-1) on the conditions for laryngeal mask airway insertion in ASA 1 and 2 patients who received propofol for induction of anaesthesia. One hundred and fifty unpremedicated patients were randomly allocated to receive either propofol 2.5 mg.kg-1 only (Group P), alfentanil 5 micrograms.kg-1 and propofol 2.5 mg.kg-1 (Group A5), or alfentanil 10 micrograms.kg-1 and propofol 2.5 mg.kg-1 (Group A10). The addition of alfentanil to propofol resulted in a greater ease of insertion and a better quality of airway patency. ⋯ Patients in Group P were apnoeic for a mean (+/- SD) time of 3.3(+/- 1.9) min, 4.71 (+/- 2.2) min in Group A5, and 7.32(+/- 4.3) min in Group A10. The use of alfentanil 10 micrograms.kg-1 with propofol, however, led to a significant decrease in mean arterial pressure and heart rate. We concluded that pretreatment with intravenous alfentanil 5 micrograms.kg-1 prior to propofol provides excellent conditions for insertion of laryngeal mask with minimal adverse haemodynamic changes.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Feb 1999
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical TrialThe effect of midazolam on persistent postoperative nausea and vomiting.
The effect of intravenous midazolam on persistent postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was compared to placebo in a prospective randomized double-blind study. Twenty patients aged 18 to 82 years with persistent PONV resistant to standard anti-emetics and present for greater than six hours were randomized to receive either an intravenous infusion of midazolam 1.0 mg/h or placebo. Nausea (P = 0.04), vomiting (P = 0.02) and the use of rescue anti-emetics (P = 0.003) were significantly less in the midazolam group. We conclude that low-dose intravenous infusion of midazolam significantly reduces persistent PONV.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialPropofol maintenance to reduce postoperative emesis in thyroidectomy patients: a group sequential comparison with isoflurane/nitrous oxide.
The clinical benefit of propofol anaesthesia in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is still being elucidated despite many studies to date. In this study 64 adult female patients scheduled for thyroidectomy received, in a randomized double-blind fashion, propofol with air or isoflurane with nitrous oxide for maintenance of anaesthesia. The primary response variable was the presence or absence of vomiting in the first six hours. ⋯ There was no significant difference detected in the 6 to 24 hour interval. In this group of female patients, total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with propofol is associated with an early reduction in early postoperative vomiting compared with standard inhalational techniques. This reduction in vomiting does not appear to persist beyond the first six hours.
-
Anaesth Intensive Care · Dec 1998
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical TrialPatient-controlled epidural versus intravenous pethidine to supplement epidural bupivacaine after abdominal aortic surgery.
In a double-blind, randomized, crossover study of 25 patients after abdominal aortic surgery, we compared patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with epidural versus intravenous pethidine. All patients received continuous epidural infusions of 0.125% bupivacaine adjusted to maintain appropriate sensory levels. The 48 hour study period commenced 36 to 48 hours after surgery and covered postoperative days 2 and 3. ⋯ Visual analog pain scores (VAS) did not differ significantly between postoperative days 2 and 3, or at rest between epidural and i.v. groups. However, VAS with coughing and with abdominal palpation were lower in the epidural PCA group (P = 0.05, 0.008). With a background epidural infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine, PCA with epidural pethidine provided better pain control than PCA intravenous pethidine and this was achieved at lower plasma pethidine concentrations.