Anaesthesia
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
The effect on outcome of peribulbar anaesthesia in conjunction with general anesthesia for vitreoretinal surgery.
The purpose of this study was to evaluate peri-operative outcome after vitreoretinal surgery when peribulbar anaesthesia is combined with general anaesthesia. Sixty adult patients undergoing elective primary retinal detachment surgery with scleral buckling or an encircling procedure received either peribulbar anaesthesia in conjunction with general anaesthesia or general anaesthesia alone. For peribulbar anaesthesia a single percutaneous injection of 5-7 ml of local anaesthetic solution (0.75% ropivacaine with hyaluronidase 15 iu.ml(-1)) was used. ⋯ In the block group there was a lower incidence of oculocardiac reflex and surgical bleeding intra-operatively. Patients in the block group also had better postoperative analgesia and a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with the group without a block. The use of peribulbar anaesthesia in conjunction with general anesthesia was superior to general anaesthesia alone for vitreoretinal surgery with scleral buckling.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Ultrasonographic guided axillary plexus blocks with low volumes of local anaesthetics: a crossover volunteer study.
Our study group recently evaluated an ED(95) local anaesthetic volume of 0.11 ml.mm(-2) cross-sectional nerve area for the ulnar nerve. This prospective, randomised, double-blind crossover study investigated whether this volume is sufficient for brachial plexus blocks at the axillary level. Ten volunteers received an ultrasonographic guided axillary brachial plexus block either with 0.11 ('low' volume) or 0.4 ('high' volume) ml.mm(-2) cross-sectional nerve area with mepivacaine 1%. ⋯ The mean (SD) duration of sensory block was 125 (38) min in the low volume group and 152 (70) min in the high volume group (NS). This study confirms our previous published ED(95) volume for mepivacaine 1% to block peripheral nerves. The volume of local anaesthetic has some influence on the sensory onset time.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study
A comparison of the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine versus propofol target-controlled infusion for sedation during fibreoptic nasotracheal intubation.
Fibreoptic intubation is a valuable modality for airway management. This study aimed to compare the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine vs target controlled propofol infusion in providing sedation during fibreoptic intubation. Forty patients with anticipated difficult airways and due to undergo tracheal intubation for elective surgery were enrolled and randomly allocated into the dexmedetomidine group (1.0 microg.kg(-1) over 10 min) (n = 20) or the propofol target controlled infusion group (n = 20). ⋯ The dexmedetomidine group experienced fewer airway events and less heart rate response to intubation than the propofol group (p < 0.003 and p = 0.007, respectively). Both dexmedetomidine and propofol target-controlled infusion are effective for fibreoptic intubation. Dexmedetomidine allows better tolerance, more stable haemodynamic status and preserves a patent airway.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Effect of informational internet web pages on patients' decision-making: randomised controlled trial regarding choice of spinal or general anaesthesia for orthopaedic surgery.
This study explored whether patients' preference for particular types of anaesthesia could be influenced pre-operatively by giving them the addresses of various relevant websites. Patients at an orthopaedic pre-assessment education clinic completed a questionnaire, which included a short multiple-choice general knowledge quiz about anaesthesia, and also questioned them as to their choice of anaesthesia (general or neuraxial). Patients were randomly assigned to intervention or control groups. ⋯ Initially, most patients stated a preference for general anaesthesia. Subsequently, the intervention group altered their preference towards neuraxial anaesthesia compared to the control group (p < or = 0.0001). The increase in median (IQR [range]) anaesthesia knowledge test score was greater in the intervention group (from 10.0 (9.0-12.0 [5.0-14.0]) to 13.0 (11.0-14.0 [6.0-14.0])) than in the control group (from 10.0 (9.0-11.5 [3.0-13.0]) to 11.0 (9.0-12.0 [4.0-14.0]); p = 0.0068).