British journal of anaesthesia
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
Randomized controlled study of colloid preload before spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section.
We randomized women having elective Caesarean section to receive either no preload (control group, n=33) or 4% gelatin solution (Gelofusine) 15 ml kg(-1) (colloid group, n=35) i.v. before spinal anaesthesia. Intravenous metaraminol was titrated at 0.25-0.75 mg min(-1) to maintain systolic arterial pressure (SAP) in the target range 90-100% of baseline after the spinal injection. ⋯ Nausea was less frequent in the colloid group (6 vs 24%) but neonatal outcome was similar in the two groups. Colloid preload improved haemodynamic stability but did not affect neonatal outcome when arterial pressure was maintained with an infusion of metaraminol during spinal anaesthesia for Caesarean section.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Clinical Trial
Spinal anaesthesia with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine in elderly patients: effects of duration spent in the sitting position.
Sixty patients, aged 65-84 yr, undergoing minor urological surgery under spinal anaesthesia remained sitting for 2 (group 1, n = 15), 5 (group 2, n = 15), 10 (group 3, n = 15), or 20 (group 4, n = 15) min after completion of the subarachnoid administration of 3 ml of a 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine solution. They were then placed in the supine position. Analgesia levels were assessed bilaterally using pinprick. ⋯ Twenty minutes after the injection the upper analgesia levels were lower (P<0.05) in group 4 (median T9.0) than in the groups 1-3 (medians T6.6-T8.5). The highest obtained levels (medians T5.7-T8.0) did not differ between the groups, but occurred later (P<0.05) in group 4 (median 35 min) than in groups 1-3 (medians 19-24 min). There were no significant differences in the maximum degree of motor block or haemodynamic changes between the four study groups.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Multicenter Study Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Comparative efficacy and safety of remifentanil and fentanyl in 'fast track' coronary artery bypass graft surgery: a randomized, double-blind study.
This multi-centre, parallel group, randomized, double-blind study compared the efficacy and safety of high-dose remifentanil administered by continuous infusion with an intermittent bolus fentanyl regimen, when given in combination with propofol for general anaesthesia in 321 patients undergoing elective coronary artery bypass graft surgery. A significantly lower proportion of the patients who received remifentanil had responses to maximal sternal spread (the primary efficacy endpoint) compared with those who received fentanyl (11% vs 52%; P<0.001). More patients who received remifentanil responded to tracheal intubation compared with those who received fentanyl (24% vs 9%; P<0.001). ⋯ Overall, the incidence of adverse events was similar but greater in the remifentanil group with respect to shivering (P<0.049) and hypertension (P<0.001). Significantly more drug-related adverse events were reported in the remifentanil group (P=0.016). There were no drug-related adverse cardiac outcomes and no deaths from cardiac causes before hospital discharge in either treatment group.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Intrathecal ropivacaine for total hip arthroplasty: double-blind comparative study with isobaric 7.5 mg ml(-1) and 10 mg ml(-1) solutions.
This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of two concentrations of intrathecal ropivacaine, 7.5 and 10 mg ml(-1), in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. One hundred and four patients, ASA I-III, were randomized to receive an intrathecal injection of one of two concentrations of isobaric ropivacaine. Group 1 (n=51) received 2.5 ml of 7.5 mg ml(-1) ropivacaine (18.75 mg). ⋯ The median duration of complete motor block was significantly prolonged (P<0.05) in Group 2 compared with Group 1 (1.9 vs 1.2 h, respectively). Anaesthetic conditions were excellent in all but one patient. Intrathecal ropivacaine, in doses of 18.75 and 25 mg, was well tolerated and provided effective anaesthesia for total hip arthroplasty.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial Comparative Study Clinical Trial
Comparison between dexmedetomidine and propofol for sedation in the intensive care unit: patient and clinician perceptions.
The alpha2 agonist dexmedetomidine is a new sedative and analgesic agent which is licensed in the USA for post-operative intensive care sedation. We compared dexmedetomidine with propofol in patients requiring sedation in intensive care. Twenty adult patients expected to require a minimum of 8 h artificial ventilation after surgery were randomized to receive sedation with either dexmedetomidine or propofol infusions. ⋯ From the clinician's and patient's perspectives, dexmedetomidine is a safe and acceptable sedative agent for those requiring intensive care. The rate pressure product is reduced in patients receiving dexmedetomidine, which may protect against myocardial ischaemia. Dexmedetomidine reduces the requirement for opioid analgesia.