Advantage of ropivacaine for postoperative epidural analgesia following leg orthopedic surgery

BACKGROUND: Epidural administration of local anesthetics may lead to effective pain relief. However, tachyphylaxis or other problems following prolonged epidural anesthesia may develop and in many cases difficulties exist in the maintenance of the similar degree of sensory blockade. The present study was therefore performed to investigate the analgesic effect of continuous postoperative epidural infusion of ropivacaine with fentanyl in comparison with that of bupivacaine or ropivacaine alone. METHODS: After leg orthopedic surgery with lumbar combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, thirty-six patients were randomized to one of the three postoperative epidural infusion groups: bupivacaine 0.125%, ropivacaine 0.2%, or ropivacaine 0.2% with 2.2 microg x ml(-1) (400 microg x 180 ml(-1)) of fentanyl. Continuous epidural infusion was started at a rate of 6 ml x h(-1) with possibility of an additional bolus injection of 3 ml at least every 60 min. Pain was assessed using a 10-cm visual analog scale (VAS) just before and 15 min after epidural bolus injections, and 15-20 h after the start of continuous epidural infusion as the severe at pain through the observation. The spread of analgesia (loss of sharpness in pinprick perception) and motor block (Bromage scale) were evaluated bilaterally. Systolic and diastolic blood pressure and heart rate were also measured. RESULTS: The epidural bolus infusion was associated with a significant decrease of VAS (P < 0.001) and stable blood pressure and heart rate in all groups. The maximal VAS in patients receiving 0.2% ropivacaine+fentanyl was significantly less compared to that in the other two groups. The regression of sensory blockade was significantly prolonged in patients treated with ropivacaine+fentanyl. There was no significant difference in the spread of sensory analgesia between 20 min and 15-20 h after the continuous epidural anesthesia in this group. None of the patients developed adverse effects such as respiratory depression, nausea, and pruritis. CONCLUSIONS: Epidural injection of ropivacaine with fentanyl decreased postoperative pain with stable vital signs in patients undergoing leg orthopedic surgery, as compared to bupivacaine or ropivacaine alone, possibly because of the maintenance of sensory blockade by ropivacaine and enhancement of this sensory blockade by fentanyl.     

Epidural fentanyl markedly improves thoracic epidural analgesia in a low-dose infusion of bupivacaine, adrenaline and fentanyl. A randomized, double-blind crossover study with and without fentanyl

BACKGROUND: The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the effects on postoperative pain intensity, pain relief, and side effects when removing fentanyl from an optimally titrated epidural infusion consisting of bupivacaine, fentanyl and adrenaline. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, crossover study was carried out in 20 patients after major upper abdominal surgery requiring a large longitudinal incision. Patients with only mild pain when coughing during thoracic epidural infusion of about 10 ml per hour of bupivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1), fentanyl 2 microg x ml(-1), and adrenaline 2 microg x ml(-1) were included. On the 1st and 2nd postoperative days, each patient was given a double-blind epidural infusion, at the same rate, with or without fentanyl. The effects were observed for 6 h or until pain when coughing became unacceptable in spite of rescue analgesia. Rescue analgesia consisted of up to two patient-controlled epidural bolus injections (4 ml) per hour and intravenous morphine if necessary. RESULTS: Main outcome measures, i.e. pain intensity when coughing and at rest, increased (P<0.001) when fentanyl (19.2+/-5.2 microg x h(-1)) was omitted from the epidural infusion: after 6 h pain intensity when coughing had increased to unacceptable levels in spite of increased consumption of rescue bupivacaine and adrenaline (P<0.001). Within 15-20 min after restarting the triple epidural mixture with fentanyl, pain intensity was again reduced to mild pain when coughing. CONCLUSIONS: A low dose of epidural fentanyl (20 microg x h(-1)) markedly improved the pain-relieving effect of bupivacaine and adrenaline infused epidurally at a thoracic level after major upper abdominal surgery. This dose of fentanyl is much too small to relieve severe dynamic pain when given systemically. Therefore, this study indirectly supports the view that a low-dose thoracic epidural infusion of fentanyl has a spinal analgesic site of action.     

Study of analgestic efficacy of ropivacaine-fentanyl patient-controlled epidural analgesia after upper abdominal gynecological surgery

BACKGROUND: Most of the patients who undergo radical or subradical hysterectomy with paraaortic lymphadenectomy suffer from postoperative pain for upper abdominal incision. They also complain of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) frequently, which are increased by opioids. METHODS: Reducing total fentanyl dose to 0.6 mg, frequency of moving pain complaints increased gradually. Therefore, we introduced patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) for suppressing pain on moving. We investigated analgestic efficacy of 0.2% ropivacaine-fentanyl PCEA in twelve patients undergoing upper abdominal gynecological surgery. Postoperative analgesic effects were evaluated by visual analogue scale (VAS) at rest and on moving, times of bolus infusion, side effects, and degrees of satisfication by patient's self-assessments. Continuous epidural infusion of 0.6 mg fentanyl in 288 ml 0.2% ropivacaine was started at a rate of 4 ml x hr(-1) with a bolus dose of 2 ml. RESULTS: VAS was maintained below 20 mm at rest but was elevated to the maximum of 45 mm on moving with few bolus requests. Ninty-two percents of the patients answered satisfied but fifty percents of them had PONV. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that ropivacaine-fentanyl PCEA is effective after upper abdominal gynecological surgery, and we can decrease the dose of fentanyl by explaining PCEA system more effectively to the patients for suppressing the pain on moving and PONV.     

Comparison of ropivacaine 0.1%-fentanyl and bupivacaine 0.125% — fentanyl infusions for epidural labour analgesia

PURPOSE: To compare analgesic efficacies of ropivacaine-fentanyl and bupivacaine-fentanyl infusions for labour epidural analgesia. METHODS: In this double- blind, randomized study 100, term, nulliparous women were enrolled. Lumbar epidural analgesia (LEA) was started at cervical dilatation < 5 cm using either bupivacaine 0.25% followed by bupivacaine 0.125% + 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl infusion (n=50) or ropivacaine 0.2% followed by ropivacaine 0.1% + 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl infusion (n=50). Every hour maternal vital signs, visual analog scale (VAS) pain score, sensory levels, and motor block (Bromage score) were assessed. Data were expressed as mean +/-1 SD and analyzed using Chi -Squared and Mann-Whitney U tests at <0.05. RESULTS: The onset times were 10.62+/-4.9 and 11.3+/-4.7 min for the bupivacaine and ropivacaine groups respectively (P = NS). The median VAS scores were not different between the groups at any of the evaluation periods. However, at least 80% of patients in the ropivacaine group had no demonstrable motor block after the first hour compared with only 55% of patients given bupivacaine (P =0.01). CONCLUSIONS: Both bupivacaine and ropivacaine produce satisfactory labour analgesia. However, ropivacaine infusion is associated with less motor block throughout the first stage of labour and at 10 cm dilatation.     

Epinephrine markedly improves thoracic epidural analgesia produced by a small-dose infusion of ropivacaine,fentanyl, and epinephrine after major thoracic or abdominal surgery: a randomized,double-blinded crossover study with and without epinephrine

We have shown that epinephrine markedly improves the analgesic effect of a thoracic epidural infusion of bupivacaine and fentanyl. Ropivacaine has an intrinsic vasoconstrictive effect, and epinephrine may therefore not have the same pharmacokinetic interaction in a ropivacaine-fentanyl infusion; but a possible spinal cord alpha(2)-agonist effect of epinephrine would give the same positive pharmacodynamic interaction with ropivacaine and fentanyl during epidural analgesia. In a prospective, randomized, crossover study, a thoracic epidural infusion of ropivacaine 1 mg/mL and fentanyl 2 microg/mL with or without epinephrine 2 microg/mL was given to 12 patients in a double-blinded manner after major thoracic or upper abdominal surgery. Main outcome measures were pain intensity at rest and when coughing, evaluated on a visual analog scale. Extent of sensory blockade was evaluated by determining dermatomal hypoesthesia to cold. Pain increased (P < 0.001) and hypoesthetic dermatomal segments decreased (P < 0.001) when epinephrine was omitted from the triple epidural infusion. After 3 h without epinephrine, pain intensity when coughing was unacceptable despite rescue analgesia. After restarting the triple epidural mixture with epinephrine, pain was again reduced to mild pain when coughing, and the sensory blockade was restored. The mixture with epinephrine caused less nausea and facilitated mobilization. We conclude that epinephrine improves the pain relief and reduces the side effects of a thoracic epidural infusion of ropivacaine and fentanyl after major thoracic or upper abdominal surgery. IMPLICATIONS: Epidural epinephrine markedly improves the pain relief and sensory blockade of a small-dose thoracic epidural infusion of ropivacaine and fentanyl. Nausea was reduced, and mobilization of the patients was facilitated.     

Efficacy of ropivacaine, bupivacaine, and levobupivacaine for labor epidural analgesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare analgesic efficacy and intensity of motor block with continuous infusions of ropivacaine, bupivacaine, and levobupivacaine in combination with fentanyl for labor epidural analgesia. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: Labor and delivery suite at Magee Womens Hospital, Pittsburgh, PA. PATIENTS: 162 ASA physical status I and II, full-term, primiparous women. INTERVENTIONS: All patients received epidural labor analgesia. Epidural medication consisted of an initial bolus of 8 mL local anesthetic with fentanyl (100 microg) followed by an infusion at 12 mL/h of local anesthetic with 2 microg/mL fentanyl. Patients were allocated to one of three groups, as follows: group 1 received bolus and infusion of bupivacaine 0.125%, group 2 received bolus and infusion of levobupivacaine 0.125%, and group 3 received a bolus of ropivacaine 0.2% and infusion of ropivacaine 0.1%. MEASUREMENTS: Maternal vital signs, pain visual analog scale (VAS) score, sensory levels, and motor block (Bromage score) were recorded every hour. Duration of first and second stage of labor and mode of delivery were also recorded. RESULTS: There were no statistically significant differences in pain VAS or Bromage motor scores among the three groups of patients at any of the measured time intervals. The time to achieve T10 sensory level and patient comfort was shorter in the ropivacaine (9.35 +/- 4.96 min) and levobupivacaine (9.56 +/- 4.71 min) groups than the bupivacaine (11.89 +/- 7.76 min) group, although this difference did not reach a statistically significant level (P = 0.06). The second stage was significantly shorter in the bupivacaine group, lasting 81.27 +/- 63.3 min, compared with the ropivacaine group (121.69 +/- 86.5 min) and the levobupivacaine (115.5 +/- 83.6 minutes) group (P = 0.04). CONCLUSION: There are no significant differences in pain VAS and Bromage scores between 0.1% ropivacaine, 0.125% bupivacaine, and 0.1% levobupivacaine given for labor epidural analgesia.     

Ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) does not decrease the need for epidural fentanyl after hip replacement surgery

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine is a new long-acting local anesthetic. Laboratory trials have demonstrated a synergistic analgesic effect between intrathecal opioids and local anesthetics. We tested the hypothesis that addition of ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) to epidural fentanyl (10 microg x ml(-1)) postoperatively decreases the need for fentanyl, improves the quality of analgesia and decreases the side-effects of fentanyl. METHODS: Forty patients were enrolled in this double-blind, randomized study to receive either fentanyl 10 microg x ml(-1) (group F) alone or fentanyl combined with ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) (group R) for 20 h as an epidural infusion at TH12-L1 or L1-L2 for analgesia after hip replacement surgery. The patients were free to use a patient-controlled epidural analgesia device, which was programmed to infuse 3 ml of the study medication hourly and to allow a 3-ml bolus when needed (maximal hourly dose of fentanyl was 150 microg). The consumption of medication, visual pain scores at rest and on movement, hemodynamic and respiratory parameters, motor and sensory block, nausea, pruritus and sedation were recorded. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the groups in the total mean fentanyl consumption (1.10+/-0.18 mg in group F, 1.08+/-0.31 mg in group R, 95% CI: -0.14 to 0.19, P = 0.774). The pain scores were similar at rest (median scores < or = 1) and on movement (median scores < or = 3). The adverse effects were similar and of a minor nature, consisting mostly of pruritus and nausea. CONCLUSION: Addition of ropivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1) to epidural fentanyl 10 microg x ml(-1) did not significantly decrease the requirement for fentanyl administered for pain relief after hip replacement surgery.     

Postoperative analgesia by combined continuous infusion and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) following hip replacement: ropivacaine versus bupivacaine

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine is a new local anaesthetic, which compared to bupivacaine is less toxic and shows greater sensory and motor block dissociation. We hypothesised that treatment of postoperative pain with a combined regimen of continuous epidural infusion and Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia (PCEA) using ropivacaine could have given better results compared with those we had obtained using bupivacaine. METHODS: Patients undergoing total hip replacement were randomly assigned to two groups. They received epidural analgesia for postoperative pain treatment using ropivacaine, 2 mg x ml(-1) or bupivacaine 2 mg x ml(-1). Both drugs were administered as a constant infusion of 6 ml x h(-1) supplemented by PCEA bolus doses of 2 ml. Patients in both groups received morphine intravenously on demand from a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. An independent observer recorded pain scores, intensity of motor block and morphine consumption at regular intervals during the first 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were evaluated. Ropivacaine and bupivacaine, in similar amounts, provided similar results assessed as adequate to very good postoperative analgesia, whereas motor block was significantly more intense in patients treated with bupivacaine. CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar analgesic effects, epidural infusion of ropivacaine combined with PCEA provides higher patient satisfaction than equal doses of bupivacaine due to lack of motor block.     

Optimal dose of fentanyl for postoperative epidural analgesia after thoracic surgery

BACKGROUND: We investigated the dose of fentanyl in ropivacaine for epidural anesthesia that will provide effective analgesia with minimal side effects after thoracic surgery. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled to undergo thoracic surgery were randomly allocated to four groups according to fentanyl dose in epidural analgesia: group R (0 microg x hr(-1); n = 15), group F1 (5 microg x hr(-1); n = 15), group F2 (10 microg x hr(-1); n = 15) and group F3 (15 microg x hr(-1); n = 15). Pain scores (visual analogue scale: VAS) were assessed at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hrs after surgery. Degrees of satisfaction regarding pain relief and complications during a period of 48 hrs after surgery were compared. RESULTS: Pain scores in group F3 were significantly lower than those in the other groups at 3, 6, and 12 hrs after surgery. The number of postoperative analgesics used in group R was significantly more than the numbers used in other groups. The incidences of side effects were similar in the four groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that continuous epidural administration of more than 15 microg x hr(-1) of fentanyl in ropivacaine provides pain relief and few side effects after thoracic surgery.     

Epinephrine added to a lumbar epidural infusion of a small-dose ropivacaine-fentanyl mixture after arterial bypass surgery of the lower extremities

BACKGROUND: The addition of epinephrine (2 micro g.ml-1) to a thoracic epidural infusion of an opioid-local anesthetic mixture improves analgesia. Here, we studied whether epinephrine could improve analgesia also at lumbar level, when added to an epidural infusion of a low-dose ropivacaine-fentanyl mixture after arterial bypass surgery of the legs. METHODS: Patients in group RFE (n = 21) received a postoperative epidural infusion containing ropivacaine (1 mg.ml-1), fentanyl (2 micro g.ml-1), and epinephrine (2 micro g.ml-1). Patients in group RF (n = 25) received a similar infusion without epinephrine. The infusion speed was 1 ml.10 kg-1. h-1. The infusion was scheduled for 48 h. RESULTS: Epinephrine did not reduce the need for rescue pain medication. Visual analog scale scores (VAS) for pain at rest were low and similar in the groups. Pain intensity was stronger during leg movement [mean VAS 1.5-2.6 (range 0-9)], but it was not affected by the coadministration of epinephrine. The groups did not differ concerning frequency and severity of side-effects. Epinephrine did not reduce fentanyl plasma concentrations. Ropivacaine concentrations were slightly lower in group RFE only in the samples 6 h from the start of the infusion, but not anymore on the first and second postoperative day. CONCLUSION: In the dosage used here, epinephrine did not improve epidural lumbar analgesia. Different distances from the epidural application site to the alpha2-adrenergic receptors of the spinal cord, and differing epinephrine dose requirements may explain why epinephrine as an additive improves epidural analgesia at thoracic, but not at lumbar level.     

A randomized,double-blinded comparison of thoracic epidural ropivacaine,ropivacaine/fentanyl,or bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia

Epidural ropivacaine has not been compared with bupivacaine for postthoracotomy analgesia. Eighty patients undergoing elective lung surgery were randomized in a double-blinded manner to receive one of three solutions for high thoracic epidural analgesia. A continuous epidural infusion of 0.1 mL. kg(-1). h(-1) of either 0.2% ropivacaine, 0.15% ropivacaine/fentanyl 5 micro g/mL, or 0.1% bupivacaine/fentanyl 5 micro g/mL was started at admission to the intensive care unit. We assessed pain scores (rest and spirometry), IV morphine consumption, spirometry, hand grip strength, PaCO(2), heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and side effects (sedation, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus) for 48 h. Thoracic epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl provided adequate pain relief similar to bupivacaine/fentanyl during the first 2 postoperative days after posterolateral thoracotomy. The use of plain 0.2% ropivacaine was associated with worse pain control during spirometry, larger consumption of IV morphine, and increased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Morphine requirements were larger in the ropivacaine group, with no differences between bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/fentanyl groups. Patients in the ropivacaine group experienced more pain and performed worse in spirometry than patients who received epidural fentanyl. There was no significant difference in motor block. We conclude that epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl offers no clinical advantage compared with bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: Thoracic epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl provided adequate pain relief and similar analgesia to bupivacaine/fentanyl during the first 2 postoperative days after posterolateral thoracotomy. Plain 0.2% ropivacaine was associated with worse pain control and an increased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. We conclude that epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl offers no clinical advantage compared with bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia.     

Lateral cervical epidural catheter placement using nerve stimulation for continuous unilateral upper extremity analgesia following a failed continuous peripheral nerve block

This case report describes the application of electrical stimulation (Tsui test) to confirm placement of a cervical epidural catheter for postoperative pain management in a patient with a failed brachial plexus block who underwent upper extremity surgery. An epidural catheter was easily advanced under nerve stimulation guidance to the surgical dermatome C4 level without any resistance from the C7-T1 level. Successful analgesia was achieved with a bolus of 2 mg ml(-1) ropivacaine 2 ml and fentanyl 20 microg, followed by a continuous infusion of 2 mg ml(-1) ropivacaine with 2 microg ml(-1) of fentanyl at a rate of 2 ml h(-1). This case reminds the clinician that cervical epidural analgesia may serve as an alternative to a difficult continuous peripheral nerve block. Electrical stimulation may also help to confirm cervical epidural catheter placement at the appropriate dermatome to provide effective analgesia with minimal side-effects.     

The optimal dose of fentanyl added to 0.2% ropivacaine for postoperative epidural analgesia after gynecological surgery

BACKGROUND: Combined administration of local anesthetics and an opioid is frequently used in order to minimize the dose of each drug and to reduce adverse effects. Although fentanyl is commonly administered with local anesthetic, side effects of fentanyl increase in a dose-dependent manner. In this study, we determined the optimal dose of epidural fentanyl after gynecological surgery. METHODS: One hundred and sixteen adult patients scheduled for elective gynecological surgery were divided into 3 groups according to postoperative epidural analgesics; 0.2% ropivacaine (group R), 0.2% ropivacaine with 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group RF 2), or 0.2% ropivacaine with 5 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group RF 5). Each analgesic was infused at 5 ml x hr(-1) for 48 hr. Pain scores , incidence of NSAIDs administration and side effects were recorded for 48 hr after the surgery. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Ropivacaine alone could not provide sufficient analgesia. Although the addition of 5 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl to 0.2% ropivacaine at a rate of 5 ml x hr(-1) improved postoperative pain, side effects caused by fentanyl increased. Supplementing 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl provided sufficient analgesia with the least incidence of side effects.     

Postoperative analgesia after radical retropubic prostatectomy: a double-blind comparison between low thoracic epidural and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain after radical retropubic prostatectomy can be severe unless adequately treated. Low thoracic epidural analgesia and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia were compared in this double-blind, randomized study. METHODS: Sixty patients were randomly assigned to receive either low thoracic epidural analgesia (group E) or patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (group P) for postoperative pain relief. All patients had general anesthesia combined with thoracic epidural analgesia during the operation. Postoperatively, patients in group E received an infusion of 1 mg/ml ropivacaine, 2 microg/ml fentanyl, and 2 microg/ml adrenaline, 10 ml/h during 48 h epidurally, and a placebo patient-controlled intravenous analgesia pump intravenously. Patients in group P received a patient-controlled intravenous analgesia pump with morphine intravenously and 10 ml/h placebo epidurally. Pain, the primary outcome variable, was measured using the numeric rating scale at rest (incision pain and "deep" visceral pain) and on coughing. Secondary outcome variables included gastrointestinal function, respiratory function, mobilization, and full recovery. Health-related quality of life was measured using the Short Form-36 questionnaire, and plasma concentration of fentanyl was measured in five patients to exclude a systemic effect of fentanyl. RESULTS: Incisional pain and pain on coughing were lower in group E compared with group P at 2-24 h, as was deep pain between 3 and 24 h postoperatively (P < 0.05). Maximum expiratory pressure was greater in group E at 4 and 24 h (P < 0.05) compared with group P. No difference in time to home discharge was found between the groups. The mean plasma fentanyl concentration varied from 0.2 to 0.3 ng/ml during 0-48 h postoperatively. At 1 month, the scores on emotional role, physical functioning, and general health of the Short Form-36 were higher in group E compared with group P. However, no group x time interaction was found in the Short Form-36. CONCLUSIONS: The authors found evidence for better pain relief and improved expiratory muscle function in patients receiving low thoracic epidural analgesia compared with patient-controlled analgesia for radical retropubic prostatectomy. Low thoracic epidural analgesia can be recommended as a good method for postoperative analgesia after abdominal surgery.     

Thoracic epidural anesthesia for cardiac surgery: the effects on tracheal intubation time and length of hospital stay.

Improvements in analgesia after major surgery may allow a more rapid recovery and shorter hospital stay. We performed a prospective randomized trial to study the effects of epidural analgesia on the length of hospital stay after coronary artery surgery. The anesthetic technique and postoperative mobilization were altered to facilitate early intensive care discharge and hospital discharge. Fifty patients received high (T1 to T4) thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) with ropivacaine 1% (4-mL bolus, 3-5 mL/h infusion), with fentanyl (100-microg bolus, 15-25 microg/h infusion) and a propofol infusion (6 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1)). Another 50 patients (the General Anesthesia group) received fentanyl 15 microg/kg and propofol (5 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1)), followed by IV morphine patient-controlled analgesia. The TEA group had lower visual analog scores with coughing postextubation (median, 0 vs 26 mm; P < 0.0001) and were extubated earlier (median hours [interquartile range], 3.2 [2.1-4.6] vs 6.7 [3.3-13.2]; P < 0.0001). More than half of all patients were discharged home on Postoperative Day 4 (24%) or 5 (33%), but there was no difference in the length of stay between the TEA group (median [interquartile range], Day 5 [5-6]) and the General Anesthesia group (median [interquartile range], Day 5 [4-7]). There were no differences in postoperative spirometry or chest radiograph changes or in markers for postoperative myocardial ischemia or infarction. No significant TEA-related complications occurred. In summary, TEA provided better analgesia and allowed earlier tracheal extubation but did not reduce the length of hospital stay after coronary artery surgery. IMPLICATIONS: We found that epidural analgesia was more effective than IV morphine for cardiac surgery. Epidural anesthesia also allowed earlier weaning from mechanical ventilation, but it did not affect hospital discharge time.     

Patient supplemented epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery with bupivacaine/fentanyl or ropivacaine/fentanyl

PURPOSE: To compare analgesic efficacy and occurrence of motor block and other side effects during patient supplemented epidural analgesia (PSEA) with either ropivacaine/fentanyl or bupivacaine/fentanyl mixtures. METHODS: In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study, 32 ASAI-III patients undergoing major abdominal surgery received an epidural catheter at the T8- T10, followed by integrated general epidural anesthesia. Postoperative epidural analgesia was provided using a patient controlled pump with either ropivacaine 0.2%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group Ropivacaine, n = 16) or bupivacaine 0.125%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group Bupivacaine, n = 16) [background infusion 4-6 ml x hr(-1), 1.5 ml Incremental Doses and 20 min lock out]. Verbal pain rating score, number of incremental doses, consumption of epidural analgesic solution and rescue analgesics, sedation (four-point scale), and pulse oximetry were recorded by a blind observer for 48 hr after surgery. RESULTS: No differences in pain relief, motor block, degree of sedation, pulse oximetry and other side effects were observed between the two groups. The number of incremental doses and the volume of analgesic solution infused epidurally were higher in patients receiving the bupivacaine/fentanyl mixture (10 [0-52] I.D. and 236 [204-340] ml) than in patients receiving the ropivacaine/fentanyl solution (5 [0-50] I.D. and 208 [148-260] ml) (P = 0.03 and P = 0.05, respectively). CONCLUSION: Using a ropivacaine 0.2%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl mixture for patient supplemented epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery provided similar successful pain relief as bupivacaine 0.125%/2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl, but patients receiving bupivacaine/fentanyl requested more supplemental.     

Pre-incisional epidural ropivacaine, sufentanil, clonidine, and (S)+-ketamine does not provide pre-emptive analgesia in patients undergoing major pancreatic surgery

BACKGROUND: The concept of pre-emptive analgesia remains controversial. This prospective, randomized, and double-blind study compared epidural administration of ropivacaine 2 mg ml(-1), sufentanil 0.5 microg ml(-1), clonidine 3 microg ml(-1), and S(+)-ketamine 0.25 mg ml(-1) (study solution) given before incision with the same combination started at the end of the operation. METHODS: After testing the stability of the solution using high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and examining 12 patients for possible side-effects in comparison with the epidural infusion of ropivacaine 2 mg ml(-1) and sufentanil 0.5 microg ml(-1), 30 patients undergoing major pancreatic surgery were recruited into the study. Before induction of anaesthesia, an epidural catheter was inserted (TH6-8). Patients in Group 1 received a bolus of 8 ml followed by a continuous infusion (8 ml h(-1)) of the study solution before induction of anaesthesia. In Group 2, patients received the same volume of saline before operation, the study solution was started at the end of surgery. After operation, the infusion was maintained for at least 96 h using a patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) pump in both groups. Patients were evaluated up to the seventh postoperative day for pain and side-effects. RESULTS: Visual analogue scale (VAS) values at rest were as follows: G1 vs G2: 24 h, 19 (sd 23) vs 6 (13); 48 h, 4 (10) vs 11 (21); and 72 h, 12 (22) vs 13 (21). VAS values during coughing and mobilization were also comparable. Total volume of epidural infusion was 904 (114) ml in G1 vs 892 (154) ml in G2. The incidence of side-effects (nausea, vomiting, and motor block) was low and not different between the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pre-incisional epidural analgesic infusion did not provide pre-emptive analgesia compared with administration started at the end of surgery, but both groups had low pain scores.     

罗哌卡因复合芬太尼用于可行走硬膜外分娩镇痛的可行性

目的 探讨0．075％罗哌卡因或布比卡因与芬太尼2μg/ml的混合液用于可行走硬膜外分娩镇痛的可行性。方法 60例初产妇随机分为三组：A组（n＝20）0．075％罗哌卡因＋芬太尼2μg/ml;B组（n＝20）0．075％布比卡因＋芬太尼2μg/ml;C级（n＝20）为对照组。采用双盲法进行视觉模拟疼痛评分（VAS）和行走功能的评定。记录各组产妇的生命体征、胎心率（FHR）、产程时间、分娩方式、催产素用量以及新生儿Apgar评分和脐静脉血气分析,并测定用药前和宫口开全时母体血清皮质醇浓度。结果 A、B两组产妇均获得良好镇痛效果,镇痛后A组所有产妇均能下床行走和自主排尿,而B组仅70％产妇能下床行走和自主排尿,两组比较有显著性差异（P＜0．05）;A、B两组第一产程末血清皮质醇浓度明显低于C组（P＜0．05）。产程时间、分娩方式和新生儿Apgar评分各组间均无差异（P＞0．05）。结论 0．075％罗哌卡因和芬太尼2μg/ml的混合液有效安全地用于可行走硬膜外分娩镇痛。     

Epidural combination of ropivacaine with sufentanil for postoperative analgesia after total knee replacement: a pilot study

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We assessed the analgesic efficacy of postoperative epidural infusions of ropivacaine 0.1 and 0.2% combined with sufentanil 1 microg mL(-1) in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. METHODS: Twenty-two ASA I-III patients undergoing elective total-knee replacement were included. Lumbar epidural blockade using ropivacaine 0.75% was combined with either propofol sedation or general anaesthesia for surgery. After surgery, the epidural infusion was commenced. Eleven patients in each group received either an epidural infusion of ropivacaine 0.1% with 1 microg mL(-1) sufentanil (Group 1) or ropivacaine 0.2% with 1 microg mL(-1) sufentanil (Group 2) at a rate of 5-9 mL h(-1). All patients had access to intravenous pirinatrimide (piritramide) via a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. RESULTS: Motor block was negligible for the study duration in both groups. There was no significant difference with the 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, with the consumption of rescue analgesia or with patient satisfaction. Patients in Group 1 experienced significantly less nausea (P < 0.05) than those in Group 2. Both treatment regimens provided effective postoperative analgesia with only a minimal use of supplemental opioid PCA. CONCLUSIONS: We recommend the use of ropivacaine 0.1% with 1 microg mL(-1) sufentanil for postoperative analgesia after total knee replacement as it provides efficient pain relief with no motor block of the lower limbs. In addition, compared with 0.2% ropivacaine with sufentanil, the mixture reduces local anaesthetic consumption without compromise in patient satisfaction or VAS scores. Patients even experience less nausea.     

A comparison of patient-controlled epidural analgesia following gynaecological surgery with and without a background infusion

We conducted a randomised, controlled study to investigate the effect of adding a background infusion to patient-controlled epidural analgesia for postoperative pain relief. Forty-two patients scheduled for elective lower abdominal gynaecological surgery received patient-controlled epidural analgesia postoperatively using a mixture of 0.2% ropivacaine and 2.0 microg x ml-1 fentanyl. Patients in group B (n = 20) were given a background infusion of 5 ml x h-1, whereas those in group N (n = 21) were not. There was no difference in pain scores or patient satisfaction scores between the two groups. Patients in group B had a higher total drug consumption (156.8 +/- 34.8 ml vs. 89.5 +/- 41.0 ml; p < 0.0001) and incidence of side-effects (71.4% vs. 30.0%; p = 0.007). Motor blockade during the 24-h study period was also greater in group B (median [range] area under the curve 7.5 [0.0-39.0] h vs. 3.0 [0.0-36.0] h; p = 0.035). We conclude that the addition of a background infusion to patient-controlled epidural anaesthesia is not recommended as it confers no additional benefits.