What concentration of sufentanil should be combined with ropivacaine 0.2% wt/vol for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia?

In this randomized double-blinded study, we sought to determine an optimal dose-combination of sufentanil with ropivacaine 0.2% wt/vol as postoperative epidural analgesics. One hundred twenty patients undergoing major abdominal surgery under general and thoracic epidural anesthesia (T9-11) were assigned to groups receiving patient-controlled epidural analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% wt/vol (R), ropivacaine 0.2% wt/vol + sufentanil 0.5 microg/mL (R+S0.5), 0. 75 microg/mL (R+S0.75), 1.0 microg/mL (R+S1). A visual analog score of less than 40 was considered effective, and all side effects were recorded. In randomized subgroups (10 patients per group), plasma pharmacokinetic data were obtained for both epidural drugs. Four patients in Group R and two in Group R+S0.5 were excluded because of inadequate analgesia. The drug infusion rates (range of means: 5.4-5. 9 mL/h) were similar in all patients. Analgesia was superior for sufentanil 0.75 microg/mL with no further enhancement by the larger sufentanil concentration of 1 microg/mL. Sufentanil plasma levels were within the range of the minimal effective concentrations (highest in R+S1), and there was no covariation between plasma levels and pain relief. Free ropivacaine plasma concentrations remained stable for 96 h. No severe side effects were detected, although pruritus correlated with an increasing dose of sufentanil. We conclude that the combination of ropivacaine 0.2% wt/vol and 0.75 microg/mL sufentanil provided the best analgesia with the fewest side effects of the three combinations tested. IMPLICATIONS: Sufentanil is added to epidural infusions of ropivacaine 0.2% wt/vol to improve the effectiveness of postoperative pain management. Regarding the risk of side effects, however, it is still unclear what concentration of sufentanil should be added to the local anesthetic. For postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery, the combination of ropivacaine 0.2% wt/vol and 0.75 microg/mL sufentanil resulted in an appropriate cost:benefit ratio between good analgesia and side effects.     

Epidural analgesia in abdominal surgery: 0.2% ropivacaine with sufentanil

AIM: Combining an opioid with peridural local analgesia is an excellent technique to control post-operative pain. Sufentanil is a widely used opioid agent, but its optimal dosage has not yet been defined. In this study we wanted to determine the best dose of epidural sufentanil in major surgery. METHODS: Before the operation, 45 major abdominal surgery patients received blended anesthesia through an epidural chest catheter. The patients were randomized into 3 groups of 15 subjects according to different sufentanil doses [0.2% ropivacaine combined with sufentanil at a dose of 0.5 microg/ml(-1), 0.75 microg/ml(-1), or 1 microg/ml(-1) (groups A, B and C, respectively)] administered through an epidural chest catheter connected to an elastometric pump (5 ml/h) for the first 36 postoperative hours. The level of postoperative analgesia in motion and at rest was measured using an analog visual scale (VAS-R, VAS-I). RESULTS: Analgesia was best in group A, and similar in groups B and C; 2 cases of pruritus were noted in group C. The VAS-I scores were <3 across all 3 patient groups. CONCLUSION: Epidural analgesia is an efficacious and reliable technique. The combination of 0.2% ropivacaine and 0.75 microg/ml(-1) sufentanil was found to be the optimum choice between analgesic efficacy and minor side effects, which correlated with the higher dose of sufentanil given to group C.     

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.     

Continuous epidural infusion of ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia after major abdominal surgery: comparative study with i.v. PCA morphine

We have compared the quality of three regimens of postoperative analgesia (continuous epidural administration of ropivacaine (Ropi. group), epidural ropivacaine and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with i.v. morphine (Ropi. + PCA group) and PCA morphine alone (PCA group)) during the first postoperative 24 h in a multicentre, randomized, prospective study. Postoperative analgesia was studied in 130 patients after major abdominal surgery performed under general anaesthesia. The ropivacaine groups received 20 ml of epidural bolus ropivacaine 2 mg ml-1 via the epidural route at the end of surgery, followed by continuous infusion of 10 ml h-1 for 24 h. The Ropi. + PCA group also had access to i.v. PCA morphine 1 mg, with a 5-min lockout. The PCA group received morphine as the sole postoperative pain treatment. The two ropivacaine groups had lower pain scores (P < 0.01) than the PCA group. Morphine consumption was higher in the PCA group (P < 0.05) than in the two ropivacaine groups. The quality of pain relief was rated as good or excellent in 79-85% of patients in the three groups. The percentage of patients without motor block increased between 4 and 24 h from 61% to 89% in the Ropi. group, and from 51% to 71% in the Ropi. + PCA group.      

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- and intraoperative epidural ropivacaine have no early preemptive analgesic effect in major gynecological tumour surgery

PURPOSE: Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is an established technique for postoperative pain relief after major abdominal surgery. However it is still under discussion whether pre-incisional TEA can reduce postoperative pain perception or postoperative analgesic consumption. METHODS: The present prospective, randomized, double-blind study was performed to investigate the effects of intra- and postoperative TEA vs only postoperative TEA using ropivacaine 0.375% in 30 women scheduled for major abdominal tumour surgery. Prior to induction of general anesthesia patients received an epidural bolus of 10 mL saline in Group I (GI) and 10 mL ropivacaine 0.375% in Group II (GII) followed by an infusion of 6 mL x hr(-1) of the respective solution during surgery. Postoperatively all patients received an epidural infusion of 6 mL x hr(-1) ropivacaine 0.375% during 24 hr followed by patient controlled epidural analgesia for the next 72 hr. Operative data, dynamic pain scores, consumption of local anesthetics and standardized supplemental analgesics were analyzed. RESULTS: No difference was seen between groups with respect to the amount of required postoperative local anesthetics and supplemental analgesics, pain scores and side effects during the first 96 hr following surgery except a reduction of intraoperative sufentanil consumption (GI: 143.2 +/- 52.6 vs GII: 73.3 +/- 32.6 microg, P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Intraoperative TEA with ropivacaine 0.375% did not significantly reduce the amount of analgesics required after major abdominal gynecological tumour surgery.     

布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛安全性探讨

目的探讨布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛的效果、并发症及安全陛。方法1600例行连续术后硬膜外镇痛的患者,按所用镇痛药物配伍不同分为：0．1％布比卡因＋5μg／ml芬太尼组（B组,n=920）和0．2％罗哌卡因＋2μg／ml芬太尼组（R组,n=680）。对两组镇痛效果（视觉模拟评分及患者对镇痛效果的满意度）、并发症和处理措施进行总结分析。结果视觉模拟评分两组无差异（P〉0．05）。患者对镇痛的满意度R组明显高于B组（P〉0．05）。并发症的发生率B组高于R组（P〉0．05）。两组内年龄≥60岁的患者低血压的发生率高于年龄〈60岁者（P〈0．05）;女性患者恶心呕吐的发生率高于男性（P〈0．05）;腰段硬膜外镇痛患者下肢乏力或麻木的发生率明显高于胸段硬膜外镇痛患者（P〈0．05）。结论布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍均可安全有效地用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛,罗哌卡因组并发症较少,并发症的发生与镇痛药物、年龄、性别及硬膜外置管部位有关。     

Effect of Postoperative Epidural Analgesia on Rehabilitation and Pain after Hip Fracture Surgery: A Randomized, Double-blind, Placebo-controlled Trial

Background: Hip fracture surgery usually carries a high demand for rehabilitation and a significant risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Postoperative epidural analgesia may reduce morbidity and has been shown to facilitate rehabilitation in elective orthopedic procedures. No studies exist on the effect of postoperative epidural analgesia on pain and rehabilitation after hip fracture surgery.

Methods: Sixty elderly patients were included in a randomized, double-blind study comparing 4 days of continuous postoperative epidural infusion of 4 ml/h bupivacaine, 0.125%, and 50 [mu]g/ml morphine versus placebo. Both patient groups received balanced analgesia and intravenous nurse-controlled analgesia with morphine. All patients followed a well-defined multimodal rehabilitation program. Pain, ability to participate in four basic physical functions, and any factors restricting participation were assessed on the first 4 postoperative days during physiotherapy.

Results: Epidural analgesia provided superior dynamic analgesia during all basic physical functions, and patients were significantly less restricted by pain, which was the dominating restricting factor in the placebo group. Motor blockade was not a restricting factor during epidural analgesia. Despite improved pain relief, scores for recovery of physical independence were not different between groups.     

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.     

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.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia after abdominal surgery: ropivacaine versus bupivacaine.

In this randomized, double-blinded study we sought to assess the analgesic efficacy of ropivacaine and bupivacaine in combination with sufentanil and the efficacy of ropivacaine alone after major abdominal surgery. Sixty patients undergoing major abdominal surgery received standardized general anesthesia combined with epidural thoracic analgesia. They were allocated to one of three groups: the BS group received postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia with 0.125% bupivacaine plus 0.5 microg/mL sufentanil; the RS group received 0.125% ropivacaine plus 0.5 microg/mL sufentanil; and the R group received 0.2% ropivacaine, with the patient-controlled epidural analgesia device set at bolus 2-3 mL and background infusion 3-5 mL/h. Visual analog scale scores were significantly lower during coughing in the BS group compared with the RS and R groups and in the RS group compared with the R group. The BS group required significantly less local anesthetic (milligrams per day) during the first three postoperative days compared with the RS and R groups, and the RS group, significantly less than the R group. No major side effects were noted in any group. We conclude that, after major abdominal surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia was more effective with bupivacaine than with ropivacaine when these two local anesthetics are used in a mixture with sufentanil. Ropivacaine alone was less effective than ropivacaine in combination with sufentanil. IMPLICATIONS: After major abdominal surgery, thoracic epidural analgesia was more effective with 0.125% bupivacaine than with 0.125% ropivacaine when these two local anesthetics were used in a mixture with 0.5 microg/mL sufentanil. Ropivacaine 0.2% alone was less effective than 0.125% ropivacaine combined with sufentanil.     

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.     

Continuous epidural analgesia with bupivacaine-fentanyl versus patient-controlled analgesia with i.v. morphine for postoperative pain relief after knee ligament surgery

BACKGROUND: Both epidural analgesia and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) have been found efficacious after various types of surgery. We compared the efficacy, safety, side effects and patient satisfaction of these methods in a randomized double-blind fashion after elective anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction of the knee. METHODS: Fifty-six patients had an epidural catheter placed at the L2-L3 interspace. Spinal anaesthesia with 15 mg of plain bupivacaine 5 mg/ml was performed at the L3-L4 interspace. After surgery the patients were randomly divided into three groups: 19 received a continuous epidural infusion with bupivacaine 1 mg/ml and fentanyl 10 mg/ml (F10), 19 patients received bupivacaine 1 mg/ml and fentanyl 5 microg/ml (F5) and 18 patients received saline (S). The rate of the epidural infusions was 0.1 ml kg(-1) h(-1). Each patient could also use an intravenous (i.v.) PCA device with 40 microg/kg bolus doses of morphine with a lockout period of 10 min and a maximum dose 240 microg kg(-1) h(-1). At the end of surgery ketoprofen 100 mg i.v. was given and continued orally three times a day. Patients were assessed for pain with a visual analogue scale (VAS) at rest and during activity, side effects and satisfaction at 3, 9 and 20 h. RESULTS: Both epidural infusions (F10, F5) provided better analgesia than epidural saline plus i.v. PCA (S) (P<0.05). There was slightly less nausea in the S group (NS). In spite of the difference in the quality of pain relief, there was no difference between the groups in patient satisfaction regarding analgesic therapy. CONCLUSION: Epidural infusion of fentanyl (1 microg kg(-1) h(-1) or 0.5 microg kg(-1) h(-1)) and bupivacaine (0.1 mg kg(-1) h(-1)) provided better pain relief but more side effects than intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia after knee ligament surgery. Almost all patients in all groups were satisfied with their pain relief.     

布托啡诺与吗啡用于腹部手术后硬膜外镇痛效果的比较

目的 研究不同剂量布托啡诺用于腹部手术患者术后硬膜外镇痛的效果及副作用,并与吗啡硬膜外镇痛进行比较. 方法 择期腹部手术ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级患者75例,按术后镇痛用药不同随机分为3组(n=25):M组(吗啡12 mg+0.1%罗哌卡因共150ml),B1组(布托啡诺9mg+0.1%罗哌卡因共150 ml),B2组(布托啡诺12mg+0-1%罗哌卡因共150ml).负荷量为0.25%罗哌卡因5 ml加吗啡2 mg或布托啡诺2 mg,持续背景输注剂量均为1-5 ml/h,按压追加药量均为2 ml/次,按压锁定时间20 min.观察记录3组患者术中芬太尼的总药量;术后1、4、8、12、18、24、36、48 h各时间点的疼痛视觉模拟评分(pain visual analogue scores,VAS);术后1、4、8、12 h的警觉镇静评分(observer's assessment ofalertness/sedation scores,OAA/S);术后48 h内按压总次数及总药量;肛门排气时间;术后镇痛副作用(头痛头晕、嗜睡、呼吸抑制、搔痒、恶心、呕吐、腹胀)的发生情况.结果 术后4 h时间点B1组VAS评分为2.8±1.0,高于M组的2.0±0.7及B2组的2.0±0.9(P<0-05),其余时间点3组间比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05).M组的头痛头晕、恶心、呕吐,腹胀,搔痒发生例数分别为3、11、7、4、5例,而B1组仅有1例头痛头晕,B2组有2例头痛头晕,1例恶心,发生率均低于M组(P<0.05).3组患者术中芬太尼的总药量、48 h内按压总次数及总药量、术后不同时间点OAA/S评分及肛门排气时间的比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05). 结论 每天3 mg～4 mg布托啡诺应用于腹部手术后硬膜外镇痛,镇痛效果确切,且其副作用发生率较吗啡明显降低.     

A double-blinded,randomized comparison of intrathecal and epidural morphine for elective cesarean delivery

We randomized 150 parturients into a double-blinded trial to receive intrathecal (IT) 100 microg (IT 100 group) or 200 microg (IT 200 group) or epidural 3 mg (Epidural group) of morphine for elective cesarean delivery with a combined spinal/epidural technique. The patients additionally received ketoprofen 300 mg/d. Postoperative pain relief and side effects were registered every 3 h up to 24 h, and all patients were interviewed on the first postoperative day. Pain control was equally good, but the parturients in the IT 100 group requested rescue analgesics more often compared with the other groups (P < 0.05). Itching was a common complaint and was reported by 74% of the parturients in the Epidural group and 65% and 91% in the IT 100 and IT 200 groups, respectively (P < 0.01). Medication for itching was requested by 44%, 24%, and 45% of the patients, respectively (P < 0.05). There was no difference in postoperative nausea or vomiting. The pain relief was perceived as good by >90% of the patients in all groups. In conclusion, because of the decreased incidence of and lesser requirements of medication for itching, IT morphine 100 microg with ketoprofen is recommended in cesarean deliveries. Rescue analgesics nevertheless need to be prescribed. IMPLICATIONS: Spinal morphine is an effective analgesic after cesarean delivery, but it has several side effects. The purpose of this study was to compare the prevalence of side effects and the level of analgesia of epidural morphine with two different doses of spinal morphine after elective cesarean delivery. Although rescue analgesics may be required, intrathecal morphine 100 microg is suggested for postoperative analgesia after cesarean delivery.     

Effect of postoperative epidural analgesia on rehabilitation and pain after hip fracture surgery: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Hip fracture surgery usually carries a high demand for rehabilitation and a significant risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Postoperative epidural analgesia may reduce morbidity and has been shown to facilitate rehabilitation in elective orthopedic procedures. No studies exist on the effect of postoperative epidural analgesia on pain and rehabilitation after hip fracture surgery. METHODS: Sixty elderly patients were included in a randomized, double-blind study comparing 4 days of continuous postoperative epidural infusion of 4 ml/h bupivacaine, 0.125%, and 50 mug/ml morphine versus placebo. Both patient groups received balanced analgesia and intravenous nurse-controlled analgesia with morphine. All patients followed a well-defined multimodal rehabilitation program. Pain, ability to participate in four basic physical functions, and any factors restricting participation were assessed on the first 4 postoperative days during physiotherapy. RESULTS: Epidural analgesia provided superior dynamic analgesia during all basic physical functions, and patients were significantly less restricted by pain, which was the dominating restricting factor in the placebo group. Motor blockade was not a restricting factor during epidural analgesia. Despite improved pain relief, scores for recovery of physical independence were not different between groups. CONCLUSION: Postoperative epidural analgesia after hip fracture surgery provides superior analgesia attenuating pain as a restricting factor during rehabilitation without motor dysfunction. However, superior analgesia did not translate into enhanced rehabilitation. Future studies with multimodal rehabilitation are required to establish whether superior analgesia can be translated into enhanced rehabilitation and reduced morbidity in hip fracture patients.     

A Comparison of Epidural Morphine and Epidural Bupivacaine for Postoperative Pain Relief

In 32 patients subjected to total hip replacement, postoperative pain relief was achieved by random treatment with either 5 mg of morphine in 10 ml of saline (n = 15) or 6–8 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine with epinephrine (n = 17), both drugs administered by the lumbar epidural route. In an additional group of 10 patients, post-traumatic thoracic or post-operative abdominal pain was relieved first by 4–6 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine with epinephrine and subsequently by 5 mg of morphine in 10 ml of saline, both drugs being administered by the thoracic epidural route. The duration of analgesia was significantly longer, on average, with morphine (28 h) than with bupivacaine (4.3 h) when the drugs were given by the lumbar route. Thoracic administration of morphine also resulted in a significantly longer duration of pain relief (on average 9.8 h) than that of bupivacaine (3.8 h). Morphine gave satisfactory pain relief in all cases. It was not associated with motor block, loss of sensitivity to temperature, touch, or pin-prick, or any signs of sympathetic block, as was the case with epidural bupivacaine. Plasma concentrations of morphine were not detectable 8 h after injection, though the patients still had pain relief. One case of delayed severe respiratory depression occurred 6 h after morphine injection via the thoracic route. Epidural morphine analgesia should therefore be reserved for patients in whom continual surveillance is possible, at least until more is known about the pharmacokinetics of narcotics in the epidural and subarachnoid space.     

Continuous epidural infusion of morphine for treatment of pain after thoracic surgery: a new technique

We evaluated postoperative pain relief and the incidence of side effects of three methods of thoracic epidural analgesia. Ninety patients, divided into three equal groups, received postoperative analgesia after thoracic surgery either as intermittent epidural injections of bupivacaine (25 mg/5 ml, 0.5% solution) as needed, or, intermittent epidural injections of morphine (5 mg/5 ml of normal saline, 0.1% solution) as needed, or continuous epidural infusion of morphine (0.1 mg, in 1 ml of normal saline) per hour supplemented with intravenous morphine (2 mg) upon request. Pain relief was evaluated by each patient on a pain scale visual analogue and by pain relief questionnaire for a period of 72 hr. Postoperative pain relief was achieved equally with these three methods of epidural analgesia in all patients with no significant difference between groups. Intermittent epidural injection of bupivacaine relieved pain for 4.9 +/- 1.9 (SD) hr/injection and was associated with urinary retention in all patients, with numbness and weakness of the hands in 12 patients, and with severe hypotension in 7 patients. Intermittent epidural injection of morphine relieved pain for 5.8 +/- 2.3 hr/injection and was associated with urinary retention in all patients, with pruritus in 12 patients, and with central narcosis and respiratory depression in 8 patients. Continuous epidural infusion of morphine with occasional intravenous morphine (2 mg) supplementation also effectively relieved postoperative pain and was associated with minimal systemic side effects. One patient complained of pruritus, and two patients developed urinary retention.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Effectiveness of ropivacaine and fentanyl for postoperative epidural analgesia following thoracic surgery

BACKGROUND: Epidural ropivacaine is now a common drug used for postoperative analgesia. However, little information is available concerning regression of sensory blockade and analgesia following prolonged epidural infusion of ropivacaine. We investigated the efficacy of ropivacaine and fentanyl for postoperative analgesia after thoracic surgery. METHODS: Thirty patients undergoing thoracic surgery were enrolled. After surgery with general and thoracic epidural anesthesia, continuous epidural infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine+fentanyl (1.67 microg x ml(-1)) was started at a rate of 6 ml x h(-1) for patients whose height was more than 155 cm and 4 ml x h(-1) for those below 155 cm with possibility of an additional bolus injection of 3 ml at least every 60 min. RESULTS: An additional epidural injection of 3 ml produced a decrease in VAS without significant changes of vital signs. The greatest VAS was 10+/-25 mm in the incision site and 36+/-38 mm in the ipsilateral shoulder. Sensory blockade was sustained until the morning after the day of surgery. Also blood pressure and heart rate were stable throughout the observation period. There were no adverse effects except for slight nausea in three patients. CONCLUSIONS: A bolus of 3 ml with continuous 4-6 ml x h(-1) epidural injection of ropivacaine plus a small dose of fentanyl would decrease postoperative pain with stable vital signs in patients after thoracic surgery.     

Retentissements de la douleur postopératoire,bénéfices attendus des traitements

Physiological responses to postoperative acute pain may impede organ functions (cardiovascular, pulmonary, coagulation, endocrine, gastrointestinal, central nervous system, etc). Pain alleviation improves patient's comfort, but also may minimise perioperative stress response, physiological responses and postoperative organ dysfunction, assist postoperative nursing and physiotherapy, enhance clinical outcome, and potentially shorten the hospital stay. Potent postoperative analgesia, especially by epidural route, may be associated with reduction in incidence and severity of many perioperative dysfunctions. Peridural analgesia using local anaesthetics is the best technique for decreasing postoperative stress after lower abdominal or lower limb surgery. Analgesia using either epidural or high doses of morphine may improve some cardiac variables such as tachycardia and ischaemia, but does not change the incidence of severe cardiac complications. For patients undergoing vascular or orthopaedic surgery, epidural analgesia can improve clinical outcome by preventing the development of arterial or venous thromboembolic complications. However, in comparative studies, the control groups did not receive adequate prophylactic treatment for thromboembolic complications. Epidural analgesia can hasten the return of gastrointestinal motility and shorten the hospital stay. Postoperative mental dysfunction is decreased using intravenous PCA morphine in the elderly. Epidural analgesia with local anaesthetics improves postoperative respiratory function but, for unknown reasons, these benefits are not associated with a decrease in respiratory complications. On balance, the mode of acute pain relief decreases adverse physiological responses and many intermediate outcome variables; however, there is inconclusive evidence that it affects clinical outcome. Major advances in postoperative recovery can be achieved by early aggressive perioperative care, including potent analgesia, early mobilisation and oral nutrition. As a result, the hospital stay may be shortened.