The effects of postoperative pain management on immune response to surgery

Surgery is associated with immune alterations, which are the combined result of tissue damage, anesthesia, postoperative pain, and psychological stress. In the present study, we compared the effects of several postoperative pain management techniques on postoperative immune function. Patients hospitalized for abdominal surgery were randomly assigned to one of three postoperative pain management techniques: opiates on demand (intermittent opiate regimen [IOR]), patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). Postoperative pain was assessed. Blood samples were collected before and 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery. Production of interleukin (IL)-1beta, IL-2, and IL-6, natural killer cell cytotoxicity, and lymphocyte mitogenic responses were assessed. Patients of the PCEA group exhibited lower pain scores in the first 24 h after surgery compared with patients of the IOR and PCA groups. Mitogenic responses were suppressed in all groups in the first 24 h, returned to preoperative values by 72 h in the PCEA group, but remained suppressed in the PCA group. Production of IL-1beta and IL-6 increased in the IOR and PCA groups, whereas it remained almost unchanged in the PCEA group. Patients receiving an epidural mixture of opiate and local anesthetics (PCEA group) exhibited reduced suppression of lymphocyte proliferation and attenuated proinflammatory cytokine response in the postoperative period.     

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.     

Dextromethorphan-associated epidural patient-controlled analgesia provides better pain- and analgesics-sparing effects than dextromethorphan-associated intravenous patient-controlled analgesia after bone-malignancy resection: a randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded study

Pain after bone malignancy surgery is intense and requires large amounts of analgesics. The augmented antinociceptive effects of dextromethorphan (DM), a N-methyl-D-aspartate receptor antagonist, were demonstrated previously. We assessed the use of postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) or IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in patients undergoing surgery for bone malignancy under standardized combined general and epidural anesthesia with or without DM. Patients (n = 120) were randomly allocated to receive PCEA (ropivacaine 3.2 mg plus fentanyl 8 microg/dose) or IV-PCA (morphine 2 mg/dose) postoperatively, starting at subjective visual analog scale pain intensity >or=4 of 10 for up to 96 h. Placebo or DM 90 mg orally (30 patients/group/set) was given in a double-blinded manner before surgery and for 2 days afterwards. Diclofenac 75 mg IM was available as a rescue drug. DM patients used PCA and rated their pain >50% less than their placebo counterparts in each set, especially during the first 2 postoperative days (P < 0.01). Hourly and overall maximal pain intensity among PCEA patients was approximately 50% less than in the IV-PCA set (P < 0.01). Diclofenac was used 42% less (P < 0.01) by the PCA-DM patients compared with their placebo counterparts. Seven PCEA-DM and 11 IV-PCA-DM individuals reported having side effects compared with 44 in the PCEA-placebo and the IV-PCA-placebo groups (P < 0.01). Time to first ambulation was similar with both analgesia techniques but shorter among the DM-treated patients compared with the placebo recipients (1.5 +/- 0.8 versus 2.1 +/- 1.1 days, P = 0.02). Thus, DM afforded better pain control and reduced the demand for analgesics, augmented the PCEA effect versus IV-PCA, and was associated with minimal untoward effects in each analgesia set. DM patients ambulated earlier than placebo recipients. IMPLICATIONS: Patients undergoing bone-malignancy surgery under combined general and epidural anesthesia received randomly patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) or IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) postoperatively and dextromethorphan (DM) 90 mg or placebo double-blindly for 3 days (n = 30/group/set). The DM effect was recorded with minimal untoward effects: it afforded better pain control and reduced the demand for analgesics compared with the placebo, especially when associated with PCEA. DM patients ambulated earlier than placebo recipients.     

Epidural Bupivacaine-Morphine Analgesia versus Patient-controlled Analgesia following Abdominal Aortic Surgery: Analgesic, Respiratory, and Myocardial Effects

Background: The efficacy and effects of epidural analgesia compared with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) have not been reported in patients undergoing major vascular surgery. We compared the effects of epidural bupivacaine-morphine with those of intravenous PCA morphine after elective infrarenal aortic surgery.

Methods: Forty patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 2 or 3 received general anesthesia plus postoperative PCA using morphine sulfate (group PCA; n = 21) or general anesthesia plus perioperative epidural morphine - bupivacaine (group EPI; n = 19) during a period of 48 h. During operation, EPI patients received 0.05 mg/kg epidural morphine and 5 ml 0.25% bupivacaine followed by an infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine with 0.1% morphine (0.1 mg/ml); group PCA received 0.1 mg/kg intravenous morphine sulfate. Continuous electrocardiographic monitoring (V4 and V5 leads) was performed from the night before surgery until 48 h afterward. Respiratory inductive plethysmographic data were recorded after tracheal extubation. Visual analog pain scores at rest and after movement were performed every 4 h after extubation.

Results: Nurse-administered intravenous morphine and time to tracheal extubation were less in group EPI, as were visual analog pain scores at rest and after movement from 20 to 48 h. Complications and the duration of intensive care unit and hospital stay were comparable. There was a similar, low incidence of postoperative apneas, slow respiratory rates, desaturation, and S-T segment depression.     

Comparison of intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia in the elderly after major abdominal surgery

BACKGROUND: Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), using an opioid either alone or in combination with a local anesthetic, are two major advances in the management of pain after major surgery. However, these techniques have been evaluated poorly in elderly people. This prospective, randomized study compared the effectiveness on postoperative pain and safety of PCEA and PCA after major abdominal surgery in the elderly patient. METHODS: Seventy patients older than 70 yr of age and undergoing major abdominal surgery were assigned randomly to receive either combined epidural analgesia and general anesthesia followed by postoperative PCEA, using a mixture of 0.125% bupivacaine and sufentanil (PCEA group), or general anesthesia followed by PCA with intravenous morphine (PCA group). Pain intensity was tested three times daily using a visual analog scale. Postoperative evaluation included mental status, cardiorespiratory and gastrointestinal functions, and patient satisfaction scores. RESULTS: Pain relief was better at rest (P = 0.001) and after coughing (P = 0.002) in the PCEA group during the 5 postoperative days. Satisfaction scores were better in the PCEA group. Although incidence of delirium was comparable in the PCA and PCEA groups (24% vs. 26%, respectively), mental status was improved on the fourth and fifth postoperative days in the PCEA group. The PCEA group recovered bowel function more quickly than did the PCA group. Cardiopulmonary complications were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSION: After major abdominal surgery in the elderly patient, patient-controlled analgesia, regardless of the route (epidural or parenteral), is effective. The epidural route using local anesthetics and an opioid provides better pain relief and improves mental status and bowel activity.     

Comparison of ropivacaine-fentanyl patient-controlled epidural analgesia with morphine intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for perioperative analgesia and recovery after open colon surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects of ropivacaine-fentanyl patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with morphine intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. SETTING: Five university-affiliated hospitals. PATIENTS: 41 patients undergoing colon surgery. INTERVENTION: Patients were randomized to receive either standardized combined epidural/general anesthesia followed by PCEA with ropivacaine 0.2% and fentanyl (2 microg/mL) or standardized general anesthesia followed by morphine IV PCA. All patients participated in a standardized postoperative clinical pathway. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Analgesia was assessed with visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Postoperative recovery was assessed by completion of prospectively defined discharge milestones and time until discharge. Statistical analyses included nonparametric and contingency table analyses. The PCEA group had better analgesia (> 50% reduction in pain scores, assessed both at rest and during a cough) for the first 3 days after surgery (p < 0.0,005). The PCEA group achieved discharge milestones approximately 36 hours faster (p < 0.002), but time until discharge was similar between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Ropivacaine-fentanyl PCEA provides superior analgesia, reduced opioid requirement, and more rapid recovery after colon surgery.     

Postoperative analgesia with morphine with or without diclofenac after shoulder surgery

Balanced analgesia using a narcotic and a nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drug has been successfully tested for postoperative analgesia. This study was designed to examine the efficacy of such combination therapy after shoulder surgeries. Twenty ASA physical status I or II patients, scheduled for shoulder surgeries under general anesthesia, were randomly assigned to either morphine (M) group (n = 10), who received IV morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) alone (2 mg as a bolus, lock-out interval of 10-minutes, and 10 mg as 1-hour limit for 48 hours), or morphine + diclofenac (M + D) group (n = 10), who received, in addition to morphine PCA, diclofenac suppositories 50 mg.8 h-1 starting immediately before surgical incision for 48 hours. Postoperative analgesic profiles, such as visual analog scale (VAS) at rest and on movement, and cumulative morphine consumption, the incidence and extent of side effects (nausea, vomiting, and time till the first bowel movement), and other complications were recorded. The two groups were similar demographically. Patients in the M + D group required 15.1 +/- 9.0 mg of morphine within 48 hours after surgery, while those in the M group required 30.5 +/- 21.0 mg of morphine (P < 0.05). No significant differences in VAS at rest and on movement were observed between the two groups. The time till the first bowel movement was significantly shorter in the M + D group. Our data suggest that diclofenac suppositories 50 mg.8 h-1 starting immediately before surgery for 48 h are effective adjuvant in reducing post-shoulder surgery morphine requirement and retardation of bowel movement.     

术后不同镇痛方式对老年患者应激反应和凝血功能的影响

目的 观察两种镇痛方式:硬膜外自控镇痛(PCEA)与静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)对老年患者下肢手术后应激反廊及凝血功能的影响.方法 择期行下肢骨科矫形手术的老年患者40例,ASAⅡ～Ⅲ级,随机分为硬膜外自榨镇痛组(PCEA组)与静脉自控镇痛组(PCIA组),每组20例.所有患者均施行腰麻硬膜外联合麻醉.术后PCEA组自硬膜外腔导管给予硬膜外自控镇痛,PCEA药物配制:罗哌卡因225 mg+吗啡8 mg+氟哌利多5 mg加生理盐水配成100 ml混合液,首次负荷苗吗啡2 mg,背景量2.0 ml/h,PCA量1.5 mL/次,间隔时间15 min;PCIA组给予静脉自控镇痛,PCIA药物配制:芬太尼0.2 mg+曲马多1g+氟哌利多5 mg加生理盐水配成100 ml混合液,首次负荷量为上述混合液10 ml静注,背景量2.0ml/h,PCA 量1.5 ml/次,间隔时间15 min.分别于麻醉前(T0)、术毕(T1)、术后24 h(T2)、术后48 h(T3)各时间点静脉采血检测血浆皮质醇(COR)、血糖(BS)和凝血功能:血浆凝血酶原时间(PT),活化部分凝血活酶时间(AFIT),凝血酶时间(TT)及血浆纤维蛋白原(Fg).于手术后12、24、48 h对两组患者进行视觉模拟疼痛评分(VAS).结果 术后12 h及24 h PCEA组VAS低于PCIA组(P均＜0.05).两组患者术毕到术后48 h(TI到T3)COR及BS与术前(TO)时比较降低(P＜0.05或0.01);而组间比较,T2和T3时PCEA组COR及BS均低于PCIA组(P均＜0.05).凝血功能指标PT、APTT、TT自T1到T3与T0比较,两组均延长(P＜0.05或0.01),而组问比较,T1和T3时两组间差异无统计学意义,而T2时上述三项指标PCEA组较PCIA组延长(P＜0.05).PCEA组纤维蛋白原(Fg)T1至T3较T0时降低(P＜0.05或0.01),而PCIA组T1到T3 Fg较T0时虽然有所降低,但差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05);两组间比较,T1和T3时组间差异无统计学意义,仅1、2时PCEA组低于PCIA组(P＜0.05).结论 PCEA和PCIA均能提供有效的术后镇痛,并减轻手术后应激反应和改善凝血功能,但PCEA优于PCIA.     

Efficacy of patient-controlled epidural analgesia using a disposable PCA device

We evaluated efficacy of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using a disposable PCA device (3.0 ml type). Twenty-two patients for elective gynecological surgery were randomized into two groups. Patients of the continuous epidural group received epidural fentanyl (15 micrograms.ml-1) with bupivacaine (1.25 mg.ml-1) from a disposable infusion pump (infusion rate: 2.1 ml.hr-1). Patients of the PCEA group received the same anesthetic solution from the same infusion pump serially connected to the disposable PCA device. There were no significant differences in postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at rest and with movement between the two groups. However, VAS scores significantly decreased from 6.8 +/- 1.6 to 1.0 +/- 1.3 when the PCA device was used for severe pain. This suggests that segmental analgesic effect might be obtained by diffusion of anesthetic solution in the epidural space after 3.0 ml PCEA bolus administration. The incidences of side effects were similar in both groups. Respiratory depression and sedative effects were not observed in both groups. We conclude that PCEA using a disposable PCA device (3.0 ml type) seems to be effective for postoperative pain relief.     

Qualität der postoperativen Schmerztherapie

Background

Despite well-designed concepts of perioperative pain management, recent studies have revealed that a large number of patients still suffer from unacceptable pain after surgery. The purpose of this prospective evaluation was to critically analyze postoperative pain treatment provided by a routinely established, DIN certified acute pain service (APS) at the University Hospital Großhadern in Munich.

Materials and methods

A total of 1,000 consecutive patients received one of the following analgesic procedures: continuous epidural analgesia (EA, n?=?401), continuous and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA, n?=?305), intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with opioids (PCA, n?=?169) or continuous peripheral nerve block (CPNB, n?=?125). For EA and PCEA, ropivacaine 0.2?% and sufentanil 0.24 µg/ml were administered while peripheral regional analgesia was performed with infusion of ropivacaine 0.2?% only. Patients with PCEA were allowed a 3 mg bolus once per hour on demand. Standardized intravenous PCA was performed with piritramide 2.5 mg/ml, a bolus of 2.5 mg, a lock-out time of 15 min, a maximum of 25 mg/4 h and no background infusion. During the daily visits the APS assessed pain intensity at rest and during movement on a numerical rating scale from 0 (no pain) to 10 (maximum pain), acceptance of pain, satisfaction with the analgesic procedure, demand of additional non-opioid analgesics, the need for optimization including bolus applications and changes of the infusion rate or retraction of the epidural catheter. The duration of the procedures, side effects and complications were documented. The catheter insertion sites were inspected daily for redness and tenderness on palpation.

Results

In general, epidural and peripheral regional analgesic techniques were superior in terms of postoperative analgesia to intravenous opioid PCA and were associated with fewer side effects, such as sedation, nausea, vomiting, obstipation and sensorimotor deficits. A subgroup analysis revealed that in major upper abdominal surgery, EA provided significantly better analgesia at rest and during movement than PCA. In lower abdominal surgery PCEA induced significantly better analgesia than both PCA and EA, especially during movement. Patient satisfaction was generally high and was best with PCEA (95?%) followed by CPNB (94?%), EA (91?%) and PCA (88?%). On the first postoperative day analgesic procedures had to be optimized (e.g. by bolus administration, retraction of catheters or changes to standardized PCA) in 23?% of EA patients, 10?% of PCEA patients, 6?% of PCA patients and 12?% of CPNB patients. Major complications, such as neuraxial hematoma, infections or respiratory depression were not observed.

Conclusions

As described in many prospective studies, this evaluation revealed that for postoperative pain control, regional anesthesia is superior to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia with strong opioids in terms of analgesia and side effects. In the setting of a well-organized acute pain service with frequent education and training of all members involved, postoperative pain management is safe and effective. However, regular re-evaluation of the defined and certified procedures is necessary.     

Comparison of Intravenous or Epidural Patient-controlled Analgesia in the Elderly after Major Abdominal Surgery

Background: Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), using an opioid either alone or in combination with a local anesthetic, are two major advances in the management of pain after major surgery. However, these techniques have been evaluated poorly in elderly people. This prospective, randomized study compared the effectiveness on postoperative pain and safety of PCEA and PCA after major abdominal surgery in the elderly patient.

Methods: Seventy patients older than 70 yr of age and undergoing major abdominal surgery were assigned randomly to receive either combined epidural analgesia and general anesthesia followed by postoperative PCEA, using a mixture of 0.125% bupivacaine and sufentanil (PCEA group), or general anesthesia followed by PCA with intravenous morphine (PCA group). Pain intensity was tested three times daily using a visual analog scale. Postoperative evaluation included mental status, cardiorespiratory and gastrointestinal functions, and patient satisfaction scores.

Results: Pain relief was better at rest (P = 0.001) and after coughing (P = 0.002) in the PCEA group during the 5 postoperative days. Satisfaction scores were better in the PCEA group. Although incidence of delirium was comparable in the PCA and PCEA groups (24%vs. 26%, respectively), mental status was improved on the fourth and fifth postoperative days in the PCEA group. The PCEA group recovered bowel function more quickly than did the PCA group. Cardiopulmonary complications were similar in the two groups.     

The effect of epidural clonidine on perioperative cytokine response, postoperative pain, and bowel function in patients undergoing colorectal surgery

The postoperative period is associated with an increased production of cytokines, which augment pain sensitivity. We investigated the hypothesis that epidural clonidine premedication and postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) including clonidine would decrease the release of proinflammatory (interleukin (IL)-6, IL-1beta, IL-8, and tumor necrosis factor (TNF)-alpha) and antiinflammatory (IL-1 receptor antagonist (RA)) cytokines in patients who underwent elective colorectal surgery and that they would provide better postoperative analgesia. Forty patients were randomly assigned to 1 of 2 groups of 20 each: the control group received normal saline 10 mL, whereas the clonidine group received epidural clonidine 150 microg diluted with 9 mL of normal saline 30 min before surgery. Venous blood samples for cytokine levels were obtained before induction, at the end of surgery, and after surgery at 12 and 24 h. After surgery, the clonidine group patients received PCEA with morphine (0.1 mg/mL) and clonidine (1.5 microg/mL) in 0.2% ropivacaine 100 mL, whereas control group patients received only PCEA morphine and ropivacaine. Patients in the clonidine group exhibited longer PCEA trigger times, lower pain scores at rest and while coughing, less morphine consumption, and a faster return of bowel function throughout the 72-h postoperative observation period, compared with patients in the control group. For patients in the clonidine group, production of IL-1RA, IL-6, and IL-8 was significantly less increased at the end of the surgical procedure and at 12 and 24 h after surgery. However, the concentrations of IL-1beta and TNF-alpha were not significantly increased.     

Morphine sparing with droperidol in patient-controlled analgesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine if droperidol has a morphine-sparing effect when coadministered with morphine via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for postoperative pain management. DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind clinical study. SETTING: Department of Anesthesiology, Kaohsiung Veterans General Hospital, Taiwan. PATIENTS: One hundred seventy-nine American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 and 2 female patients undergoing abdominal hysterectomy. INTERVENTIONS: At the end of surgery, patients in the droperidol group received PCA, with the device programmed to deliver a bolus dose of 1 mg morphine and 50 mug droperidol on demand. Patients in the control group received 1 mg morphine on demand. For both groups, PCA lockout was 5 minutes between boluses, with a 4-hour morphine limit of 30 mg. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Pain intensity at rest or on movement and relative sedation score were evaluated and recorded at 6, 12, 24, 48, and 72 hours after surgery. Related side effects were also evaluated and recorded on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3. Morphine use was significantly lower for the droperidol group than the control group during the postoperative 72-hour period (33.9 +/- 9.8 and 54.9 +/- 12.1 mg, respectively), with significantly decreased pain intensity levels for the former relative to the latter at 48 hours (pain intensity on movement: 3.9 +/- 1.2 vs 4.3 +/- 0.9, respectively; P = .049) and 72 hours (pain intensity on movement: 3.0 +/- 1.1 vs 3.6 +/- 0.5, respectively; P = .003; pain intensity at rest: 1.3 +/- 1.0 vs 1.6 +/- 0.7, respectively; P = .033) subsequent to surgery. Control subjects demonstrated a greater frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting than did their droperidol counterparts on postoperative day 1. CONCLUSION: Coadministration of 50 mug droperidol and 1 mg morphine on demand via PCA provides a morphine-sparing effect and reduces the frequency of postoperative nausea and vomiting.     

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.      

The efficacy of intravenous indomethacin in prevention of postoperative pain

Since intravenous prophylactic anti-inflammatory agents have been suggested to reduce or even replace opiates in postoperative pain therapy, we studied the demand for morphine in 45 patients recovering from abdominal surgery who had received a baseline infusion of either indomethacin, morphine or saline placebo. When extubated after inhalational anaesthesia, each patient received an i.v. bolus of either 0.5 mg.kg-1 indomethacin, 0.07 mg.kg-1 morphine or saline placebo. Thereafter a 20-h infusion of the same test analgesic was started, either 0.1 mg.kg-1.h-1 indomethacin, 0.03 mg.kg-1.h-1 morphine or saline placebo. For additional analgesia, a patient-controlled analgesia device (PCA) delivering 5-mg boluses of morphine was used. For the first 5 postoperative hours, significantly more (P less than 0.05) PCA morphine was needed in the indomethacin group (35 mg) than in the morphine group (24 mg), while the placebo group demanded mean 30 mg. For equal analgesia (measured by VAS and VRS) between 5-20 h, similar amounts (mean 23 and 19 mg) of PCA morphine were required in the indomethacin and morphine groups, in contrast to the placebo group (mean 40 mg) (P less than 0.001). Morphine infusion increased the total consumption of morphine by 25% as compared to placebo. We conclude that, following abdominal surgery, the analgesic effect of indomethacin infusion became apparent after the first 5 postoperative hours, thereafter reducing the demand for PCA morphine by about 40%. Continuous morphine infusion diminishes the postoperative demand for PCA morphine, but also increases the total morphine consumption.     

Does Epidural Morphine Loading in Addition to Thoracic Epidural Analgesia Benefit the Postoperative Management of Morbidly Obese Patients Undergoing Open Bariatric Surgery? A Pilot Study

Background

Insufficient data exist regarding postoperative thoracic epidural analgesia for morbidly obese patients undergoing open bariatric surgery. This study evaluated the effectiveness of morphine loading in a postoperative thoracic epidural analgesic regimen of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with levobupivacaine combined with continuously administered epidural morphine in this patient group.

Methods

In this prospective randomized controlled trial, 48 superobese patients (body mass index of ≥50 kg/m²) undergoing open bariatric surgery were randomly allocated to three groups of 16 patients each. Postoperatively, all groups received a continuous epidural morphine infusion of 0.2 mg/h with 0.1 % levobupivacaine via PCEA. Group A did not receive intraoperative epidural morphine loading, while groups B and C received an intraoperative 1- and 2-mg morphine bolus, respectively. Levobupivacaine consumption via PCEA (primary outcome), pain scores at rest and on cough, the time to return of bowel function and ambulation, and arterial blood gas levels (secondary outcomes) were recorded.

Results

The increase in perioperative morphine administration (groups B and C) led to a significantly prolonged return to normal bowel function and delayed ambulation (P?Conclusions Thoracic PCEA with 0.1 % levobupivacaine combined with continuous epidural morphine administration of 0.2 mg/h without morphine loading is an effective postoperative analgesic regimen that provides adequate pain control, early ambulation, and early return of bowel function in superobese patients, particularly those with OSA.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia versus continuous epidural infusion with ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia in children

Epidural ropivacaine infusion has been used in children; however, patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) has not been evaluated in the pediatric population. In this study, we compared the clinical efficiency of PCEA and of continuous epidural infusion analgesia (CEA) in children. Forty-eight children undergoing orthopedic surgery were randomized to receive PCEA or CEA with ropivacaine 0.2%. All patients underwent a standard general anesthetic. Children also received ketoprofen and propacetamol. Pain scores and side effects were recorded for 48 h. If the visual analog score scale score was >4 of 10, analgesia was considered inadequate, and rescue treatment was administered. Both groups obtained effective pain relief. Children in the PCEA group received significantly less local anesthetic than those in the CEA group (0.20 +/- 0.08 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1) versus 0.40 +/- 0.08 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1); P < 0.001). Motor effects, supplemental analgesic requirements, and side effects did not differ. We concluded that PCEA with ropivacaine 0.2% can provide adequate postoperative analgesia for pediatric orthopedic procedures with smaller dose requirements than CEA. IMPLICATIONS: We studied patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and continuous epidural infusion analgesia (CEA) with 0.2% ropivacaine during the postoperative period in children. We found that either PCEA or CEA with plain ropivacaine 0.2% provided adequate pain relief in children during the first 48-h postoperative course. However, adequate analgesia was obtained with 50% less volume infused with PCEA compared with CEA.     

A comparison of three antiemetic combinations for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting

In this study we compared the efficacy and safety of three antiemetic combinations in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ninety ASA status I-II women, aged 18-65 yr, undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. A standardized anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia (intrathecal morphine plus IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine) were used in all patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1, n = 30), dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2, n = 30), or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and placebo 12 h later (Group 3, n = 30). A complete response, defined as no PONV in 48 h, occurred in 80% of patients in Group 1, 70% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 2 (P = 0.004 versus Groups 1 and 3). The incidences of side effects and other variables that could modify the incidence of PONV were similar among groups. In conclusion, ondansetron, in combination with droperidol or dexamethasone, is more effective than dexamethasone in combination with droperidol in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery with intrathecal morphine plus IV PCA with morphine for postoperative analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: The combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone or droperidol was significantly better than the combination of dexamethasone plus droperidol in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, with intrathecal and IV morphine (patient-controlled analgesia) for management of postoperative pain.     

Addition of 0.1% bupivacaine to buprenorphine and droperidol in patient-controlled epidural analgesia improved postoperative pain scores on coughing after gynecological surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic efficacy of additional 0.1% bupivacaine to patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using buprenorphine and droperidol after gynecological surgery. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: Operating theater and general ward at Jichi Medical School Hospital. PATIENTS: Thirty patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II scheduled for gynecological surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received combined general and epidural anesthesia for surgery and epidural analgesia for postoperative analgesia. Patients were assigned to receive PCEA with or without 0.1% bupivacaine. Group 1 (n = 15) received buprenorphine 20 microg and droperidol 0.1 mg diluted with saline, and group 2 (n = 15) received bupivacaine 2 mg, buprenorphine 20 microg, and droperidol 0.1 mg diluted with saline (0.1% bupivacaine solution) in a bolus dose of the PCEA, respectively. No background epidural infusion was used. MEASUREMENTS: Visual analog pain scale (VAPS) scores at rest and on coughing, and cumulative frequency of self-administrated analgesic solution in PCEA were recorded at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively. MAIN RESULTS: There were no significant differences noted between the groups in VAPS scores at rest or in cumulative volumes of PCEA solution in 24 or 48 hours postoperatively. Median VAPS scores on coughing in group 2 were significantly lower than those values in group 1 at 24 hours (36 vs 65 mm, P < .001) and 48 hours (32 vs 54 mm, P = .036) postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of 0.1% bupivacaine to PCEA using buprenorphine and droperidol provides better analgesia on coughing after gynecological surgery.     

Blood rheology in PCA and PCEA after total knee arthroplasty

The rheological events in 2 groups of patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty were compared--15 patients were given general anesthesia and controlled their postoperative pain applying intravenous patient-controlled analgesia; 17 individuals received combined spinal-epidural anesthesia and controlled their postoperative pain by patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). Twenty-four and 48 hours after surgery, the patient-controlled analgesia group showed a significant increase in whole-blood viscosity at the 3 shear rates (P < .01), as well as in relative viscosity at both periods (P < .001 and .01, respectively). Similar findings were observed for red blood cell aggregation (P < .001) and fibrinogen level (P < .001). These values were less expressed in the PCEA group, particularly 48 hours after surgery (P < .01), and the patients showed lower scores on the visual analog pain scale. The better results observed in the PCEA group favor the application of epidural anesthesia and PCEA analgesia in patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty.