Day case hernia repair under local versus general anaesthesia: patient preferences

In selected patients, day case herniorrhaphy has a similar clinical outcome but is more economical than in-patient care. Herniorrhaphy may be performed under local (LA) or general anaesthesia (GA). GA requires an anaesthetist and greater post-operative nursing care. A survey of 75 patients awaiting open hernia repair revealed that when allowed to make an ‘informed choice', 91% of patients who were fit for GA or LA preferred day case surgery. Whilst 20% did not express a preference for the type of anaesthesia, 33% had a strong preference for LA and 47% for GA. Preference for GA was associated with previous adverse experiences with LA and an assumed feeling of anxiety if awake during surgery. Measures are needed to improve patient acceptability of day case hernia repair, especially under LA, which makes clinical and economic sense.     

Preoperative application of piroxicam gel compared to a local anaesthetic field block for postoperative analgesia

The non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs inhibit prostaglandin synthesis and hence have an analgesic action. Following topical administration, the drug is concentrated in the tissues and so can have a local analgesic effect. This study investigated the effect of the preoperative application of topical piroxicam on postoperative analgesic requirement compared to a placebo group and a conventional local anaesthetic field block.
Forty-two patients presenting for in-patient inguinal hernia repair were randomly allocated on a double-blind basis to have either piroxicam gel 15gm applied preoperatively, or an inguinal field block with 20ml of 0.375% bupivacaine following induction of anaesthesia, or no treatment. Postoperative Visual Analogue Scores for pain on moving in group P, I or C on admission and at 1 h, 2 h, and 4 h following surgery were: 2 vs 1 vs 6.5; 3 vs 3 vs 5; 3 v 2 vs 4.5; 3 vs 2 vs 5.0, respectively (P<0.005). Median(range) time to first analgesia was 25.4(15–70) min in group 1,30.3(10–49) min in group P; this was not significantly different from group C 21.5(7–70) min. Over the first 24 hours the postoperative morphine requirement was significantly less in the two treatment groups 30(20)mg in group I and 34(17)mg in group P and 71(15) in group C, P<0.0001. There were no apparent NSAID-induced side-effects, or effects on wound healing.
The preoperative administration of piroxicam (15gm) topically compared favourably with a preoperative local anaesthetic field block with respect to VAS scores, time to first analgesia and total morphine consumption. And both treatment groups provided significantly superior analgesia than the control group.     

Effectiveness of intra-operative wound infiltration with long-acting local anaesthetic

Background : Postoperative pain relief is of importance to both patients and surgeons. One of the simpler techniques is infiltration of the surgical incision with long acting local anaesthetic. The literature is confusing, with numerous reports attesting to the value of this approach and a similar number disputing the demonstrable benefits. Methods : A prospective, ‘blinded’, randomized trial was undertaken involving 18 females undergoing uncomplicated bilateral sapheno‐femoral ligation. They received intraoperative bupivacaine infiltration into one or the other of their groin incisions. Postoperatively these patients were asked to assess a number of variables relating to their postoperative pain, each patient thereby acting as their own control. Results : There was no significant difference in the postoperative pain experience between groins infiltrated with bupivacaine and those not infiltrated. Two patients developed wound infections and both of these occurred on the sides which had been infiltrated with bupivacaine, however this was not statistically significant. There was no difference found in pain experience with respect to pre‐ versus post‐incision infiltration. Conclusion : Intraoperative wound infiltration with bupivacaine is widely employed as a method of minimizing postoperative pain. This study was unable to demonstrate a benefit of employing the technique in terms of a reduction in the patient’s perception of pain. By having each patient act as their own control, we have avoided one of the major deficiencies of previous studies, namely, interpatient variability in assessment and perception of pain.     

Regional anaesthesia for outpatient knee arthroscopy: a randomized clinical comparison of two different anaesthetic techniques

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this prospective, randomized study was to evaluate the time required to perform anaesthesia, achieve surgical block and fulfil standardized discharge criteria in outpatients receiving knee arthroscopy with either spinal anaesthesia or combined sciatic-femoral nerve block. METHODS: After a standard midazolam/ketoprofen premedication and baseline measurement of cardiovascular parameters, 50 ASA I-II patients scheduled for elective outpatient knee arthroscopy were randomized to receive spinal anaesthesia with 8 mg of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine (group Spinal, n=25), or combined sciatic-femoral nerve block with 25 ml of mepivacaine 20 mg ml(-1) and a multiple injection technique (15 ml for femoral nerve block and 10 ml for sciatic nerve block). Times lasting from skin disinfection to the end of local anaesthetic injection (preparation time) and then to achieve surgical anaesthesia (readiness for surgery), as well as times required for block resolution, micturition, unassisted ambulation, and home discharge were recorded by a blinded observer. Occurrence of adverse events was also recorded. RESULTS: Preparation time (mean+/-SD) was longer with sciatic-femoral block (8+/-2.7 min) than spinal anaesthesia (5+/-2.1 min) (P=0.0002) while no differences were observed in the time required to achieve readiness for surgery (14+/-5 min and 15+/-6 min in the Spinal and Sciatic-femoral groups, respectively). No differences in haemodynamic side effects and need for intraoperative additional analgesia were observed. Patients receiving spinal anaesthesia showed a faster resolution of nerve block and longer time to micturition (137+/-49 min and 231+/-101 min) than patients receiving peripheral nerve blockade (206+/-51 min and 145+/-36 min) (P<0.0005 and P=0.002, respectively); however, no differences were observed in the time required to fulfil standardized discharge criteria (241+/-101 min in group Spinal and 209+/-70 min in group Sciatic-femoral; P=0.86). CONCLUSION: In patients receiving elective outpatient knee arthroscopy, using a combined sciatic-femoral nerve block with 25 ml of mepivacaine 20 mg ml(-1) and a multiple injection technique results in a slightly longer preoperative time but provides similarly effective anaesthesia with no differences in home discharge times as compared to spinal anaesthesia with 8 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine.     

Safety and efficacy of extended-release bupivacaine local anaesthetic in open hernia repair: a randomized controlled trial

Background: Pain relief remains a major problem in hernia surgery. SABER‐Bupivacaine is an investigational extended‐release formulation of bupivacaine in a resorbable matrix, which may provide up to 72 h of local pain relief. Methods: A double‐blinded, randomized controlled trial was undertaken to evaluate the safety and efficacy of SABER‐Bupivacaine. Consented patients (n= 124) undergoing open inguinal hernia repair at five sites in Australia and New Zealand were randomized to receive either 2.5 (330 mg) or 5.0 mL (660 mg) of SABER‐Bupivacaine or SABER‐Placebo administered to the surgical wound at the end of the procedure. Analgesic efficacy and safety was evaluated. Results: SABER‐Bupivacaine appeared safe with no difference in the incidence of side effects compared with SABER‐Placebo. The 5.0 mL dose of SABER‐Bupivacaine reduced the mean area under the curve of pain intensity on movement compared with SABER‐Placebo (2.47 versus 3.60; P= 0.0033) and decreased the number of patients requiring supplemental opioids by 26% (although not statistically significant; P= 0.0909). Normal wound healing was reported throughout the trial and at 3‐ and 6‐month follow‐up in every treatment group. Conclusion: After open inguinal hernia repair, SABER‐Bupivacaine administered at the surgical site was safe and provided pain relief, reduced the need for supplemental (oral and parenteral) analgesia and did not impair wound healing.     

局麻下前入路改良Kugel腹股沟疝无张力修补术的临床应用

目的探讨在局麻下应用前入路改良Kugel施行腹股沟疝无张力修补术的可行性及优越性。方法回顾性分析并随访我院近2年来在局麻下施行的改良Kugel的无张力腹股沟疝修补术22例(25侧),对患者手术前合并症、手术时间、手术方式、术后镇痛药应用、术后并发症、术后住院天数以及平均总住院费用进行综合分析。结果本组患者手术过程顺利,麻醉效果好,术后疼痛耐受好,不需应用镇痛药物,并发症少,平均手术时间55min(35~110min),术后住院天数3~8d,术后随访无疼痛发生。结论局麻下应用改良Kugel实施微创腹股沟疝无张力修补术是可行的,该方式具有简便、安全、快捷、患者耐受性好、并发症少、费用低廉、术后恢复快、学习曲线短等优点,尤其适合于合并多种慢性疾病的老年患者。     

Postoperative analgesia in herniorrhaphy with local anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care

Summary In this study the authors evaluated the grade of acceptance and the operating conditions of unilateral primary herniorrhaphy under local anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care (MAC). The amount of pain in the immediate postoperative period was assessed and the efficacy of treatment using a popular non-opiate analgesic, magnesic metamizol, by the oral route was studied. In a period of six months 63 consecutive patients were operated on by the same surgeon using the same technique of hernia repair (Shouldice technique) with local infiltration anesthesia supplemented by MAC in the form of conscious sedation. A mixture of 300 mg of plain mepivacaine and 50 mg of plain bupivacaine was used for infiltration. A standard dose of fentanyl 0.10 mg and midazolam 2 mg was used for conscious sedation. Propofol in continuous infusion was also employed. The average dose of propofol varied from 1–3 mg/kg/h. Conscious level was assessed using a five-point sedation score. A level-3 end point was persued (closed eyes, but answer verbal orders). Pain intensity in the postoperative period was measured by the visual analogue scale (VAS) and the verbal pain scale (VPS), based on the McGill pain questionnaire. The operating conditions were excellent in all cases except in three patients. In no case conversion to general anesthesia was necessary. In the postoperative period, 5 patients (8%) never felt pain and 58 (92%) felt pain on the average 4 hours 36 minutes after the local infiltration (VAS=2.5; VPS=1.45). Of the 58 patients 49 took the first dose of oral analgesic 6 hours 40 minutes after infiltration (VAS=4; VPS=1.97). All patients were satisfied with the anesthetic-surgical technique and were ready to repeat the experience. However, when the patients took the second dose of oral analgesic 28% of them had moderate pain and 9% severe pain. Our conclusions are that local infiltration with MAC is a valid and satisfying experience for both the patient and the surgeon. Nevertheless, further attempts should be made to better the postoperative pain relief when the oral route is elected.     

Pre-emptive analgesia with local anaesthetic for herniorrhaphy

There is little evidence that local anaesthetics produce pre-emptive analgesia and one reason may be the short duration of action of the drugs studied. We examined the pre-emptive analgesic effect of a bupivacaine field block on postoperative pain in 40 patients following herniorrhaphy in a double-blind, randomised trial. Patients received the block either after induction but before surgery, or after surgery but before the end of anaesthesia. There was no difference in pain scores or analgesic consumption up to 7 days after surgery between the two groups. We have demonstrated that bupivacaine does not appear to provide significant pre-emptive analgesia following a field block for herniorrhaphy. This study does not support the hypothesis that pre-emptive analgesia with local anaesthetic depends upon the duration of action of the drug.     

The combination of morphine with local anaesthetic in rhinoplasty - no evidence of a peripheral morphine effect

Background: The recognition of a peripheral opioid action has prompted a number of clinical reports demonstrating a prolonged analgesic effect of peripheral opiate. As most studies have used a model of intraarticular instillation of narcotic we examined direct morphine infiltration of the surgical site in a unique clinical model. Methods: Sixty patients undergoing primary rhinoplasty were entered into this prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Patients received a standard protocol of premedication, intravenous sedation, and nasal block. Two 2 ml syringes containing saline or morphine 3 mg in saline were provided for IM injection and for addition to the local anesthetic (IW, intrawound): Group I (control) - saline IW, saline IM; Group II -morphine IW, saline IM; Group III - saline IW, morphine IM. Intraoperative assessments included need for further sedation, need for further local anesthetic, and degree of bleeding. Recovery room analgesic requirements, pain scores, and recall of intraoperative pain were recorded prior to discharge. Followup phone calls at 24 hours recorded home pain scores and analgesic use during the first postoperative day. Results: Significantly more patients in Group II (9/20) required supplemental local anesthetic intraoperatively compared to Group I (2/20) and Group III (0/20). Significantly more patients in Group II (6/20) recalled their surgical experience as painful compared to Group I (1/20) and Group III (1/20). Group II patients also evidenced significantly more operative bleeding. There were no differences in postoperative pain scores, but Group I patients required analgesic in the recovery room significantly more than in Groups II and III (85% vs 45% and 50%, respectively). There were no differences between groups in analgesic consumption at home. Conclusions: The results of this study indicate that the preoperative injection of intrawound morphine in combination with the local anesthetic both promotes bleeding and has an early pain-enhancing effect while providing no late analgesic benefit beyond that of IM morphine.     

Wound infiltration of local anaesthetic after lower segment Caesarean section

The analgesic efficacy of subcutaneous wound infiltration with 20 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine after elective lower segment section Caesarean section was studied in 28 patients in a double-blind randomised controlled manner using a patient-controlled analgesia system. The mean 24-hour morphine consumption of the placebo group and the bupivacaine group was similar (76 mg and 68 mg respectively). Analysis of the cumulative hourly morphine consumption failed to show any statistically significant differences between the groups. However, on a weight-adjusted basis statistically significant differences in morphine consumption were demonstrated, although these may not be clinically important. Subjective experiences of pain, nausea and drowsiness assessed by linear analogue scoring were similar in both groups.     

Postoperative pain relief and recovery with ropivacaine infiltration after inguinal hernia repair

The purpose of this study was to assess the analgesic effects of wound infiltration with 300 mg ropivacaine. A total of 77 inpatients scheduled for inguinal hernia repair were randomized, to receive postoperative local infiltration with 40 ml ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml or placebo. Wound pain, consumption of analgesics and time when patients were fit for discharge were assessed. Pain scores upon mobilization and coughing were significantly lower in the ropivacaine group over 0–24 h. At rest, this difference was noted until 12 h. The mean time to the first request for analgesics was significantly longer in the ropivacaine group. The consumption of analgesics was comparable. The median time when patients were fit for discharge occurred significantly earlier in the ropivacaine group. Wound infiltration with ropivacaine after inguinal hernia repair results in lower postoperative pain scores, delays the requirement for additional analgesics, and allows earlier patient discharge.     

气管内硬膜外联合麻醉下的超前镇痛

目的研究气管内硬膜外联合麻醉下,硬膜外给药时间不同、全麻诱导药物不同对术后镇痛产生的影响。方法开腹行切除肝癌、胃癌的病人120例,随机分为A、B、C、D4组,每组30例。A组:在T8-9经硬膜外注入1%利多卡因和0.25%布比卡因混合液6～8ml,再经硬膜外注入含吗啡2mg、氟哌利多2.5mg的生理盐水10ml;全身麻醉诱导药物为芬太尼3μg·kg-1,异丙酚1～1.5mg·kg-1,琥珀胆碱2mg·kg-1。B组:诱导药物中不使用芬太尼,用利多卡因1～1.5mg·kg-1代替,术中也不使用芬太尼,其余条件同A组。C组:在T8-9行硬膜外穿刺,之后行全身麻醉诱导,诱导药物为芬太尼3μg·kg-1,异丙酚2～2.5mg·kg-1,琥珀胆碱2mg·kg-1,必要时可加芬太尼2～3μg·kg-1。切皮后90min,经硬膜外注入1%利多卡因和0.25%布比卡因6～8ml,再经硬膜外注入含吗啡2mg、氟哌利多2.5mg的生理盐水10ml。D组:诱导药物中不使用芬太尼,用利多卡因1～1.5mg·kg-1代替,术中也不使用芬太尼,其余条件同C组。分别于术毕后4、8、24、48h观测VAS、镇痛药消耗量、恶心、呕吐、骚痒等指标。结果A组的药物消耗量最少、镇痛效果最好;B组和C组次之;D组的药物消耗量最大,镇痛效果最差。结论硬膜外复合气管内麻醉时,硬膜外麻醉与芬太尼同时使用,术后镇痛效果最好。     

局麻下应用UHS与Lichtenstein两种术式治疗腹股沟疝的疗效对比分析

目的分析局麻下应用超普疝修补装置(UHS)与补片行李金斯坦(Lichtenstein)两种无张力疝修补术式在腹股沟疝修补中的临床疗效。方法 280例老年腹股沟疝患者按随机分组原则分为UHS组(A组)和Lichtenstein组(B组)。A组132例,B组148例。均在局麻下行无张力疝修补术,比较两组的手术时间、术后平均住院时间、术后并发症和复发率。结果两组手术时间、术后平均住院时间方面,差异无统计学意义(P0.05),两组术后发生血肿、阴囊水肿、腹股沟区慢性疼痛、切口感染、缺血性睾丸炎等并发症比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05),A组切口感染1例,B组切口感染2例,最后均能治愈。术后随访1年,A组无复发患者,B组复发3例,复发率为2%(3/148)。两组复发率比较差异无统计学意义(P0.05)。结论局麻下行李金斯坦及UHS无张力修补手术均具有手术时间短,术后恢复快,安全性高,复发率低等优点,直疝、复合疝UHS手术疗效优于Lichtenstein手术。     

Peribulbar anaesthesia using a mixture of local anaesthetic and vecuronium

The aim of this double-blind, randomised study was to assess the effects of the addition of 0.5 mg of vecuronium bromide to a standard local anaesthetic mixture used for peribulbar anaesthesia. We studied 60 patients undergoing regional anaesthesia for intra-ocular surgery and were primarily interested in the quality of globe and lid akinesia. All received a mixture of 5 ml 2% lignocaine with 1:200 000 adrenaline, 5 ml 0.75% bupivacaine and 150 IU hyaluronidase with either 0.9% saline 0.25 ml (group A, n  = 30) or vecuronium bromide 0.25 ml (0.5 mg) (group B, n  = 30). Eye movements assessed at both 5 and 10 min were significantly reduced in the vecuronium group (group B) (p < 0.05). We conclude that the addition of vecuronium at a dose of 0.5 mg to the standard local anaesthetic mixture improves the quality of globe and lid akinesia.     

局部麻醉施行无张力疝修补术(附357例报告)

目的探讨局部麻醉施行无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝的可行性，并总结临床经验。方法局部麻醉下无张力疝修补术治疗腹股沟疝357例，对麻醉效果及手术时间、并发症和复发率进行回顾性分析。结果病人术中疼痛耐受良好，平均手术时间42min，3～24h内可以下床活动，术后平均住院时间3．6d。术后出现尿潴留2例，切口皮下脂肪液化2例，阴囊积液2例，补片异物反应1例，并发症发生率为1．96％(7／357)。随访2个月～5年未见复发病例。结论局麻下施行无张力疝修补术具有快捷、安全、疗效好和疼痛耐受良好等优点，能明显降低手术并发症、住院时间和住院费用，局麻尤其适合老年人及合并慢性疾患的腹股沟疝患者。     

Peribulbar anaesthesia: a double-blind comparison of three local anaesthetic solutions

A prospective, randomised, double-blinded study comparing three agents for peribulbar anaesthesia is reported. Sixty patients undergoing extracapsular cataract extraction under local anaesthesia were randomly allocated to receive peribulbar anaesthesia with lignocaine 2% with adrenaline; prilocaine 3% with felypressin 0.03 IU.ml-1 or 2% lignocaine and 0.5% bupivacaine in a ratio of 1:1, using a standardised two-injection technique. The pain of injection, time of onset of the block and the operating conditions at the start and finish of surgery were assessed. Peribulbar anaesthesia using lignocaine 2% was significantly more painful than the other solutions. The onset of anaesthesia adequate for surgery was similar in all three groups. Prilocaine 3% with felypressin was associated with the greatest number of blocks providing total akinesia of the eye. Inadequate duration of anaesthesia was seen in only one case; the solution used for this block was 2% lignocaine.     

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.     

Pre-emptive effect of pre-incisional versus post-incisional infiltration of local anaesthesia on children undergoing hernioplasty

Background: Although promising in experimental studies of post-traumatic pain, the concept of pre-emptive analgesia is still controversial in a clinical setting. Thus, we wanted to compare the clinical efficacy of wound infiltration with local anaesthesia before surgery with wound infiltration after hernioplasty in children. Methods: Fifty children aged 2–10 years scheduled for hernioplasty were randomly assigned into two groups. Group 1 (n=28) was infiltrated before surgery with bupivacaine 2.5mg/ml, lmg/kg after induction of general anaesthesia. After surgery they were infiltrated with the same volume of 0.9% saline. Group 2 (n=22) was infiltrated with 0.9% saline before surgery and bupivacaine 2.5 mg/ml, lmg/kg after surgery. The study was performed double-blindly. In both groups anaesthesia was induced with thiopenthone and maintained with nitrous oxide and halothane, adjusted to keep haemodynamic measurements stable. All children were given paracetamol 15–20 mg/kg rectally when admitted to the recovery ward. Painscore (OPS) and analgesic requirements were registered postoperatively. After 48 h the parents completed a standardised questionnaire and they were interviewed by telephone after one week. Results: The pre-incisional group needed significantly less halothane during the procedure compared with the post-incisional group (P<0.05). The pre-incisional group also had a tendency towards faster awakening after the end of anaesthesia and a significantly lower OPS-pain score 30 min after the operation (P<0.03). There were no differences between the two groups regarding need for additional analgesia: meperidine i.v. during the first 5 h postoperatively, and paracetamol thereafter. There were no differences between the groups regarding activity level, appetite and quality of sleep in the first week. In both groups the need for opioid analgesics was low:54% in the pre-incisional group and 45% in the post-incisional group did not receive any opioid analgesic treatment. The children were virtually fully recovered after the first 24 h. Conclusion: Perioperative infiltration with a local anaesthetic in children undergoing hernioplasty results in a smooth recovery with little need for opioids postoperatively. Apart from a lower anaesthetic requirement and a reduced postoperative pain level after 30 min in the pre-incisional bupivacaine group, there was no difference between infiltration before (pre-emptive) or after surgery.     

Thoracic epidural anaesthesia and analgesia: United Kingdom practice

BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural analgesia has become increasingly practised in recent years. Complications are rare but potentially serious and, consequently, careful evaluation is required before undertaking this technique. The practice surrounding this procedure varies widely amongst anaesthetists. METHODS: A postal survey to examine the practice of thoracic epidural analgesia was sent to all Royal College of Anaesthetists tutors in the United Kingdom. RESULTS: Responses were received from 240 tutors, representing a return rate of 83%. When obtaining consent for thoracic epidural cannulation, 42% of respondents mentioned risk of a dural tap complication and 11% mentioned neurological damage. Fifty percent of respondents performed epidural cannulation following induction of general anaesthesia. The practice of epidural insertion in patients with abnormal coagulation varied, although over 80% of respondents did not consider concurrent treatment with either aspirin or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs a contraindication. Sterile precautions for epidural insertion also varied between anaesthetists. Postoperatively, 95% of respondents used an opioid-based bupivacaine solution for epidural infusions, and these were most commonly nursed on general surgical wards (63%). Seventy-eight percent of hospitals provided an acute pain team to review epidural analgesia. CONCLUSION: In the United Kingdom, there is little consensus in the practice of thoracic epidural analgesia relating to the issues of informed consent, epidural cannulation in patients with deranged clotting and the sterile precautions taken prior to performing epidural insertion. Most respondents use an opioid-based bupivacaine solution to provide postoperative epidural analgesia. Most hospitals in the UK now provide an acute pain service for thoracic epidural follow-up.