The effects of caudal or intravenous clonidine on postoperative analgesia produced by caudal levobupivacaine in children

Background: Clonidine is used increasingly in pediatric anesthesia practice to prolong the duration of action of caudal block with a local anesthetic agent. Which route of administration of clonidine is the most beneficial remains unknown. We compared the effects of caudal and intravenous clonidine on postoperative analgesia produced by caudal levobupivacaine. Methods: Sixty ASA I and II children, aged 2–8 undergoing inguinal hernia repair or orchidopexy surgery received standardized premedication with midazolam and general anesthesia. The children were randomized in a double‐blind fashion to three groups. Group L (n = 20) patients received 0.75 ml·kg^?1 of caudal 0.25% levobupivacaine and i.v. 5 ml saline, Group L‐Ccau (n = 20) patients received 0.75 ml·kg^?1 of caudal 0.25% levobupivacaine + 2 μg·kg^?1 clonidine and i.v. 5 ml saline, Group L‐Civ (n = 20) patients received 0.75 ml·kg^?1 of caudal 0.25% levobupivacaine and i.v. 2 μg·kg^?1 clonidine in 5 ml of saline. Mean arterial blood pressure, heart rate, peripheral oxygen saturation, and end‐tidal carbon dioxide values were recorded. Postoperative pain [Children and Infants Postoperative Pain Scale (CHIPPS) score], sedation (Ramsay Sedation Scale) and motor blockade (Modified Bromage Scale) were assessed at predetermined time points during the first 24 h after surgery. Results: Caudal clonidine significantly delayed the time to first rescue analgesic and fewer patients required rescue analgesia in the 24 h after surgery. No motor block was observed in any of the three groups on awakening or during the study period. In Group L‐Ccau, the CHIPPS score was lower than in Group L at all times through 240 min (P < 0.05), while the pain scores were lower in Group L‐Civ only at extubation and at 240 min (P < 0.05). Conclusions: Caudal clonidine prolongs the duration of analgesia produced by caudal levobupivacaine without causing significant side effects and this is because of a spinal mode of action.     

Caudal morphine for postoperative analgesia in children: a comparison with caudal bupivacaine and intravenous morphine

We compared the efficacy, duration, and side effects of preservative-free morphine injected into the caudal space in children, with caudal bupivacaine and with intravenous morphine administration for relief of postoperative pain. Forty-six children, ages 1-16 yr, were randomly assigned to receive intravenous morphine (control group), caudal bupivacaine (0.25%, 1 ml/kg), or caudal morphine (0.5 mg/ml, 0.1 mg/kg). In half the patients given caudal morphine, the morphine was mixed with a dose of lidocaine adequate to produce sacral analgesia, to confirm correct caudal injection of the morphine. Caudal injections were performed at the end of surgery. Time until the first required postoperative intravenous morphine dose was recorded for each patient. The duration of analgesia was significantly greater with caudal morphine (median 12 hr, P less than 0.02) than with caudal bupivacaine (median 5 hr), and both were greater than with intravenous morphine in control patients (median 45 min). Urinary retention, pruritis, and nausea appeared with slightly greater frequency in the caudal morphine group, but no delayed respiratory depression occurred. Caudal morphine (0.5 mg/ml, 0.1 mg/kg) provided 8-24 hr of analgesia in children without a significantly greater incidence of side effects than caudal bupivacaine or intravenous morphine.     

Evaluation of adding preoperative or postoperative rectal paracetamol to caudal bupivacaine for postoperative analgesia in children

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to investigate whether effects of caudal analgesia could be extended by preoperative or postoperative rectal paracetamol administration in children undergoing surgical repair of hypospadias. METHODS: The group consisted of 60 ASA I boys, aged 3-12 years, who were operated for surgical repair of hypospadias. The patients were randomized into three groups: patients in group I received rectal paracetamol (20-25 mg x kg(-1)) just before the operation. Group II received only caudal bupivacaine. Group III patients received rectal paracetamol (20-25 mg x kg(-1)) at the end of the operation. Pain was assessed by Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Scale (CHEOPS) and the degree of sedation was evaluated. During the first 24 h, time to the patients' first analgesic requirement and the number of supplementary analgesics needed were recorded. RESULTS: There was no difference between the demographic and haemodynamic data of the three groups. In addition, the duration of surgery and anaesthesia, pain scores and sedation scores of the groups were not significantly different. CONCLUSIONS : Addition of preoperative or postoperative rectal paracetamol in the doses used did not show an effect on the duration and intensity of postoperative analgesia obtained by caudal bupivacaine.     

An evaluation of intrathecal bupivacaine combined with intrathecal or intravenous clonidine in children undergoing orthopedic surgery: a randomized double-blinded study

Background: Propofol is a popular agent for providing intraoperative sedation in pediatric population during lumbar puncture and spinal anesthesia. Adjuvant‐like clonidine is used increasingly in pediatric anesthesia to provide postoperative analgesia with a local anesthetic agent. The aim of this study was to assess the effects of intrathecal and intravenous clonidine on postoperative analgesia/sedation and intraoperative requirements of propofol after intrathecal bupivacaine for orthopedic surgery in children. Methods: Fifty‐nine ASA I and II children aged 6–8 year undergoing orthopedic surgery were randomized to receive intrathecal 0.5% bupivacaine 0.2–0.4 mg·kg^?1 and intravenous 2 ml saline (Group B), intrathecal 0.5% bupivacaine 0.2–0.4 mg·kg^?1 plus 1 μg·kg^?1 clonidine and intravenous 2 ml saline (Group BCit), and 0.5% bupivacaine 0.2–0.4 mg·kg^?1 and intravenous 1 μg·kg^?1 clonidine in 2 ml of saline (Group BCiv). Intraoperative sedation was maintained with 20–50 μg·kg^?1·min^?1 of propofol infusion. The requirements of propofol, time to first rescue analgesia, and postoperative pain or sedation scores were assessed. The duration of motor and sensory blocks and perioperative adverse events were determined. Results: Clonidine significantly prolonged the time to first rescue analgesia and reduced the requirements of propofol sedation whether administered intravenously or intrathecally. The mean Children and Infants Postoperative Pain Scale scores of children were significantly lower in groups BCit and BCiv than in group B. Postoperative sedation scores were higher in groups BCit and BCiv than in group B. Intrathecal clonidine significantly prolonged the time to regression of the sensory block and recovery of motor block. There were no significant differences among the three groups regarding the incidence of perioperative adverse events. Conclusion: Intrathecal or intravenous clonidine similarly provided better postoperative analgesia and sedation and reduced the requirements of propofol. Only intrathecal clonidine prolonged the duration of sensory and motor blocks.     

Double-blind randomized controlled trial of caudal versus intravenous S(+)-ketamine for supplementation of caudal analgesia in children

Background. The postoperative analgesic efficacy of S(+)-ketamineafter caudal or i.v. administration following sub-umbilicalsurgery in children was studied to investigate its principalsite of analgesic action. Methods. Sixty children undergoing caudal block during generalanaesthesia for hernia repair or orchidopexy were prospectivelyrandomized to one of three groups: the bupivicaine group receivedplain bupivacaine 0.25% 1 ml kg^–1; the caudal ketaminegroup received caudal plain bupivacaine 0.25% 1 ml kg^–1with S(+)-ketamine 0.5 mg kg^–1; the i.v. ketamine groupreceived caudal plain bupivacaine 0.25% 1 ml kg^–1 plusS(+)-ketamine 0.5 mg kg^–1 i.v.. Postoperative measurementsincluded analgesic requirements and modified objective painscore for the first 24 h. Results. The median time to first analgesia was significantlylonger in the caudal ketamine group (10 h) than in the i.v.ketamine (4.63 h) or bupivacaine (4.75 h) groups (P=0.01). Significantlyfewer doses of analgesia were required over the first postoperative24 h by subjects in the caudal ketamine group (median 1) comparedwith the i.v. ketamine (median 2) or bupivacaine (median 2.5)groups (P<0.05). There was no difference between the groupsin the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting or psychomotorreactions. Conclusions. We have demonstrated that the addition of caudalS(+)-ketamine to bupivacaine prolongs the duration of postoperativeanalgesia. However, the same dose of i.v. S(+)-ketamine combinedwith a plain bupivacaine caudal provides no better analgesiathan caudal bupivacaine alone, indicating that the principalanalgesic effect of caudal S(+)-ketamine results from a localneuroaxial rather than a systemic effect. Br J Anaesth 2004; 92: 344–7     

Midazolam for caudal analgesia in children: comparison with caudal bupivacaine

In a randomized, double-blind study we have examined the analgesic efficacy of caudal administration of midazolam, bupivacaine, or a mixture of both drugs in 45 children, undergoing inguinal herniotomy. They were allocated randomly into three groups (n = 15 in each) to receive a caudal injection of either 0.25% bupivacaine 1 ml · kg^?1 with or without midazolam 50 μg · kg^?1 or midazolam 50 μg · kg^?1 with normal saline 1 ml · kg^?1. There were no differences in quality of pain relief, postoperative behaviour or analgesic requirements between the midazolam group and the other two groups. Times to first analgesic administration (paracetamol suppositories) were longer (P < 0.001) in the bupivacaine-midazolam group than in the other two groups. Further, the bupivacaine-midazolam group received fewer (P < 0.05) doses of paracetamol than the bupivacaine group. Side effects such as motor weakness, respiratory depression or prolonged sedation were not observed in patients who received caudal epidural midazolam only. We conclude that caudal midazolam in a dose of 50 μg · kg^?1 provides equivalent analgesia to bupivacaine 0.25%, when administered postoperatively in a volume of 1 ml · kg^?1 for children following unilateral inguinal hemiotomy.

     

Comparison of caudal epidural bupivacaine with bupivacaine plus tramadol and bupivacaine plus ketamine for postoperative analgesia in children

This study compared the effect of single-dose caudal epidural bupivacaine, bupivacaine plus ketamine and bupivacaine plus tramadol for postoperative pain management in children having surgery for inguinal hernia. Following ethics committee approval and informed parental consent, 75 children ASA PS I and II, between three and nine years of age and scheduled for elective unilateral inguinal hernia repair with general anaesthesia were recruited. The patients were randomly divided into three groups to receive 0.5 ml/kg caudal bupivacaine 0.25% (group B), bupivacaine 0.25% plus tramadol 1 mg/kg (group BT) or bupivacaine 0.25% plus ketamine 0.5 mg/kg (group BK). The injections were performed under general anaesthesia. Mean arterial pressure, heart rate, pulse oximetry, respiratory rate and sedation and pain scores were recorded at defined intervals following recovery from anaesthesia. The groups were similar in age, weight and duration of operation (P >0.05). No patient experienced hypotension, bradycardia or respiratory depression. Duration of analgesia was (mean+/-SD) 6.5+/-4.1 h in group B, 9.2+/-3.9 h in group BK, and 8.5+/-3.1 h in group BT (P <0.05). More patients in group B required supplementary analgesics in the first 24 h (P <0.05). Sedation scores were comparable in all groups. Incidence of emesis and pruritus was similar in all the groups. Caudally administered 0.5 ml/kg bupivacaine 0.25% plus ketamine or bupivacaine 0.25% plus tramadol 1 mg/kg provided significantly longer duration of analgesia without an increase in the adverse effects when compared to bupivacaine alone.     

Caudal bupivacaine supplemented with caudal or intravenous clonidine in children undergoing hypospadias repair: a double-blind study

Background. Clonidine is used increasingly in paediatric anaestheticpractice to prolong the duration of action of caudal block witha local anaesthetic agent. Which route of administration ofclonidine is the most beneficial remains unknown. We comparedthe effects of caudal and i.v. clonidine on postoperative analgesiaproduced by caudal bupivacaine after hypospadias repair. Methods. Forty-six children (ASA I or II) aged 24–104months received standardized premedication with midazolam, ageneral anaesthetic and a caudal block with bupivacaine 0.25%,0.5 ml kg^–1. The children were randomized in a double-blindfashion to two groups: the i.v. group received clonidine 2 µg kg^–1i.v. and simultaneously the same volume of saline caudally.The caudal group received clonidine 2 µg kg^–1caudally and a similar volume of saline i.v. After surgery,all children received acetaminophen 20 mg kg^–1 rectallyor orally 6-hourly and were given a patient-controlled or nurse-controlledanalgesia (PCA/NCA) pump with i.v. morphine (bolus of 25 µg kg^–1and an 8-min lockout period with no background infusion). Monitoringof scores for pain, sedation, motor block, and postoperativenausea and vomiting was performed by nurses blinded to the studyallocations. Time to first activation of the PCA/NCA pump and0–24 h and 24–48 h morphine consumption were alsorecorded. Results. Forty-four children completed the study. Age, weightand duration of anaesthesia and surgery were similar in thetwo groups. The median (range) time to first activation of thePCA/NCA pump was similar in the two groups: 425 (150–1440)min in the i.v. group and 450 (130–1440) min in the caudalgroup. The number of children not requiring postoperative morphinewas four and seven respectively. Morphine consumption during0–24 h and 24–48 h was similar between groups. Conclusions. The analgesic effect of clonidine 2 µg kg^–1as an adjunct to caudal block with bupivacaine 0.25%, 0.5 ml kg^–1is similar whether administered i.v. or caudally. Br J Anaesth 2004; 92: 223–7     

Comparison between instillation of bupivacaine versus caudal analgesia for postoperative analgesia following inguinal herniotomy in children

BACKGROUND: In this study we compare the postoperative pain relief for inguinal herniotomy in children provided by instillation of bupivacaine into the wound with that provided by a caudal block. METHODS: Fifty-eight children aged 0-5 years having elective unilateral hernia repair were studied in this prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Anaesthesia was induced and maintained with oxygen, nitrous oxide, sevoflurane and propofol. Patients were randomly assigned to receive caudal analgesia with 1.0 ml.kg-1 body weight (BW) bupivacaine 0.25% or wound instillation with 0.2 ml.kg-1 BW bupivacaine 0.5% at the end of surgery. Pain was assessed over 24 h using a modified 10-point objective pain scale. During the first postoperative hour in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), intravenous (i.v.) piritramide (0.05 mg.kg-1) was administered to any child scoring 5 or more points on the pain scale. On the ward, rectal acetaminophen was administered by a staff nurse when considered necessary. RESULTS: Thirty children in the caudal group and 28 children in the wound instillation group were studied. There were no statistically significant differences between the groups regarding need for i.v. opioids, discharge time from the PACU and administration of acetaminophen. No statistically significant differences in postoperative pain score were observed in 16 of a total of 17 postoperative observations. No complications and no adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSION: Instillation of bupivacaine into a wound provides postoperative pain relief following hernia repair, which is as effective as that provided by a postoperative caudal block.     

Intraperitoneal aerosolization of bupivacaine reduces postoperative pain in laparoscopic surgery: a randomized prospective controlled double-blinded clinical trial

Background Laparoscopic strategies for managing intraabdominal pathologies offer significant benefits compared with conventional approaches. Of interest are reports of decreased postoperative pain, resulting in shorter hospitalization and earlier return to normal activity. However, many patients still require strong analgesia postoperatively. This study analyzed the use of intraoperatively delivered aerosolized intraperitoneal bupivacaine and its ability to reduce postoperative pain. Methods For this study, 80 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were recruited and divided randomly into four groups: control (n = 20), aerosolized bupivacaine (n = 20), aerosolized normal saline (n = 20), and local bupivacaine in the bladder bed (n = 20). All the patients had standard preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care. Pain scores were recorded by the nursing staff in recovery, then 6, 12, and 24 h postoperatively using a standard 0 to 10 pain scoring scale. In addition, opiate consumption and oral analgesia were recorded. Results Aerosolized bupivacaine significantly reduced postoperative pain in comparison with all other treatments (p < 0.05). Injection of bupivacaine into the gallbladder bed did not result in a significant difference from the control condition. Conclusion Aerosolized intraperitoneal local anesthetic is an effective method for controlling postoperative pain. It significantly helped to reduce opiate use and contributed to rapid mobilization, leading to short hospitalization and possible reduction in treatment cost.     

Comparison of the effects of adrenaline, clonidine and ketamine on the duration of caudal analgesia produced by bupivacaine in children

Sixty boys, aged 1-10 yr, undergoing orchidopexy were allocated randomly to receive one of three solutions for caudal extradural injection. Group A received 0.25% bupivacaine 1 ml kg-1 with adrenaline 5 micrograms ml-1 (1/200,000), group C received 0.25% bupivacaine 1 ml kg-1 with clonidine 2 micrograms kg-1 and group K received 0.25% bupivacaine 1 ml kg-1 with ketamine 0.5 mg kg-1. Postoperative pain was assessed using a modified objective pain score and analgesia was administered if this score exceeded 4. The median duration of caudal analgesia was 12.5 h in group K compared with 5.8 h in group C (P < 0.05) and 3.2 h in group A (P < 0.01). There were no differences between the groups in the incidence of motor block, urinary retention or postoperative sedation.      

Low-dose spinal hyperbaric bupivacaine for adult anorectal surgery: a double-blinded,randomized, controlled study

Background and objectiveTo produce selective spinal anesthesia for adult anorectal surgery.Study designDouble-blinded, randomized, controlled trial.SettingOperating room and postoperative recovery area.Patients152 adult, consecutive ASA physical status I, II, and III patients.InterventionsAfter patients underwent dural puncture in the sitting position at L3-L4 or L4-L5, 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine was injected over two minutes: Group S7.5 received 1.5 mL, Group S5 received 1.0 mL, and Group S4 0.8 mL. After sitting for 10 minutes, patients were positioned for surgery.MeasurementsRate of success, level and duration of sensory and motor block, time to voiding and ambulation, complications, and quality of anesthesia according to the patient and medical staff, were recorded.ResultsSpinal block had a 98% rate of success. Mean level of sensory block was 10.4 ± 1.7, 7.4 ± 2.2, and 7.0 ± 1.8 dermatomes in Groups S7.5, S5, and S4 (P < 0.01 S7.5 vs S5, and S7.5 vs S4). Mean duration of sensory block was 310.5 ± 42.6, 255.9 ± 43.7, and 228.8 ± 34.8 min in Groups S7.5, S5, and S4 (P < 0.01 S7.5 vs S5, S7.5 vs S4, and S5 vs S4). Motor block was Bromage score 2-3 in 70.5% of Group S7.5 patients versus Bromage score 0-1 in 97.3% of Group S5 and 92.1% of Group S4 patients (P < 0.05).ConclusionA dose of 4 mg of hyperbaric bupivacaine produces a similar level of sensory and motor block as a 5 mg dose but with shorter duration and faster recovery.     

Postoperative analgesia using caudal morphine in pediatric surgery: randomized double-blind study compared with bupivacaine

Morphine and bupivacaine have been administered caudal via to 28 children between 2 and 12 years old for the postoperative pain treatment. All of them were submitted to general anesthesia and randomly divided into 3 groups depending on the drug administered caudal via. a) Morphine group (n = 10): morphine chlorhydrate 50 micrograms/kg (0.5 ml/kg of morphine solution 100 micrograms/ml). b) Bupivacaine group (n = 10): bupivacaine 0.5%, 2.5 mg/kg. c) Control group (n = 8): no drug administered. Pain evaluation was made on the basis of physiological and clinical data. In the morphine group, the postoperative time until analgesia was required 20 +/- 5 hours and analgesia has been significantly better (p less than 0.001) than bupivacaine and control group. The number of analgesic drug needed during the postoperative 24 first hours was also less in morphine group. No differences on postoperative complications were seen among the 3 groups and no case of respiratory depression was observed. It is concluded that epiduro-caudal morphine provides effective and prolonged analgesia and can be safely used for postoperative pain treatment in pediatric urologic surgery. However, we believe, that larger series of patients will provide better information of its efficacy and other side effects.     

A comparison of single dose caudal tramadol, tramadol plus bupivacaine and bupivacaine administration for postoperative analgesia in children

BACKGROUND: Our aim was to compare the effect of single dose caudal tramadol, tramadol plus bupivacaine and bupivacaine on the management of postoperative pain in children. METHODS: Sixty-three children in ASA groups I-II, between the ages of 1 and 5 were evaluated for postoperative pain randomly divided into three groups as follows: In group T, only tramadol was given caudally; in group TB, tramadol-bupivacaine was given caudally; in group B, bupivacaine was given alone. Pain was evaluated by using the paediatric objective pain scale (POPS). Sedation was evaluated with a 5-point test. There were no differences with age, weight, haemodynamic and respiratory parameters between groups. RESULTS: For 24 h postoperatively, the POPS value showed no statistically significant difference among groups (P > 0.05). Postoperative analgesia was maintained for 24 h. Nausea and vomiting was found to be higher in the tramadol group than in the bupivacaine group and tramadol-bupivacaine group (P < 0.001 and P < 0.01, respectively). CONCLUSION: Tramadol used caudally is as effective as bupivacaine in the management of postoperative pain in children and the addition of tramadol to bupivacaine, when both drugs were administered caudally, did not prolong the duration of action of bupivacaine and is a safe agent in children.     

Levobupivacaine caudal anesthesia in children: a randomized double-blind comparison with bupivacaine

BACKGROUND: Levobupivacaine is the pure S-enantiomer of bupivacaine. Despite obvious benefits in the event of accidental intravascular injection there has been no studies demonstrating a clinically significant benefit to levobupivacaine over racemic bupivacaine for pediatric regional anesthesia. Given the similar pharmacokinetic profiles of both drugs the studies to date have been underpowered to demonstrate what is likely to be a small difference in clinical effectiveness. Our aim was to determine if there are significant differences in the clinical effectiveness of levobupivacaine compared with racemic bupivacaine for caudal anesthesia in children having lower abdominal surgery. A secondary aim was to determine if there are differences in the incidence of postoperative motor blockade between these agents. METHODS: Three hundred and ten children ranging in age from 1 month to 10.75 years in age having lower abdominal surgery were enrolled. Patients were randomized in a double blind manner to receive a caudal block with either 0.25% bupivacaine (n = 152) or 0.25% levobupivacaine (n = 155) to a total volume of 1 ml x kg(-1). Motor blockade (modified Bromage scale) and postoperative pain or distress (FLACC behavioral scale for postoperative pain) were measured at predetermined time points during the subsequent 120 min. RESULTS: There were no significant adverse effects attributable to levobupivacaine. Success rates were defined as a lack of hemodynamic response to first surgical incision and low postoperative pain scores. At a mean duration of 5 min between block completion and first incision success for 1 ml x kg(-1) of 0.25% bupivacaine was 91% and 94% for 0.25% levobupivacaine. Satisfactory postoperative analgesia was present in 98% of patients after bupivacaine caudal anesthesia and 97.5% for levobupivacaine. At 30 min following caudal anesthesia the incidence of postoperative motor block with racemic bupivacaine was 84% and decreased to 7% at 120 min. For levobupivacaine motor block at 30 min postcaudal was present in 85% and decreased to 11% at 120 min. CONCLUSIONS: Levobupivacaine is an effective agent for caudal anesthesia in children at a recommended dose of 2.5 mg x kg(-1). The rapidity of onset was suitable for establishment of surgical anesthesia and postoperative analgesia was achieved in greater than 97.5% of patients. It appears to be of equivalent potency to racemic bupivacaine in children requiring lower abdominal surgery.