Patient-controlled interscalene analgesia with ropivacaine after major shoulder surgery: PCIA vs PCA

We have compared the efficacy of patient-controlled interscalene analgesia (PCIA) using ropivacaine with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) using nicomorphine in 60 patients (n = 30 in each group), in a prospective, randomized study. In both groups, all patients received interscalene block with 0.75% ropivacaine before induction of anaesthesia. Six hours after interscalene block, patients in group PCIA received continuous infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine at a rate of 5 ml h-1 with a bolus dose of 3 or 4 ml and a lockout time of 20 min; patients in group PCA received continuous infusion of nicomorphine 0.5 mg h-1 and a bolus dose of 2 or 3 mg with a lockout time of 20 min. Control of pain was significantly better from 12 to 48 h after operation (except at 42 h) in group PCIA. Nausea and pruritus occurred significantly more frequently in group PCA. Patient satisfaction was greater in group PCIA. We conclude that the use of 0.2% ropivacaine using PCIA was an efficient way of managing pain after major shoulder surgery and compared favourably with PCA nicomorphine in terms of pain relief, side effects and patient satisfaction.      

Patient-controlled interscalene analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% versus patient-controlled intravenous analgesia after major shoulder surgery: effects on diaphragmatic and respiratory function

BACKGROUND: The authors compared the effects of patient-controlled interscalene analgesia (PCIA) with ropivacaine 0.2% and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIVA) with opioids on hemidiaphragmatic excursion and respiratory function after major shoulder surgery. METHODS: Thirty-five patients scheduled for elective major shoulder surgery were prospectively randomized to receive either PCIA or PCIVA. All patients received an interscalene block before surgery. In the PCIA group, a catheter was introduced between the anterior and middle scalene muscles. Six hours after the initial block, patients received for 48 h either a continuous infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine through the interscalene catheter at a rate of 5 ml/h plus a bolus dose of 3 or 4 ml with a lockout time of 20 min (PCIA group) or a continuous intravenous infusion of nicomorphine at a rate or 0.5 mg/h plus a bolus dose of 2 or 3 mg with a lockout time of 20 min (PCIVA group). Hemidiaphragmatic excursion and respiratory function were assessed with the patient in a 45 degrees semirecumbent position the day before the operation and 20 min (in the operating room), 24 h, and 48 h after the initial block by means of ultrasonography and spirometry, respectively. Pain relief was regularly assessed, side effects were noted, and patient satisfaction was rated 6 h after the end of the study. RESULTS: Hemidiaphragmatic excursion was similar in the two groups 20 min after interscalene block. Hemidiaphragmatic excursion was increased in the PCIA group on the nonoperated side 24 and 48 h after the interscalene block (P < 0.05). Pulmonary function was similar in the two groups at each time. Pain was better controlled in the PCIA group at 12 and 24 h (P < 0.05). The incidence of nausea and vomiting were 5.5% versus 60% for the PCIA and PCIVA groups, respectively (P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction was greater in the PCIA group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of PCIA or PCIVA techniques to provide analgesia after major shoulder surgery is associated with similar effects on respiratory function. In the PCIA group, hemidiaphragmatic excursion showed a significantly greater amplitude 24 and 48 h after the initial block on the nonoperated side. The PCIA technique provided better pain control, a lower incidence of side effects, and a higher degree of patient satisfaction.     

Patient-controlled interscalene analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% versus bupivacaine 0.15% after major open shoulder surgery: the effects on hand motor function

We compared the effects of patient-controlled interscalene analgesia with ropivacaine 0.2% and patient-controlled interscalene analgesia (PCIA) with bupivacaine 0.15% on hand grip strength after major open shoulder surgery. Sixty patients scheduled for elective major shoulder surgery were prospectively randomized to receive in a double-blinded fashion either ropivacaine or bupivacaine through an interscalene catheter. Before surgery, all patients received an interscalene block (ISB) with either 40 mL of 0.6% ropivacaine or 40 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine. Six h after ISB, the patients received a continuous infusion of either 0.2% ropivacaine or 0.15% bupivacaine for 48 h. In both groups, the PCIA infusion rate was 5 mL/h plus a bolus of 4 mL with a lockout time of 20 min. Strength in the hand was assessed preoperatively, 24 h, and 48 h after ISB and 6 h after stopping the infusion of local anesthetic. The presence of paresthesia in the fingers was checked. Pain relief was assessed using a visual analog scale; side effects were noted, and the patients rated their satisfaction 54 h after the block. A significant decrease of strength in the hand was observed in the Bupivacaine group 24, 48, and 54 h after ISB (P < 0.05). Paresthesia was more frequently reported in the Bupivacaine group for the second and third fingers 48 h after ISB (P < 0.05) and in the first three fingers 6 h after discontinuation of the local anesthetic infusion (P: < 0.05). The pain score was similar in the two groups at all times, and patient satisfaction was comparable between the two groups. We conclude that the use of the PCIA technique with ropivacaine 0.2% or bupivacaine 0.15% provides a similar pain relief after major shoulder surgery. However, ropivacaine 0.2% is associated with better preservation of strength in the hand and less paresthesia in the fingers. Implications: We compared the patient-controlled interscalene analgesia technique with ropivacaine 0.2% and bupivacaine 0.15% after major open shoulder surgery. For similar pain control ropivacaine is associated with better preservation of strength in the hand and less paresthesia in the fingers.     

Continuous interscalene brachial plexus block for postoperative analgesia following shoulder surgery

BACKGROUND: Severe postoperative pain is a well-known problem following shoulder surgery. This study evaluates the clinical efficacy of continuous interscalene brachial plexus block, patient-controlled analgesia, and morphine (i.v. and i.m.) for postoperative analgesia in this setting. METHODS: Thirty patients, scheduled for acromioplasty during general anesthesia, were randomly allocated to one of three different postoperative pain management groups. Group MO received morphine (5 mg i.m. and 2 mg i.v.) when visual analogue pain score (VAS) > 3, group PL received a continuous interscalene brachial plexus block with bupivacaine (1.25 mg kg-1 + 0.25 mg kg-1 h-1) and group PCA received patient-controlled analgesia with morphine (bolus 1 mg). Postoperative pain relief was assessed (24 h) by VAS, circulatory and respiratory stress parameters (heart rate, systemic arterial pressure and respiratory rate) and stress metabolites (glucose, lactate, glycerol by abdominal subcutaneous microdialysis). RESULTS: Pain relief in the PL group was effective (VAS < 3) and significantly more potent than in groups MO and PCA, except at 16 and 20 h. Lactate was significantly increased in the PL group, glucose was significantly increased in all groups, while glycerol showed a variable pattern. There were no significant stress metabolite differences among groups. VAS showed no statistical correlation with microdialysate, respiratory or circulatory data. CONCLUSION: Successful continuous interscalene brachial plexus block provides very good pain relief following shoulder surgery and is superior to the other methods studied. However, we were unable to demonstrate a correlation between VAS pain scores and stress indicators in metabolic, circulatory and respiratory parameters.     

Continuous intralesional infusion combined with interscalene block was effective for postoperative analgesia after arthroscopic shoulder surgery

The purpose of this study was to compare the efficacy of postoperative pain control by intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV) and by continuous intralesional infusion of a local anesthetic (IL) with or without an interscalene block (ISB) after arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We allocated 84 patients to 4 groups according to analgesic method: IV, ISB-IV, IL, and ISB-IL. Postoperative pain, side effects, and supplementary analgesics were recorded at 1 hour and then every 8 hours for 48 hours. The interscalene block (groups ISB-IV and ISB-IL) was found to be effective at relieving pain and at reducing supplementary analgesic amounts at 1 and 8 hours postoperatively (P < .05). Patients in group ISB-IL had less pain at 16 and 48 hours postoperatively than those in the other groups (P < .05). Continuous intralesional infusion (groups IL and ISB-IL) was superior in reducing analgesic-related side effects (P < .05). This study suggests that a combination of an interscalene block and continuous intralesional infusion of a local anesthetic is an effective and safe method of postoperative pain control after arthroscopic shoulder surgery.     

Continuous Interscalene Analgesia with Ropivacaine 2 mg/ml after Major Shoulder Surgery

Background: In this open, randomized study, the pharmacokinetics, clinical efficacy, and safety of a 48-h continuous interscalene infusion of 2 mg/ml ropivacaine for postoperative pain relief were investigated in patients undergoing open major shoulder surgery.

Methods: An initial interscalene block with 30 ml ropivacaine, 7.5 mg/ml (225 mg), was performed. After completion of interscalene block, all patients (n = 24) received general anesthesia, and 6 h after interscalene block, a 48-h continuous interscalene infusion of 12 or 18 mg/h using 2 mg/ml ropivacaine was started. Total and unbound plasma concentrations of ropivacaine and 2.6-pipecoloxylidide (PPX; a major active metabolite) were determined during and up to 6 h after the interscalene infusion. Postoperative pain at rest was assessed by a visual analog scale. Supplementary analgesics and adverse events were recorded.

Results: Plasma concentrations of total and unbound ropivacaine were proportional to the total dose. At the end of the interscalene infusion of 9 ml/h, the mean +/- SD plasma concentrations of total and unbound ropivacaine were 1.40 +/- 0.54 and 0.03 +/- 0.01 mg/l, respectively, and of total and unbound PPX were 0.70 +/- 0.38 and 0.30 +/- 0.20 mg/l, respectively. Plasma concentrations of unbound ropivacaine and unbound PPX, added together, remained well below threshold levels for systemic central nervous system toxicity. There were no significant differences between the groups for postoperative pain (median maximum of about 20 mm on the visual analog scale in both groups), analgesic consumption, or quality of pain relief assessed by the patient. No signs or symptoms of systemic local anesthetic toxicity were observed.     

Plasma concentrations and analgesic effects of ropivacaine 3.75 mg/ml during long-term extrapleural analgesia after thoracotomy

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Fourteen patients received long-term extrapleural analgesia with ropivacaine for postoperative pain relief after posterolateral thoracotomy. We determined plasma concentrations of ropivacaine as well as pain scores and opioid consumption to assess the analgesic effect. METHODS: In this prospective study, an extrapleural catheter was placed with its tip near the third rib before chest closure. The extrapleural block started with 10 mL of 7.5 mg/mL of ropivacaine followed 30 minutes later by an infusion of 3.75 mg/mL of ropivacaine at a fixed rate of 0.1 mL/kg/h for 71.5 hours. RESULTS: Mean total and free ropivacaine concentrations increased until day 1, reached similar values on day 2, and subsequently decreased. In 13 patients, free drug levels did not exceed 0.14 mg/L. Coincidence of above-average total ropivacaine concentrations up to 4.8 mg/L and low plasma binding resulted in free drug concentrations up to 0.31 mg/L in 1 patient. An impaired ropivacaine plasma binding was observed in 2 patients after major surgical blood loss, in 3 patients in a state of a moderate postoperative acidosis, and in 1 patient after intravenous administration of clindamycin. All free ropivacaine concentrations measured were below the toxic threshold, and we observed no clinical signs of ropivacaine-related toxicity. The magnitude of pain scores and the opioid consumption pointed out a sufficient postoperative analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: A dose of 0.375 mg/kg/h of ropivacaine can safely be administered for long-term extrapleural analgesia after thoracotomy.     

Continuous interscalene brachial plexus block during and after shoulder surgery

Continuous interscalene brachial plexus block with a single dose of 0.75% bupivacaine (150-210 mg) with adrenaline, continued with an infusion of plain 0.25% bupivacaine 0.25 mg/kg/h, was performed on 20 patients to provide analgesia during shoulder surgery and in the postoperative period. The control group included 20 patients who were given general anaesthesia for surgery after starting a continuous interscalene brachial plexus block; test dose of 0.75% bupivacaine (22.5 mg) with adrenaline, continued with an infusion of 0.25% bupivacaine 0.25 mg/kg/h. Surgery was performed successfully under regional anaesthesia in 16/20 patients; 4/16 were given one dose of fentanyl during the surgery, and diazepam or midazolam as supplementary sedation were given in 13/16 cases. For postoperative analgesia 35/40 patients had a fully functioning catheter for 20-26 hours and the need for oxycodone i.m. during that time was 1.5 +/- 0.4 doses after regional anaesthesia (n = 14) and 1.8 +/- 0.4 doses after general anaesthesia (n = 18). There was a statistically significant difference in the mean plasma bupivacaine concentrations between the groups, concentrations in the regional anaesthesia group being higher at 5, 30, 60 min and 3 h (maximum 2.3 micrograms/ml at 60 min), but there was no difference between the values at 24 h. One infusion of local anaesthetic was discontinued because of probable treatment-related side-effects (breathing difficulties, nausea). Mild local anaesthetic toxicity (dizziness, tinnitus) was noticed in four patients.     

Continuous interscalene brachial plexus blockade provides good analgesia at home after major shoulder surgery-report of four cases

PURPOSE: Continuous interscalene brachial plexus blockade (CIBPB) in a hospital setting can provide excellent surgical conditions and postoperative analgesia for major shoulder surgery. This is a case report of four patients on the efficacy and advantages of CIBPB for postoperative analgesia at home. CASE REPORTS: Four patients scheduled for rotator cuff repair under CIBPB were discharged home the day of surgery with an interscalene catheter connected to an automated infusion pump administering 0.2% ropivacaine at 10 mL x hr(-1) for 72 hr. Prior to discharge, patients and their attendant were given verbal and written instructions concerning local anesthetic toxicity and explicit contact information for an anesthesiologist or nurse. Outcomes were measured pre- and postoperatively, including verbal analogue pain scores (pain VAS), verbal analogue nausea scores (nausea VAS), side effects, cognitive function (mini-mental state questionnaire), sleep (hours/night), and patient satisfaction (Likert scale). Postoperative VAS scores over three days were very low. Two patients reported only one episode of nausea. There were no complications associated with local anesthetic toxicity or catheter use. Cognitive function improved over three days. Sleep increased from a mean of five hours before surgery to seven hours over the next three nights. Patient satisfaction with care was high. Significant cost savings were documented. CONCLUSION: The use of CIBPB for 72 hr in patients undergoing major ambulatory shoulder surgery can result in good analgesia with minimal opioid requirement, cost savings and possibly improvement in outcome measures.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia: a prospective audit of epidural pethidine 4 mg/ml and ropivacaine 0.2% with fentanyl 2 micrograms/ml

A prospective audit of one hundred and forty-seven (147) Acute Pain Service (APS) patients, who received postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using pethidine 4 mg/ml or ropivacaine 0.2% with fentanyl 2 micrograms/ml in general surgical or orthopaedic wards over a twelve-month period, is presented. Data were collected from APS observation charts over a 48-hour period postoperatively. We found no significant difference in postoperative analgesia or side-effects between pethidine and ropivacaine with fentanyl in orthopaedic or general surgical patients.     

Ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml versus bupivacaine 5 mg/ml for interscalene brachial plexus block--a comparative study

We investigated ropivacaine 75 mg/ml in comparison with bupivacaine 5 mg/ml in patients receiving interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) and general anaesthesia. In this randomized, double-blind, prospective clinical trial, each patient received an ISB block according to the technique originally described by Winnie and a catheter technique as per Meier. The rapidity of onset and the quality of sensory and motor block were determined. After general anaesthesia had been induced further parameters evaluated were consumption of local anaesthetic, opioid and neuromuscular blocking drug. After arrival in the recovery room, the patients were assessed for intensity of pain using a visual analog scale (VAS). One hundred and twenty patients were included in the study. The onset and development of sensory block was similar in both groups. Development and quality of motor block was also nearly identical for both local anaesthetics. Consumption of neuromuscular blocking drug and opioid did not differ between ropivacaine and bupivacaine. In the recovery room the mean pain score was less than 25 in both groups. There were no significant differences in terms of onset and quality of sensory or motor block during the intraoperative and early postoperative period. In addition we did not identify any side-effects related to the administration of the local anaesthetics. Ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml and bupivacaine 5mg/ml proved to be nearly indistinguishable when administered for interscalene brachial plexus block.     

Continuous interscalene block for ambulatory shoulder surgery

Management of acute post-operative pain due to shoulder surgery may be successfully and consistently achieved in ambulatory patients by using continuous interscalene block. This chapter outlines the anterior and posterior approaches to the proximal brachial plexus and describes a method of precisely placing a catheter along the brachial plexus by stimulating the plexus through the needle used for placing the catheter as well as through the catheter itself. A technique for securing the catheter by subcutaneous tunneling to prevent dislodgement is also described. Suggested drugs and dosages for initial boluses, continuous infusions and patient controlled interscalene analgesia are discussed. Sedation for block placement, and special precautions, are outlined.     

Lidocaine versus ropivacaine for continuous interscalene brachial plexus block after open shoulder surgery

BACKGROUND: This study compared the postoperative infusion of 1% lidocaine and 0.2% ropivacaine for continuous interscalene analgesia in patients undergoing open shoulder surgery. METHODS: Forty patients undergoing open shoulder surgery received an interscalene brachial plexus block with 30 ml of either 1.5% lidocaine (n = 20) or 0.5% ropivacaine (n = 20), followed by a continuous patient-controlled interscalene analgesia with 1% lidocaine or 0.2% ropivacaine, respectively. A blinded observer recorded the quality of analgesia and recovery of motor function during the first 24 h of infusion. RESULTS: Onset of the block occurred after 7.5 (5-40) min with lidocaine and 30 (10-60) min with ropivacaine (P = 0.0005). Postoperative pain intensity was higher with lidocaine than ropivacaine for the first 8 h of infusion. The ratio between boluses given and demanded from the pump was 0.5 (0.13-0.7) with lidocaine and 0.7 (0.4-1.0) with ropivacaine (P = 0.005). Rescue IV tramadol was required during the first 24 h of infusion by 16 patients of the lidocaine group (84%) and eight patients of the ropivacaine group (46%) (P = 0.05). At the 16 h and 24 h observation times a larger proportion of patients receiving ropivacaine had complete regression of motor block (70% and 95%) than patients receiving lidocaine (50% and 55%) (P = 0.05 and P = 0.013, respectively). CONCLUSIONS: Although 1% lidocaine can be effectively used for postoperative patient-controlled interscalene analgesia, 0.2% ropivacaine provides better pain relief and motor function.     

Axillary brachial plexus block with ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine is less cardiotoxic than bupivacaine and may be used in higher doses in order to increase the quality of a block. The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of 40 ml ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml (300 mg) and 40 ml bupivacaine 5 mg/ml (200 mg) for axillary plexus block. METHODS: One hundred and four adult patients were included in a prospective, double-blind study. Sensory and motor block were tested for the five main terminal nerves of the arm at 10-min intervals until start of surgery and every second hour there-after until full resolution of the block. RESULTS: The overall evaluation of the block by the surgeon and the anesthesiologist showed a significantly better quality in the ropivacaine patients, regarding both anesthesia and motor block. There were no differences in the time to onset and duration of the block. Except for one patient, who had seizures after an accidental IV injection of ropivacaine, there were no major side effects. CONCLUSION: Ropivacaine 7.5 mg/ml, 40 ml, produces axillary plexus block of similar onset and duration but better quality than 40 ml of bupivacaine 5.0 mg/ml.     

Wound infiltration and drain lavage with ropivacaine after major shoulder surgery

Subcutaneous infiltration and wound lavage with ropivacaine is an alternative to opioids after major shoulder surgery. However, the efficacy and potential toxicity of this method remain unclear. We therefore evaluated plasma ropivacaine concentrations after shoulder infiltration and wound lavage. We subsequently quantified the efficacy of two ropivacaine concentrations. Patients undergoing major shoulder surgery were anesthetized with alfentanil and propofol. The initial patients (n = 18) received ropivacaine 7.5 mg/mL and ropivacaine plasma concentrations were measured in 15-min intervals. The subsequent 45 patients were randomly assigned to: 1) isotonic saline, 2) 3.75 mg/mL ropivacaine, or 3) 7.5 mg/mL ropivacaine. Ten milliliters of each solution was administered subcutaneously and 20 mL was injected into the wound drain which was clamped for 10 min. Supplemental postoperative pain relief was provided by patient-controlled anesthesia using the opioid piritramid (3.5-mg boluses, 6-min lock-out). Postoperative pain scores were recorded on a 100-mm visual analog scale for 4 h in the initial patients and for 10 h in the second part of the study. Unbound ropivacaine plasma concentrations peaked after 15 min at 0.08+/-0.09 microg/mL; the maximum was 0.30 microg/mL, compared with a toxic threshold of 0.6 microg/mL. In the second part of the study, pain scores were significantly lower after 3.75 mg/mL (20+/-15 mm) or 7.5 mg/mL (10+/-9 mm) ropivacaine than saline (35+/-10 mm). Piritramid requirements differed significantly in the three groups, being highest with saline and lowest with ropivacaine 7.5 mg/mL. We conclude that wound infiltration and lavage with 30 mL ropivacaine 7.5 mg/mL after major shoulder surgery resulted in very low pain scores and opioid requirement. IMPLICATIONS: Wound infiltration and lavage with 30 mL ropivacaine 7.5 mg/mL after major shoulder surgery resulted in very low pain scores and opioid requirement.     

Spinal anaesthesia: comparison of plain ropivacaine 5 mg ml(-1) with bupivacaine 5 mg ml(-1) for major orthopaedic surgery

Background. Ropivacaine provides effective spinal anaesthesiafor total hip arthroplasty. This study was designed to comparethe efficacy and safety of plain ropivacaine with plain bupivacainefor spinal anaesthesia in patients undergoing total hip arthroplasty. Methods. Sixty-six patients, ASA I or II, were randomized toreceive an intrathecal injection of one of two local anaestheticsolutions. Group R (n=32) received 3.5 ml of ropivacaine 5 mgml^–1 (17.5 mg). Group B (n=34) received 3.5 ml of bupivacaine5 mg ml^–1 (17.5 mg). The onset and duration of sensoryblock at dermatome level T10, maximum upper and lower spreadof sensory block and the onset, intensity and duration of motorblock were recorded, as were safety data. Results. Onset of motor and sensory block was rapid with nosignificant differences between the two groups. The median timeof onset of sensory block at the T10 dermatome was 2 min (range2–5 min) in Group R and 2 min in Group B (range 2–9min). The median duration of sensory block at the T10 dermatomewas 3.0 h (range 1.5–4.6 h) in Group R and 3.5 h (2.7–5.2h) in Group B (P<0.0001). The median duration of completemotor block (modified Bromage Scale 3) was significantly shorterin the ropivacaine group compared with the bupivacaine group(2.1 vs 3.9 h, P<0.001). Conclusions. Intrathecal administration of either 17.5 mg plainropivacaine or 17.5 mg plain bupivacaine was well toleratedand an adequate block for total hip arthroplasty was achievedin all patients. A more rapid postoperative recovery of sensoryand motor function was seen in Group R compared with Group B. Br J Anaesth 2002; 89: 702–6     

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.     

Patient-controlled interscalene analgesia after shoulder surgery: catheter insertion by the posterior approach

Insertion and maintenance of an interscalene catheter is technically challenging using lateral or anterior approaches. We report a technique to provide continuous brachial plexus blockade through a 48-h infusion of ropivacaine 0.1% (5 mL/h with a 5 mL bolus dose, 20-min lockout interval) using a catheter inserted with cannula-over-needle technique on the posterior side of the neck in 120 patients undergoing shoulder surgery. All catheters were successfully placed. There were no technical complications (impossibility to thread catheter, accidental vascular, epidural or subarachnoid location), catheter dislodgment, or analgesic solution leakage. Dysphonia, Horner's syndrome, and difficulty breathing were observed in 12 patients, four patients, and one patient, respectively. One patient complained of minor paresthesia that spontaneously resolved. Three patients complained of cervical pain. Pain scores as well as ropivacaine requirement via a patient-controlled analgesia device were low. Evaluation of acute and nonacute complications in a large-size study is needed to compare efficacy and safety of this approach with existing techniques.