The use of lidocaine for preventing the withdrawal associated with the injection of rocuronium in children and adolescents

We designed this study to examine the incidence and degree of movement after the administration of rocuronium in children and adolescents and to measure the treatment effect of lidocaine for its prevention. One hundred patients (aged 5-18 yr) were randomly assigned to two groups. After general anesthesia was induced with 5 mg/kg thiopental sodium and manual occlusion of venous outflow was performed, one group of patients received 0.1 mL/kg 1% lidocaine i.v.. A second group received 0.1 mL/kg of isotonic sodium chloride solution as a placebo control. Venous outflow occlusion was held for 15 s, released, and immediately followed by the administration of rocuronium 1 mg/kg i.v.. The patient's response to rocuronium injection was graded using a 4-point scale. We observed that the incidence of withdrawal was 84% in the placebo group and was significantly decreased to 46% in patients pretreated with lidocaine (P < 0.001). This study demonstrates that the i.v. injection of rocuronium is commonly associated with a withdrawal reaction in anesthetized pediatric patients and that this reaction can be attenuated or eliminated by pretreatment with i.v. lidocaine. Implications: Pain on injection of rocuronium in pediatric patients can be alleviated by pretreatment with i.v. lidocaine.     

Esmolol pretreatment reduces the frequency and severity of pain on injection of rocuronium

OBJECTIVE: To determine the effect of esmolol on the frequency and severity of pain and withdrawal reactions after injection of rocuronium and to compare it with lidocaine and placebo. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. SETTING: Single university hospital. PATIENTS: 120 ASA physical status I and II patients undergoing general anesthesia for elective surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive esmolol (0.5 mg/kg), lidocaine (0.5 mg/kg), or placebo, followed by a subparalyzing dose of rocuronium. After induction of anesthesia with propofol and fentanyl, an intubating dose of rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg was given. MEASUREMENTS: Patients were observed after injection of rocuronium 0.05 mg/kg, then immediately asked if they had pain in the arm. The response was assessed; discomfort, pain, and withdrawal of the hand were recorded and graded using a 4-point scale (none, mild, moderate, or severe). After the intubating dose of rocuronium, withdrawal reactions were scored as follows: (a) no pain response, (b) pain limited to the wrist, (c) pain limited to the elbow/shoulder, or (d) generalized pain response. RESULTS: 31 patients (77.5%) in the esmolol group, 32 (80%) in the lidocaine group, and 15 (37.5%) in the placebo group reported no pain (both groups vs placebo, P < 0.001). Moderate pain was seen in only one patient receiving lidocaine, in 6 placebo patients, but in none in the esmolol group (esmolol vs placebo, P < 0.05). Severe pain was felt by 8 patients receiving placebo, but by none receiving esmolol or lidocaine (P < 0.01). Frequency of withdrawal response after rocuronium was 2.5%, 17.5%, and 40% in the esmolol, lidocaine, and placebo groups, respectively (esmolol group vs placebo, P < 0.001; lidocaine group vs placebo, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Esmolol, like lidocaine, reduces the frequency of pain and withdrawal reaction associated with rocuronium injection.     

Prevention of withdrawal associated with the injection of rocuronium in adults and children

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine which technique prevents the withdrawal associated with rocuronium administration in adults and children. DESIGN: Blinded, randomized, prospective trial. SETTING: This study was set at an inpatient anesthesia in a university teaching hospital. PATIENTS: 200 adult patients (aged 19-63 years) and 150 children (aged 2-9 years) undergoing elective surgery requiring endotracheal intubation. INTERVENTIONS: Four groups in adult and 3 groups in children of 50 patients each were investigated. In adult study, control groups with free intravenous (IV) flow (C-F) or the occlusion of IV flow (C-O) received saline as the pretreatment of rocuronium; lidocaine groups with free IV flow (L-F) or the occlusion of IV flow (L-O) received lidocaine as the pretreatment of rocuronium, preceded by thiopental 5 seconds before. In children study, groups P and L received saline and lidocaine as the pretreatment of rocuronium, respectively, and group S received rocuronium mixed with sodium bicarbonate after the pretreatment of placebo preceded by thiopental. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The patient's response to rocuronium injection was graded using a 4-point scale. The pH and osmolality of treatment solution were measured. The incidence of no movement after rocuronium was 96% in L-O, 46% in L-F, 26% in C-O, and 18% in C-F in adult and 96% in S, 58% in L, and 8% in P in children. CONCLUSIONS: Withdrawal after rocuronium can be eliminated by the pretreatment of lidocaine during the occlusion of the IV flow in adults and addition of sodium bicarbonate in children.     

Prevention of withdrawal movement associated with injection of rocuronium in children: comparison of remifentanil, alfentanil and fentanyl

BACKGROUND: We compared the efficacy of remifentanil, alfentanil and fentanyl in reducing withdrawal movement associated with the injection of rocuronium in children. METHODS: In total, 164 ASA physical status I or II pediatric patients, aged 1-14 years, were randomly assigned to four treatment groups: group C received saline; group R, remifentanil 1 microg/kg; group A, alfentanil 10 micro/kg; and group F, fentanyl 2 microg/kg. Treatments were injected over 30 s, followed by thiopental 5 mg/kg. At 90 s after the start of the study drug injection, rocuronium 0.6 mg/kg was injected over 10 s. The patient's response to the injection of rocuronium was graded on a four-point scale in a double-blinded manner. RESULTS: The incidence of withdrawal movement was 89.5% in group C, 70.3% in group F, 36.3% in group A and 7.2% in group R. The incidence of generalized movement (grade 4) was 86.9% in group C, 58.5% in group F, 15.9% in group A and 2.4% in group R. CONCLUSION: Remifentanil, alfentanil and fentanyl all reduced the incidence of withdrawal movement when administered 90 s before the injection of rocuronium compared with saline. Remifentanil was the most effective, followed by alfentanil. Fentanyl was less effective but significantly different from the saline in reducing withdrawal movement in children.     

Epidural fentanyl speeds the onset of sensory block during epidural lidocaine anesthesia

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Shortening the onset time of sensory block is a practical goal to improve the quality of epidural anesthesia. The addition of fentanyl to a local anesthetic solution is widely used during epidural anesthesia. This randomized double-blind study examined the onset time of sensory block during epidural lidocaine anesthesia with and without added fentanyl to the epidural solution. METHODS: Thirty-six young male patients undergoing knee arthroscopy were randomly allocated into 3 groups of 12 patients each: epidural fentanyl (EF, epidural administration of 17 mL of 2% lidocaine plus 100 microg fentanyl and followed by intravenous (IV) injection of 2 mL of normal saline); IV fentanyl (IF, epidural administration of 17 mL of 2% lidocaine plus 2 mL of normal saline and followed by IV injection of 100 microg of fentanyl); and control (C, epidural administration of 17 mL of 2% lidocaine plus 2 mL of normal saline and followed by IV injection of 2 mL of normal saline). The sensory block was assessed by pinprick method. The hemodynamic changes, postepidural shivering, and side effects of epidural fentanyl were also recorded. RESULTS: There was no difference in the distribution of age, weight, and height among the 3 groups. The onset time of sensory block up to T(10) dermatome was significantly more rapid in the EF group (8.3 +/- 3.7 minutes) than that of the IF group (13.1 +/- 4.2 minutes, P <.05) or C group (14.2 +/- 5.4 minutes, P <.05). The upper level of sensory block was also significantly higher in the EF group. Although the incidence of shivering was lower in the EF group, this did not reach statistical significance. Postepidural arterial blood pressures and heart rates were no different among the 3 groups. No nausea, vomiting, pruritus, respiratory depression, urinary retention, or hypotension were observed in any patients. CONCLUSION: Epidural injection of the mixture of 100 microg fentanyl and 2% lidocaine solution accelerated the onset of sensory block during epidural lidocaine anesthesia without increased side effects.     

The prevention of pain from injection of rocuronium by ondansetron,lidocaine, tramadol,and fentanyl

We compared the efficacy of ondansetron, lidocaine, tramadol, and fentanyl in minimizing pain caused by the injection of rocuronium in 250 patients. After tourniquet application on the forearm, the patients were given saline (3 mL) (Group 1, n = 50), ondansetron (4 mg) (Group 2, n = 50), lidocaine (30 mg) (Group 3, n = 50), tramadol (50 mg) (Group 4, n = 50), or fentanyl (100 microg) (Group 5, n = 50) diluted into a 3-mL solution. The occlusion was released after 20 s and rocuronium was injected over 10-15 s. The patients were observed and asked immediately if they had pain in the arm, and the response was assessed. Reactions such as discomfort and pain, withdrawal of the hand, and so on after the administration of rocuronium were recorded as side effects for 24 h. Ten patients in Group 1, 28 patients in Group 2, 37 patients in Group 3, 30 patients in Group 4, and 15 patients in Group 5 reported no pain. Light pain was seen in 11 patients in Group 1, 14 patients in Group 2, 11 patients in Group 3, 12 patients in Group 4, and 20 patients in Group 5. Moderate pain was seen in 15 patients in Group 1, 6 patients in Group 2, 2 patients in Group 3, 8 patients in Group 4, and 10 patients in Group 5. Severe pain was seen in 14 patients in Group 1, 2 patients in Group 2, 0 patients in Group 3, 0 patients in Group 4, and 5 patients in Group 5. Correlation determined with log-linear analysis found in Group 1 pain score 0 (P < 0.001), Group 1 pain score 1 (P < 0.001), and Group 3 pain score 0 (P < 0.001). We conclude that ondansetron, lidocaine, tramadol, and fentanyl decrease the level of rocuronium injection pain. Among these drugs, lidocaine is the most effective, whereas fentanyl is the least effective. IMPLICATIONS: We compared the efficacy of ondansetron, lidocaine, tramadol, and fentanyl in minimizing the pain on injection of rocuronium in 250 patients. Ondansetron, lidocaine, tramadol, and fentanyl were effective in preventing and decreasing the level of rocuronium injection pain. Among these drugs, lidocaine was the most effective, and fentanyl was the least effective.     

A comparison of metoclopramide and lidocaine for preventing pain on injection of diazepam

We compared the ability of metoclopramide with IV lidocaine pretreatment to abolish pain from a diazepam injection. In a randomized, prospective, double-blinded, placebo-controlled clinical trial, 159 patients (ASA physical status I and II), aged 20-70 yr old, were allocated to one of three groups. Placebo and study drugs were injected IV immediately before 0.1 mg/kg of diazepam into a dorsal hand vein. Patients in Groups 1, 2, and 3 received 2 mL of placebo, 2 mL of lidocaine 1%, and 2 mL of metoclopramide (10 mg), respectively. The patient's response was graded using a 4-point scale. Any score other than 0 represented pain on injection. We observed that the incidence of pain on diazepam injection was 83% in the placebo group, which was decreased to 70% and 39% in patients pretreated with metoclopramide and lidocaine, respectively. Although there was no significant difference in the incidence of pain in Groups 1 and 3 (P > 0.05), Group 3 showed significantly less patients with severe pain scores than Group 1 as diazepam was injected (P < 0.000). Group 2 showed a significantly less frequent incidence of pain than the saline (P < 0.000) and the metoclopramide (P < 0.002) groups as diazepam was injected. The intensity of pain in Group 2 was significantly less than Group 3 (P = 0.012). The intensity of diazepam injection pain was intense with placebo as compared with other groups (P < 0.000). Metoclopramide, rather than lidocaine pretreatment, may be a reasonable analgesic alternative for painful injections. IMPLICATIONS: Metoclopramide, rather than lidocaine pretreatment, may be a reasonable analgesic alternative to decrease pain from a diazepam injection, especially when there is a medical condition in which lidocaine should be used very cautiously.     

Effect of narcotic pretreatment on pain after rocuronium injection: a randomized,double-blind controlled comparison with lidocaine

Various strategies have been studied to reduce the discomfort of rocuronium pain. These studies have shown fentanyl and lidocaine to be effective in reducing the incidence of pain on rocuronium injection. This prospective, randomized, and double-blind study was carried out on 80 neurosurgical patients for whom pain on rocuronium injection was assessed after pretreatment with lidocaine, fentanyl, sufentanil, or normal saline. The 80 neurosurgical patients were randomly allocated to anyone of the groups to receive lidocaine, fentanyl, sufentanil, or normal saline prior to being given rocuronium. The patients were asked about any discomfort in the hand, and also to rank that discomfort on a 5-point scale. In the normal saline group, the incidence of pain was 95%, of which 90% had very severe pain. In the lidocaine group, only 10% of patients reported pain, which was mild in nature. In the fentanyl group, 95% of patients had pain, of whom 25% had severe to very severe pain. In the sufentanil group, 85% of patients reported pain, of whom 25% fell into the severe to very severe group. We found that lidocaine was best at decreasing the incidence of pain on intravenous (i.v.) injection of rocuronium. Although the incidence of pain on injection of rocuronium with both fentanyl and sufentanil was high, the intensity was definitely reduced, with most patients falling in the mild pain group.     

Pretreatment with small-dose ketamine reduces withdrawal movements associated with injection of rocuronium in pediatric patients

We evaluated the pretreatment of small-dose of ketamine or normal saline in the reduction of withdrawal movements induced by rocuronium injection. One-hundred pediatric patients (aged 1-6 yr) were randomly assigned into 2 groups. A 22-gauge IV cannula was inserted into the dorsum of the hand, and ketamine 0.2 mg/kg or normal saline was given, followed by a 5 mg/kg thiopental injection 10 s later. IV rocuronium (0.8 mg/kg) was injected over 5 s. The patient's response to rocuronium injection was graded by using a four-point scale in a double-blinded manner. We observed that the incidence of withdrawal movements was 83% in the saline group and 27% in patients pretreated with ketamine (P < 0.05). Some patients in both groups developed skin erythema at the site of injection. We conclude that pretreatment with small-dose ketamine significantly attenuates withdrawal movements associated with IV injection of rocuronium in pediatric patients anesthetized with thiopental. IMPLICATIONS: Pretreatment with small-dose ketamine 0.2 mg/kg provides a simple and safe means of reducing the incidence of withdrawal movements induced by the injection of rocuronium, a short-acting nondepolarizing muscle relaxant.     

Bacteriostatic saline containing benzyl alcohol decreases the pain associated with the injection of propofol

Bacteriostatic saline is a physiological saline solution containing the bacteriostatic agent benzyl alcohol as a 0.9% solution. It is used mostly for diluting and dissolving drugs for IV injection and as a flush for intravascular catheters. It also has local anesthetic properties. We studied its efficacy in decreasing the pain associated with IV administration of propofol and compared it with mixing lidocaine with propofol. One-hundred-twenty patients were randomly allocated into three groups. All patients received propofol 50 mg. The benzyl alcohol group received bacteriostatic saline as a preinjection, and the lidocaine group received propofol containing lidocaine. The placebo group did not receive bacteriostatic saline or lidocaine. Fifteen of 39 patients (38%) in the benzyl alcohol group complained of pain on injection compared to 33 of 39 (84%) in the placebo group and 22 of 42 (52%) in the lidocaine group. Differences were significant between the benzyl alcohol and placebo groups (P < 0.01) and the lidocaine and placebo groups (P < 0.01). Preinjection with bacteriostatic saline decreases the incidence of pain associated with IV administration of propofol and is comparable to that of mixing lidocaine with propofol.     

Effect of ondansetron pretreatment on pain after rocuronium and propofol injection: a randomised, double-blind controlled comparison with lidocaine

In a randomised, controlled, double-blinded trial to study the effect of ondansetron pretreatment on the pain produced after intravenous injection of rocuronium and propofol in comparison with lidocaine, 60 patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups. Group 1 received 5 ml of intravenous 0.9% sodium chloride solution pretreatment, group 2 received ondansetron 4 mg (2 mg.ml-1 solution) diluted into a 5-ml solution, and group 3 received 50 mg lidocaine (5 ml 1% solution); this was followed 1 min later by rocuronium and propofol. Pain was reduced significantly in the ondansetron and lidocaine groups (p < 0.0001) compared with placebo, and significantly better with lidocaine than with ondansetron (p = 0.02). We conclude that ondansetron is effective in relieving the pain of rocuronium but is not as effective as lidocaine.     

Prevention of rocuronium-induced withdrawal movement in children: a comparison of remifentanil with alfentanil

BACKGROUND: This study was designed to compare the efficacy of remifentanil and alfentanil without the venous occlusion technique in preventing the withdrawal response associated with rocuronium injection in children. METHODS: One hundred and twenty children aged between 3 and 10 years were randomly allocated into one of four groups to receive either i.v. remifentanil 0.5 microg.kg(-1) (remi 0.5 group), remifentanil 1 microg.kg(-1) (remi 1.0 group), alfentanil 15 microg.kg(-1) (alfentanil group) or saline 5 ml (saline group). Anesthesia was induced with 2.5% thiopental sodium 5 mg.kg(-1) and the test drug was injected over 30 s. One minute later, 1% rocuronium 0.6 mg.kg(-1) was injected over 5 s and the response was recorded. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded on arrival in the operating room, before and 1 min after tracheal intubation. RESULTS: The incidence of withdrawal movement in the saline group (93%) was significantly higher than that in the remi 0.5, remi 1.0, and alfentanil groups (53%, 17%, and 20%, respectively) (P < 0.05). The incidence in the remi 1.0 and alfentanil groups was significantly less than that in the remi 0.5 group (P < 0.05). After intubation, MAP and HR were significantly higher in the saline group than that in remi 1.0 and alfentanil groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both remifentanil 1 microg.kg(-1) and alfentanil 15 microg.kg(-1) can be used to prevent rocuronium-associated withdrawal movement in children because they are equally effective and attenuate the increase in MAP and HR after intubation.     

Rocuronium pretreatment reduces suxamethonium-induced myalgia: comparison with vecuronium

We have studied, in 150 patients undergoing elective oral surgery, the effectiveness and sequelae of pretreatment with rocuronium for reducing myalgia after suxamethonium. Patients were allocated randomly to one of three groups: anaesthesia was induced with propofol and fentanyl, and group V received vecuronium 1 mg, group R rocuronium 6 mg and group P placebo pretreatment. Suxamethonium 1.5 mg kg-1 was given 60 s after the pretreatment agent. All patients received ketorolac 10 mg i.v. and morphine 10 mg i.m. for analgesia. The incidence of postoperative myalgia on day 1 after rocuronium (20%) was significantly less than after vecuronium (42%) (P < 0.05) or placebo (70%) (P < 0.01). By day 4 the incidence of myalgia was 28.6% in the rocuronium group, 46.3% in the vecuronium group and 95% in the placebo group. Intubating conditions were not affected adversely by any pretreatment regimen.      

Dilution of rocuronium to 0.5 mg/mL with 0.9% NaCl eliminates the pain during intravenous injection in awake patients

In a randomized, double-blinded, controlled study, we evaluated the effect of diluting rocuronium 10 mg/mL to 1 or 0.5 mg/mL with 0.9% NaCl on the pain associated with IV administration of rocuronium with small doses given before succinylcholine or nondepolarizing agent administration. One hundred fifty patients undergoing surgical procedures that required general anesthesia were randomized into three groups. Group 1 received rocuronium 10 mg/mL. Groups 2 and 3 received 1 and 0.5 mg/mL of rocuronium, respectively. Patient demographics, pain scores, osmolality, and the pH of the solutions were recorded. Group 1 had the most intense and frequent pain response. Eighty percent of patients in this group reported pain on injection. In Group 2, the incidence and intensity of pain were significantly less when compared with those of Group 1. In this group, 38% of patients reported pain during injection. In Group 3, none of the patients experienced pain on injection. The pH values and osmolalities of study solutions were not significantly different among groups. In conclusion, in awake patients, dilution of rocuronium 10 mg/mL at small doses given before succinylcholine or nondepolarizing agent administration of 0.06 mg/kg to 0.5 mg/mL with 0.9% NaCl is a simple and cost-effective strategy for preventing pain during IV rocuronium injection.     

Rapid injection of rocuronium reduces withdrawal movement on injection

Study ObjectiveTo test whether rapid injection of rocuronium reduces withdrawal movement on injection.DesignRandomized, prospective trial.SettingOperating room in a university hospital.Patients150 ASA physical status I and II patients aged 18 to 60 years, undergoing general anesthesia.InterventionsPatients were randomized to three groups. After undergoing anesthesia induction with thiopental sodium, then 5 seconds later receiving a rubber tourniquet applied to the mid-forearm to stop intravenous (IV) flow by gravity, the pretreatment drug was injected. The tourniquet was held for 15 seconds then released, and 1.0 mg/kg of 1% rocuronium was injected IV. Group C patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of 0.9% NaCl and then injected with rocuronium slowly within 10 seconds. Group L patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of preservative-free 1% lidocaine and then injected with rocuronium slowly within 10 seconds. Group R patients (n = 50) were pretreated with 0.1 mL/kg of 0.9% NaCl and then rapidly injected with rocuronium within approximately one second (as quickly as possible).MeasurementsAfter injection of the patient with the study drug, a single anesthesiologist with no knowledge of the study protocol graded each patient's response as follows: 0 = no response; 1 = mild movement limited to the wrist only; 2 = moderate movement involving the elbow and shoulder; and 3 = severe movement involving more than one extremity.Main ResultsGroup C had the most intense and frequent withdrawal response. The frequency and intensity of withdrawal movement was significantly less in Groups L and R than Group C. No significant difference in withdrawal response between Groups L and R was noted.ConclusionsWithdrawal response can be significantly reduced for rocuronium injection without lidocaine pretreatment, simply through rapid injection.     

Prevention of pain on injection of propofol: a comparison of remifentanil with alfentanil in children

AIM: Propofol has a high incidence of pain on injection, particularly when a vein on the back of hand is used. Administration of lidocaine, either before or mixed with propofol remains the most widely used method to attenuate this pain. The use of opioids such as alfentanil and fentanyl has been found to decrease pain induced by propofol injection. The purpose of this study was to evaluate the effects of different doses of remifentanil and alfentanil in minimizing the pain caused by propofol. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, healthy premedicated children between the age group of 5-12 years admitted for adenotonsillectomy were randomly allocated to one of 6 treatment groups. Group I: remifentanil 0.25 microg kg(-1); Group II: remifentanil 0.50 microg kg(-1); Group III: alfentanil 15 microg kg(-1); Group IV: alfentanil 20 microg kg(-1) 60 s prior to propofol mixed with 1 mL of 0.9% normal saline; Group V: lidocaine 1 mL of 1% (10 mg) added to 100 mg of propofol and Group VI: normal saline. During the injection of propofol (3 mg kg(-1)) pain perception was assessed with a four-point behavioural scale: none, mild, moderate, or severe. RESULTS: There were 52 subjects in Group I, 51 in Group II, 49 in Group III, 52 in Group IV, 52 in Group V and 52 in Group VI; 63.46% of patients in Group I, 39.21% in Group II, 38.77% in Group III, 36.53% in Group IV, 38.46% in Group V and 84.61% in Group VI experienced pain. Statistically, Groups II, III, IV and V were significantly better than placebo in the reduction of propofol pain (P<0.0001). Groups II, III and IV significantly reduced the pain in comparison with Group I (P<0.001). CONCLUSION: Pretreatment with intravenous remifentanil 0.5 microg kg(-1), alfentanil 15 microg kg(-1) and 20 microg kg(-1) were equally effective in reducing pain associated with propofol injection in children between the age group of 5-12 years.     

Fentanyl improves analgesia but prolongs the onset of axillary brachial plexus block by peripheral mechanism

We evaluated the effects of fentanyl added to lidocaine for axillary brachial plexus block in 66 adult patients scheduled for elective hand and forearm surgery. In this double-blinded study, all patients received 40 mL of 1.5% lidocaine with 1:200,000 epinephrine, injected into the brachial plexus sheath using the axillary perivascular technique, and they were randomized into three groups. Group 1 was given lidocaine containing 2 mL of normal saline plus 2 mL of normal saline IV. Patients in Group 2 received lidocaine containing 100 microg fentanyl plus 2 mL of normal saline IV. Group 3 patients received lidocaine containing 2 mL of normal saline plus 100 microg fentanyl IV. Sensory and motor blockade were evaluated by using a pinprick technique and by measuring the gripping force, respectively. The success rate of sensory blockade for radial and musculocutaneous nerves and the duration of the sensory blockade significantly increased in Group 2 (323 +/- 96 min) as compared with Group 1 (250 +/- 79 min). However, onset time of analgesia was prolonged in every nerve distribution by adding fentanyl to brachial plexus block. IV fentanyl had no effect on the success rate, onset, or duration of blockade. We conclude that the addition of fentanyl to lidocaine causes an improved success rate of sensory blockade but a delayed onset of analgesia, although this may be accounted for by the decreased pH caused by the fentanyl. Implications: It is still unclear whether the addition of a peripheral opioid is useful for nerve blockade in humans. Peripheral application of fentanyl to lidocaine for axillary brachial plexus blockade in this study provided an improved success rate of sensory blockade and prolonged duration.     

Intravenous lidocaine and ephedrine, but not propofol, suppress fentanyl-induced cough

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to evaluate the effectiveness of lidocaine, propofol and ephedrine in suppressing fentanyl-induced cough. METHODS: One hundred and eighteen patients were randomly assigned into four groups and the following medications were given intravenously: patients in Group I (n = 31) received normal saline 2 mL, Group II (n = 29) received lidocaine 2 mg.kg(-1), Group III (n = 30) received propofol 0.6 mg.kg(-1) and Group IV (n = 28) received ephedrine 5 mg. At one minute after the study medication, fentanyl 2.5 microg.kg(-1) was given intravenously within two seconds. The occurrence of cough and vital sign profiles were recorded within two minutes after fentanyl bolus by an anesthesiologist blinded to study design. RESULTS: Sixty-five percent of patients in the placebo group had cough, whereas the frequency was significantly decreased in Groups II (14%) and IV (21%). Although a numerically lower frequency of cough was noted in Group III (37%), it was not statistically different from that of the placebo group. SpO(2) decreased significantly in patients of Group III compared to placebo; one patient experienced hypoxemia necessitating mask ventilation. Patients in Group III showed a decrease in heart rate and systolic blood pressure (2 beats.min(-1) and 8 mmHg vs baseline). Patients in Group IV showed an increase in both measurements (5 beats.min(-1) and 8 mmHg vs baseline). No truncal rigidity was observed throughout the study. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous lidocaine 2 mg.kg(-1) or ephedrine 5 mg, but not propofol 0.6 mg.kg(-1), was effective in preventing fentanyl-induced cough. The results provide a convenient method to decrease fentanyl-induced cough.     

麻醉诱导时芬太尼不同给药方法对其诱发患者咳嗽的影响

目的 评价麻醉诱导时芬太尼不同给药方法对其诱发患者咳嗽的影响.方法 择期全麻手术患者420例,年龄18～60岁,性别不限,ASA分级Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,采用随机数字表法,将患者随机分为4组(n=105):常规组(Ⅰ组)、预注射组(Ⅱ组)、稀释组(Ⅲ组)和后注射组(Ⅳ组).麻醉诱导:Ⅰ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)2 μg/kg、异丙酚2 mg/kg、罗库溴铵1mg/kg;Ⅱ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)0.5 μg/kg、异丙酚2 mg/kg、罗库溴铵1mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)1.5 μg/kg;Ⅲ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、芬太尼(20 μg/ml)2μg/kg、异丙酚2mg/kg、罗库溴铵1 mg/kg;Ⅳ组依次静脉注射咪达唑仑0.05 mg/kg、异丙酚2 mg/kg、罗库溴铵1 mg/kg、芬太尼(50 μg/ml)2 μg/kg.注药完毕后2 min行气管插管.气管插管前观察咳嗽、异丙酚注射痛的发 生情况,于麻醉诱导前、诱导后、咳嗽时、气管插管时记录HR和有创动脉压.结果 与Ⅰ组比较,其余组患者咳嗽发生率和咳嗽程度降低(P＜0.05);与Ⅱ组和Ⅲ组比较,Ⅳ组患者咳嗽发生率和咳嗽程度降低(P＜0.05).四组其余指标组间比较差异无统计学意义(P＞0.05).结论 麻醉诱导时芬太尼稀释给药、给予预注剂量或后注射均可明显降低其诱发咳嗽的发生,其中后注射效果最佳.     

The influence of a bupivacaine and fentanyl epidural infusion after epidural fentanyl in patients allowed to ambulate in early labor

Epidural fentanyl after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose provides adequate analgesia and allows for ambulation during early labor. This study was designed to determine the influence of an epidural infusion of bupivacaine plus fentanyl administered after initiation of epidural labor analgesia with fentanyl. Specifically, we evaluated whether there is an increase in motor block or an increased time to request for further analgesic medication. Fifty-one laboring primigravid women at <5 cm cervical dilation who requested epidural analgesia were enrolled. After a 3-mL epidural test dose of 1.5% lidocaine with epinephrine (5 microg/mL), patients received fentanyl 100 microg via the epidural catheter. They then randomly received either an infusion (10 mL/h) of 0.0625% bupivacaine with fentanyl (3 microg/mL) or an infusion of preservative-free saline. After the administration of the initial analgesic, pain scores and side effects were recorded for each patient at 10, 20, and 30 min, every 30 min thereafter, and at the time of request for additional analgesic medication, by an observer blinded to the technique used. There were no demographic differences between the two groups. The mean duration of analgesia (time from initial dose to request for additional analgesia) was increased in the group that received a continuous infusion of bupivacaine and fentanyl compared with the Saline group (198 +/- 86 vs 145 +/- 50 min; P < 0.009). Side effects were similar between the two groups. No patient in either group experienced any detectable motor block. Fourteen patients chose to ambulate in the Saline group, and 12 patients chose to ambulate in the Infusion group. In early laboring patients, a continuous infusion of 0.0625% bupivacaine infusion with fentanyl (3 microg/mL) prolonged the duration until top-up was required, after epidural fentanyl 100 microg after a lidocaine and epinephrine test dose, and did not cause any clinically detectable motor block. IMPLICATIONS: A 0.0625% bupivacaine and fentanyl (3 microg/mL) infusion, when added to epidural fentanyl (100 microg), prolongs the analgesic duration without increasing motor block in women in early labor.