Extradural fentanyl for postoperative analgesia: predominant spinal or systemic action?

This randomized, double-blind study of 40 patients was designedto determine if the predominant analgesic effect of extraduralfentanyl is mediated by a direct spinal action or an indirectsystemic one. After Caesarean section, postoperative analgesiawas provided for 24 h by patient-controlled extradural analgesia(PCEA group) or by patient-controlled i.v. analgesia (PCIVAgroup). Both groups received a bolus dose of fentanyl 20 µgwith a 10-min lockout interval. In the PCIVA group, nine patientsstopped early (compared with none in the PCEA group) becauseof inadequate analgesia. Mean visual analogue pain scores (0–100mm) at 8 and 12 h were lower for PCEA (23 (SD 13) mm at rest,31(23) mm on coughing) than for PCIVA (50 (25) mm at rest, 67(24) mm on coughing) (P < 0.0005). The mean dose of fentanylself-administered between 4 and 8 h was lower in the PCEA group(38 (So 30) µg h^–1 compared with the PCIVA group(59 (27) µg h^–1 (P < 0.05). Our results supportthe hypothesis that the predominant analgesic effect of extraduraladministration of fentanyl is mediated by a direct spinal actionrather than an indirect action from systemic absorption.     

Lidocaine with fentanyl, compared to morphine, marginally improves postoperative epidural analgesia in children

PURPOSE: To compare the epidural administration of fentanyl (1 microg/mL) combined with lidocaine 0.4% to preservative-free morphine for postoperative analgesia and side effects in children undergoing major orthopedic surgery. METHODS: In a prospective, double-blind study, 30 children, ASA I-II, 2-16-yr-old, were randomly allocated to receive immediately after surgery either epidural F-L (epidural infusion at a rate of 0.1-0.35 mL/kg/hr of 1 microg/mL of fentanyl and lidocaine 0.4%) or epidural M (bolus of 20 microg/kg of morphine in 0.5 mL/kg saline every eight hours). Both groups received 40 mg/kg of iv metamizol (dipyrone) every six hours. In the F-L Group, blood samples were taken on the second and third postoperative day to determine total lidocaine concentrations. Adequacy of analgesia using adapted pediatric pain scales (0-10 score) and side-effects were assessed every eight hours postoperatively. RESULTS: Resting pain scores were under 4, 95% of the time in the F-L Group and 87% of the time in the M Group (Chi square=4.674, P <0.05). The frequency of complications was very similar in both groups. The F-L Group total plasma lidocaine concentrations were directly related to the dose received, and below the toxic range in all patients. CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative epidural fentanyl with lidocaine infusion provides slightly better analgesia than conventional bolus administration of epidural morphine. Side-effects or risk of systemic toxicity were not augmented by the addition of lidocaine to epidural opioids.     

Bupivacaine 0.125% improves continuous postoperative epidural fentanyl analgesia after abdominal or thoracic surgery

The addition of 0.125% and 0.25% bupivacaine to continuous postoperative epidural infusions of fentanyl, in a 10 μg · ml^?1 concentration, were studied in 39 patients following abdominal or thoracic surgery in prospective, random, double-blind fashion. Patients received an initial bolus of 0.1 ml · kg^?1 of the the study solution and an infusion of 6 ml · hr^?1 which was titrated to maintain analgesia (VAS < 40). Assessments of pain (VAS), pulmonary function (pH, PaCO₂, and bowel function (time to flatus or po fluids) were made until the second postoperative morning. There was a difference among the three groups in analgesia (means VAS scores) over time (P < 0.01), with the fentanyl-alone group producing less analgesia than the 0.125% bupivacaine group (P < 0.01). There was no difference in the average infusion rates, postoperative pulmonary function, or bowel function. The incidence of side effects including somnolence, nausea and vomiting, and pruritus was also similar. Fewer patients in the 0.125% bupivacaine group than in the 0.25% group developed a transient sensory loss to pinprick and ice (3 vs 10, P < 0.001). Four patients in both bupivacaine groups had leg weakness, those in the 0.125% were all a Bromage 1 score, while in the 0.25% group one had a Bromage 1, one a Bromage 2, and two Bromage 3 scores. The addition of 0.125% bupivacaine improves the analgesia of epidural infusions of fentanyl (10 μg · ml^?1) when used following abdominal or thoracic surgery and results in minimal sensorimotor disturbance.     

Bupivacaine 0.1% does not improve postoperative epidural fentanyl analgesia after abdominal or thoracic surgery

Epidural infusions of fentanyl, in a 10 micrograms.ml-1 concentration, combined with bupivacaine 0.1% were compared with epidural infusions of fentanyl alone for postoperative analgesia following abdominal or thoracic surgery. There were no detectable differences between the two groups in analgesia (mean visual analogue scale pain scores ranging between 15-35 mm), average infusion rates of 7-9 ml.hr-1, and serum fentanyl concentrations which reached 1-2 ng.ml-1. There was no difference in postoperative pulmonary function (pH, PaCO2, SaO2), or bowel function (time to flatus or po fluids). The incidence of side-effects including somnolence, nausea and vomiting, pruritus and postural hypotension was also similar. Of the patients receiving fentanyl and bupivacaine 0.1%, three developed a transient unilateral sensory loss to pinprick and ice, and two of these patients had unilateral leg weakness equal to a Bromage 1 score. The addition of bupivacaine 0.1% does not improve epidural infusions of fentanyl using a 10 micrograms.ml-1 concentration following abdominal or thoracic surgery.     

舒芬太尼和芬太尼在新生儿术后镇痛的应用

目的 观测新生儿术后静脉恒速持续输注等效量舒芬太尼、芬太尼两药对新生儿镇痛的临床效果.方法 将90例新生儿随机均分为三组:舒芬太尼组(A组)、芬太尼组(B组)、无镇痛组(C组).A、B组患儿术后分别采用舒芬太尼0.025μg·kg-1·h-1和芬太尼0.25 μg·kg-1·h-1静脉恒速持续输注48h进行镇痛,C组不用镇痛药.于术后12、24、48、96 h分别行镇痛评分(CRIES评分)和神经行为评分(NBNA评分),同时采集患儿尿标本检测S100β蛋白含量.结果 术后各时点C组CRIES分值均高于A、B组(P<0.05);术后48、96 h B组CRIES分值高于A组(P<0.05).C组NBNA评分明显低于A、B组(P<0.05).各时点C组尿S100β蛋白含量均明显高于A组和B组(P<0.01),术后48 h和96 h B组尿S100β蛋白含量高于A组(P<0.05).B组术后恶心呕吐2例,C组5例.各组均无呼吸抑制发生.结论 应用上述剂量的舒芬太尼和芬太尼皆能安全有效进行新生儿术后镇痛.     

Optimal dose of fentanyl for postoperative epidural analgesia after thoracic surgery

BACKGROUND: We investigated the dose of fentanyl in ropivacaine for epidural anesthesia that will provide effective analgesia with minimal side effects after thoracic surgery. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled to undergo thoracic surgery were randomly allocated to four groups according to fentanyl dose in epidural analgesia: group R (0 microg x hr(-1); n = 15), group F1 (5 microg x hr(-1); n = 15), group F2 (10 microg x hr(-1); n = 15) and group F3 (15 microg x hr(-1); n = 15). Pain scores (visual analogue scale: VAS) were assessed at 1, 3, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hrs after surgery. Degrees of satisfaction regarding pain relief and complications during a period of 48 hrs after surgery were compared. RESULTS: Pain scores in group F3 were significantly lower than those in the other groups at 3, 6, and 12 hrs after surgery. The number of postoperative analgesics used in group R was significantly more than the numbers used in other groups. The incidences of side effects were similar in the four groups. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that continuous epidural administration of more than 15 microg x hr(-1) of fentanyl in ropivacaine provides pain relief and few side effects after thoracic surgery.     

A comparison of postoperative analgesia provided by wound infiltration or caudal analgesia

A prospective randomised study was performed to compare postoperative analgesia produced by caudal block with that of local wound infiltration in 54 children following unilateral inguinal herniotomy. There was no statistically significant difference in the analgesia produced by these two methods. The requirement for additional postoperative analgesia and the incidence of side-effects was similar in the two groups.     

地佐辛复合氟比洛芬酯或芬太尼用于开胸手术术后镇痛的比较

目的 比较地佐辛复合氟比洛芬酯或芬太尼用于开胸手术患者术后自控静脉镇痛(PCIA)的效果.方法 择期行开胸手术患者120例,随机均分为三组,术后均行PCIA,镇痛药配方分别为地佐辛30 mg+芬太尼0.5 mg(A组),地佐辛30 mg+氟比洛芬酯200 mg(B组),芬太尼0.5mg+氟比洛芬酯200 mg(C组),均加入托烷司琼6mg,且用生理盐水稀释至100 ml,初始负荷剂量2 ml,背景剂量2ml/h,单次PCA剂量0.5ml,锁定时间15 min.观察并记录患者术后2、4、8、24、48h的VAS疼痛评分、Prince-Henry疼痛评分、Ramsay镇静评分,以及术后24 h内PCA按压次数和不良反应.结果 术后2、4h,A组VAS疼痛评分、Prince-Henry疼痛评分和术后24 h内PCA按压次数明显高于B、C组(P＜0.05).术后2h,A组Ramsay镇静评分明显低于B、C组,术后4、8、24 h高于B、C组(P＜0.05).结论 地佐辛复合氟比洛芬酯可以安全有效地用于开胸手术术后镇痛,而地佐辛复合芬太尼在术后最初数小时内镇痛效果欠佳,不良反应偏高.     

Effectiveness of ropivacaine and fentanyl for postoperative epidural analgesia following thoracic surgery

BACKGROUND: Epidural ropivacaine is now a common drug used for postoperative analgesia. However, little information is available concerning regression of sensory blockade and analgesia following prolonged epidural infusion of ropivacaine. We investigated the efficacy of ropivacaine and fentanyl for postoperative analgesia after thoracic surgery. METHODS: Thirty patients undergoing thoracic surgery were enrolled. After surgery with general and thoracic epidural anesthesia, continuous epidural infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine+fentanyl (1.67 microg x ml(-1)) was started at a rate of 6 ml x h(-1) for patients whose height was more than 155 cm and 4 ml x h(-1) for those below 155 cm with possibility of an additional bolus injection of 3 ml at least every 60 min. RESULTS: An additional epidural injection of 3 ml produced a decrease in VAS without significant changes of vital signs. The greatest VAS was 10+/-25 mm in the incision site and 36+/-38 mm in the ipsilateral shoulder. Sensory blockade was sustained until the morning after the day of surgery. Also blood pressure and heart rate were stable throughout the observation period. There were no adverse effects except for slight nausea in three patients. CONCLUSIONS: A bolus of 3 ml with continuous 4-6 ml x h(-1) epidural injection of ropivacaine plus a small dose of fentanyl would decrease postoperative pain with stable vital signs in patients after thoracic surgery.     

Transdermal nitroglycerine enhances spinal sufentanil postoperative analgesia following orthopedic surgery

BACKGROUND: Sufentanil is a potent but short-acting spinal analgesic used to manage perioperative pain. This study evaluated the influence of transdermal nitroglycerine on the analgesic action of spinal sufentanil in patients undergoing orthopedic surgery. METHODS: Fifty-six patients were randomized to one of four groups. Patients were premedicated with 0.05-0.1 mg/kg intravenous midazolam and received 15 mg bupivacaine plus 2 ml of the test drug intrathecally (saline or 10 microg sufentanil). Twenty to 30 min after the spinal puncture, a transdermal patch of either 5 mg nitroglycerin or placebo was applied. The control group received spinal saline and transdermal placebo. The sufentanil group received spinal sufentanil and transdermal placebo. The nitroglycerin group received spinal saline and transdermal nitroglycerine patch. Finally, the sufentanil-nitroglycerin group received spinal sufentanil and transdermal nitroglycerine. Pain and adverse effects were evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale. RESULTS: The time to first rescue analgesic medication was longer for the sufentanil-nitroglycerin group (785+/-483 min) compared with the other groups (P<0.005). The time to first rescue analgesics was also longer for the sufentanil group compared with the control group (P<0.05). The sufentanil-nitroglycerin group group required less rescue analgesics in 24 h compared with the other groups (P<0.02) and had lesser 24-h pain visual analog scale scores compared with the control group (P<0.005), although these scores were similar to the sufentanil and nitroglycerin groups (P>0.05). The incidence of perioperative adverse effects was similar among groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Transdermal nitroglycerine alone (5 mg/day), a nitric oxide generator, did not result in postoperative analgesia itself, but it prolonged the analgesic effect of spinal sufentanil (10 microg) and provided 13 h of effective postoperative analgesia after knee surgery.     

Transdermal nitroglycerine enhances spinal neostigmine postoperative analgesia following gynecological surgery

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal neostigmine causes analgesia by inhibiting the breakdown of acetylcholine. Experimental data suggest that the production of endogenous nitric oxide is necessary for tonic cholinergic inhibition of spinal pain transmission. The purpose of this study was to determine whether association of transdermal nitroglycerine would enhance analgesia from a low dose of intrathecal neostigmine in patients undergoing gynecologic surgery during spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Forty-eight patients were randomized to one of four groups. Patients were premedicated with use of 0.05-0.1 mg/kg intravenous midazolam and received 15 mg bupivacaine plus 1 ml test drug intrathecally (saline or neostigmine, 5 microgram). Twenty to 30 min after the spinal puncture, a transdermal patch of either 5 mg nitroglycerin or placebo was applied. The control (Con) group received spinal saline and transdermal placebo. The neostigmine group received spinal neostigmine and transdermal placebo. The nitroglycerin group received spinal saline and a transdermal nitroglycerine patch. Finally, the neostigmine-nitroglycerin group received spinal neostigmine and transdermal nitroglycerine. Pain and adverse effects were evaluated using a 10-cm visual analog scale. RESULTS: Patients in the groups were similar regarding age, weight, height, and American Society of Anesthesiologists status. Sensory level to pin prick at 10 min, surgical duration, anesthetic duration, and visual analog scale score for pain at the time of administration of first rescue medication were statistically the same for all groups. The time to administration of first rescue analgesic (min) was longer in the neostigmine-nitroglycerin group (550 min; range, 458-1,440 min; median, 25-75th percentile) compared with the other groups (P < 0.001). The neostigmine-nitroglycerin group required fewer rescue analgesics in 24 h than did the control group (P < 0.0005), whereas the neostigmine group required less analgesics compared with the control group (P < 0.02). The incidence of perioperative adverse effects (nausea, vomiting, headache, back pain) was similar among groups (P > 0.05). CONCLUSION: Although neither intrathecal 5 microgram neostigmine alone nor transdermal nitroglycerine alone (5 mg/day) delayed the time to administration of first rescue analgesics, the combination of both provided an average of 14 h of effective postoperative analgesia after vaginoplasty, suggesting that transdermal nitroglycerin and the central cholinergic agent neostigmine may enhance each other's antinociceptive effects at the dose studied.     

比较术前和术中静脉注射帕瑞昔布钠对开胸术后芬太尼静脉自控镇痛的影响

目的 评价帕瑞昔布钠对开胸术后芬太尼静脉自控镇痛(PCIA)的效果及安全性.方法 60例ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级择期开胸手术患者随机均分为三组:Ⅰ组于切皮前15 min静脉注射帕瑞昔布钠40 mg;Ⅱ组于缝皮时静脉注射帕瑞昔布钠40 mg;Ⅲ组为空白对照组.术后均采用芬太尼PCIA镇痛.记录术后2、8、24、48 h的HR、MAP、疼痛VAS评分及不良反应;记录术后24 h内PCIA的芬太尼用量.结果 Ⅰ、Ⅱ组8、24 h VAS评分显著低于Ⅲ组(P<0.05);术后24 h芬太尼用量Ⅰ组[(0.53±0.02)mg]、Ⅱ组[(0.55±0.01)mg]明显低于Ⅲ组[(0.72±0.02)mg](P<0.05);Ⅰ、Ⅱ组不良反应发生率明显少于Ⅲ组(P<0.05).结论 帕瑞昔布钠可增强芬太尼术后镇痛效果降低不良反应发生率,不影响心血管功能,可安全用于开胸手术围术期辅助镇痛.     

地佐辛和芬太尼用于甲状腺术后镇痛对患者呼吸的影响

目的比较等效剂量地佐辛与芬太尼用于甲状腺术后镇痛对患者呼吸的影响。方法甲状腺手术患者80例,年龄20~65岁,随机均分为地佐辛组(D组)和芬太尼组(F组)。两组患者术后第1次感到疼痛时分别静注地佐辛0.15 mg/kg或芬太尼1.5μg/kg。记录用药前及用药后10、20、30 min的RR、SpO2;记录用药前及用药后1、2、4、8 h吞咽时VAS评分及咳嗽和深呼吸时的BCS评分。结果两组患者用药后各时点VAS、BCS评分差异无统计学意义。用药后10、20 min两组RR较用药前明显减慢,F组明显慢于D组(P<0.05),且F组有3例患者出现SpO2<90%。结论等效剂量地佐辛用于甲状腺术后镇痛对呼吸的抑制作用较芬太尼弱。     

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.     

A comparison of ropivacaine with fentanyl to bupivacaine with fentanyl for postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia

Ropivacaine for patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) may facilitate postoperative patient mobilization because it causes less motor block than bupivacaine. Forty patients undergoing abdominal surgery were randomized in a double-blinded manner to the following: 0.05% bupivacaine/4 microg fentanyl, 0.1% bupivacaine/fentanyl, 0.05% ropivacaine/fentanyl, or 0.1% ropivacaine/fentanyl for standardized PCEA. We measured pain scores, side effects, and PCEA consumption for 42 h. Lower-extremity motor function was assessed with electromyography and isometric force dynamometry. Analgesia was equivalent among groups. Local anesthetic use was more in the 0.1% Ropivacaine and 0.1% Bupivacaine groups (77% increase, P = 0.001). Motor function decreased during PCEA (10%-35% decrease from preoperative, P < 0.001) and was equivalent among groups. Eight patients were transiently unable to ambulate. These patients used more local anesthetic (45 vs 33 mg mean, P < 0.05) with additional decrease in motor function (32%, P < 0.004) compared with ambulating patients. Other side effects were mild and equivalent among solutions. PCEA with bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/fentanyl as 0.05% or 0.1% solutions appears clinically equipotent. Lower-extremity motor function decreases, but is unlikely to result in prolonged inability to ambulate. Use of a 0.05% solution may be advantageous to decrease local anesthetic use and prevent transient motor block. IMPLICATIONS: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia with bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/fentanyl as either 0.05% or 0.1% solutions are clinically similar. Lower-extremity motor function will decrease with the use of any of these combinations, but is unlikely to result in the inability to walk.     

The optimal dose of fentanyl added to 0.2% ropivacaine for postoperative epidural analgesia after gynecological surgery

BACKGROUND: Combined administration of local anesthetics and an opioid is frequently used in order to minimize the dose of each drug and to reduce adverse effects. Although fentanyl is commonly administered with local anesthetic, side effects of fentanyl increase in a dose-dependent manner. In this study, we determined the optimal dose of epidural fentanyl after gynecological surgery. METHODS: One hundred and sixteen adult patients scheduled for elective gynecological surgery were divided into 3 groups according to postoperative epidural analgesics; 0.2% ropivacaine (group R), 0.2% ropivacaine with 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group RF 2), or 0.2% ropivacaine with 5 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl (group RF 5). Each analgesic was infused at 5 ml x hr(-1) for 48 hr. Pain scores , incidence of NSAIDs administration and side effects were recorded for 48 hr after the surgery. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: Ropivacaine alone could not provide sufficient analgesia. Although the addition of 5 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl to 0.2% ropivacaine at a rate of 5 ml x hr(-1) improved postoperative pain, side effects caused by fentanyl increased. Supplementing 2 microg x ml(-1) fentanyl provided sufficient analgesia with the least incidence of side effects.     

术前肌注右美沙芬对全麻术后镇痛芬太尼用量的影响

目的　观察术前应用右美沙芬 (dextromethorphan ,DM )对全麻术后镇痛芬太尼用量的影响。方法　选择 4 0例ASAⅠ～Ⅱ级 ,拟在全麻下行腰椎手术的患者 ,随机分为对照组及DM组 ,术前 30min分别肌注 4ml生理盐水或DM 2 0mg。术后应用芬太尼行静脉自控镇痛 (PCIA)。记录患者术后首次要求镇痛的时间 ,术后 1、2、4、2 4、4 8h的疼痛评分 (VAS) ,镇静评分 (OAA/S) ,芬太尼用量及术后恶心呕吐的情况。结果　从手术结束到患者首次要求镇痛的时间 ,DM组 (35 38±10 5 6 )min ,比对照组显著延长 [(12 80± 5 72 )min](P <0 0 1)。DM组术后 4 8h内芬太尼的总用量 (0 4 2± 0 10 )mg ,显著低于对照组 [(0 81± 0 0 9)mg](P <0 0 1)。术后恶心呕吐的发生率DM组与对照组分别为 10 %和 30 % (P <0 0 5 )。结论　全麻下施行腰椎手术 ,术前 30min肌肉注射DM2 0mg ,可为患者提供超前镇痛 ,延长术后第一次要求镇痛的时间 ,减少术后 4 8h内芬太尼的用量及恶心呕吐的发生率     

患者自控静脉镇痛用于脊椎融合术后镇痛的临床观察

目的 观察各年龄组患者脊椎融合术后使用患者自控静脉镇痛(patient-controlled intravenous analgesia,PCIA)进行镇痛治疗的有效性及并发症发生的情况,并评价镇痛效果与年龄、性别等因素的关系.方法 选取自2007年6月至2009年2月于我院行脊椎融合手术的患者154名,根据年龄分为20岁以下组、20岁～39岁组、40岁～59岁组和60岁及以上组,各组再根据性别分为2个亚组.记录患者术后的痛觉评分、与PCIA应用有关的并发症以及患者对PCIA治疗的满意度. 结果各组患者使用PCIA治疗后VAS评分均降低.PCIA使用时间与年龄、性别无明显关联.40岁～59岁年龄组中患者VAS评分与年龄存在正相关.女性患者组中VAS评分与年龄存在正相关.87.7%的患者对术后PCIA治疗的满意度为优和良.结论 PCIA治疗腰椎融合术术后疼痛是安全、有效的.     

Continuous spinal analgesia or opioid-added continuous epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control after hip replacement

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Continuous spinal anaesthesia and continuous epidural anaesthesia are both able to provide adequate postoperative pain relief. Combining local anaesthetics and opioids results in synergistic effects. The purpose of this randomized, prospective study was to compare quality of analgesia, side-effects and patient's satisfaction between spinal bupivacaine alone and epidural bupivacaine with sufentanil postoperatively. METHODS: Fifty-nine patients scheduled for hip arthroplasty were randomly assigned either to Group 1 receiving continuous spinal anaesthesia or Group 2 receiving continuous epidural anaesthesia. Postoperatively, those in Group 1 received a 1 mL bolus followed by a continuous infusion of 10 mL/24 h of bupivacaine 0.25 %. Those in Group 2 received a 5 mL bolus of lidocaine 2%, followed by a continuous infusion of bupivacaine 0.25% with sufentanil 0.001 mg mL(-1) at 4 mL h(-1). Pain was measured using a verbal rating score and a visual analogue scale. RESULTS: Group 1 and Group 2 of 43.3% and 37.9% reported complete analgesia on the verbal rating score. No statistically significant difference was found in the visual analogue scale. Nausea and vomiting occurred significantly more often in Group 2. The patient satisfaction rates did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous spinal analgesia with bupivacaine alone and continuous epidural analgesia with bupivacaine/sufentanil are both effective for postoperative pain relief after hip replacement. Those patients in the epidural group reported better analgesia but had a higher rate of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Efficacy of pain therapy did not correlate with patient satisfaction.     

Pharmacokinetics of cefazolin applied topically to the surgical wound.

Topical application of antibiotics is used in the prophylaxis of postoperative surgical infections. However, whether topically applied antibiotics remain primarily in the surgical wound fluid or are systemically absorbed is uncertain. The pharmacokinetics of topically applied cefazolin were studied in a canine model that allowed simultaneous determination of serum and wound fluid antibiotic concentrations. Topical administration of cefazolin resulted in high antibiotic concentrations in the wound fluid for prolonged periods and rapid systemic absorption. Bioavailability after topical administration was 95%. Within 1 hour, the serum concentrations after topical administration equaled the serum concentrations after intravenous administration, and the concentration time curves declined in parallel. In wound fluid, the mean time above the susceptibility break point minimum inhibitory concentration after topical administration of cefazolin was 5.76 hours compared with the estimated time above the minimum inhibitory concentration of 2.55 hours after intravenous administration.