Epidural naloxone reduces intestinal hypomotility but not analgesia of epidural morphine

PURPOSE: Epidural morphine is associated with decreased bowel motility and increased transit time. Low doses of intravenous naloxone reduce morphine-induced pruritus without reversing analgesia, but the effect of epidural naloxone on bowel motility has not been studied. Therefore we evaluated bowel motility and analgesia when naloxone was co-administered with morphine into the epidural space. METHODS: Forty-three patients having combined thoracic epidural and general anesthesia for subtotal gastrectomy were randomly assigned to one of two study groups. All received a bolus dose of 3 mg epidural morphine at the beginning of surgery, followed by a continuous epidural infusion containing 3 mg morphine in 100 ml bupivacaine 0.125% with either no naloxone (control group, n = 18) or a calculated dose of 0.208 microg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) of naloxone (experimental group, n = 25) for 48 hr. We measured the time to the first postoperative passage of flatus and feces to evaluate the restoration of bowel function, and visual analog scales (VAS) for pain during rest and movement. Scores were assessed at 2, 4, 8, 16, 24, 36 and 48 hr postoperatively. RESULTS: The experimental group had a shorter time to the first postoperative passage of flatus (5 1.9 +/- 1 6.6 hr vs 87.0 +/- 19.5 hr, P < 0.001 ) and feces (95.3 +/- 25.0 hr vs 132.9 +/- 29.4 hr, P < 0.001). No differences were found in either resting or active VAS between the two groups. CONCLUSION: Epidural naloxone reduces epidural morphine-induced intestinal hypomotility without reversing its analgesic effects.     

Effects of simultaneous epidural administration of ropivacaine and morphine on the post-operative pain in the gynecologic patients

BACKGROUND: We examined the effects of simultaneous epidural administration of ropivacaine with morphine on the level of the post-operative METHODS: Forty-one patients were assigned to one of three groups [ropivacaine (R), ropivacaine + morphine (RM) or morphine (M)]. In the R group, 5 ml of 1% ropivacaine bolus was administered just before the skin incision followed by infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine (5 ml x hr(-1)) during the first 48 hours after the operation. In the RM and M groups, 5 ml of 1% ropivacaine + 2 mg of morphine bolus was administered just before the skin incision followed by infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine (RM group, 5 ml x hr(-1)) or saline (M group, 5 ml x hr(-1)) + 4 mg x day(-1) of morphine during the first 48 hours after the operation. RESULTS: The score of post-operative pain in the R group is higher than that of the MR group or that of M group. There is no difference between the score of post-operative pain of the MR group and that of the M group. CONCLUSIONS: These data suggested that simultaneous epidural administration of ropivacaine with morphine produces no beneficial effect as compared with morphine alone.     

Combined spinal and epidural anesthesia for cesarean section: a retrospective study with 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine

BACKGROUND: We investigated retrospectively the relationship between the intrathecal dose of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine and the use of 2% mepivacaine through an epidural catheter. METHODS: Forty-nine patients undergoing cesarean section with combined spinal and epidural anesthesia (CSEA) were analyzed. They were divided into two groups; with (CSEA group) and without additional epidural injection group (spinal group). RESULTS: In the CSEA group (24 patients received 1.2 +/- 0.4 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine), 5-10 ml of 2% mepivacaine were required to achieve the adequate surgical anesthesia. In the spinal group (25 patients received 1.6 +/- 0.3 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine), cesarean section was performed without additional mepivacaine before delivery. The analgesic level and the amount of fluid infusion were similar in the two groups. However, 20% of patients in the spinal group showed hypotension (systolic blood pressure below 80 mmHg), although no patients in the CSEA group developed hypotension. The amount of ephedrine used before delivery was significantly larger in the spinal group (8.9 +/- 7.7 mg) than in the CSEA group (3.9 +/- 4.3 mg). CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anesthesia induced by 1.2 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with sequential epidural block induced by 5-10 ml of 2% mepivacaine caused no hypotension during cesarean section.     

Epidural naloxone reduces pruritus and nausea without affecting analgesia by epidural morphine in bupivacaine

PURPOSE: To determine whether epidural naloxone preserved analgesia while minimizing side effects caused by epidural morphine. METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing combined epidural and general anesthesia for hysterectomy were randomly assigned to one of four groups. All received 2 mg epidural morphine bolus one hour before the end of surgery and a continuous epidural infusion was started containing 4 mg morphine in 100 ml bupivacaine 0.125% with either no naloxone (Group 1, n = 20), 0.083 microg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) of naloxone (Group 2, n = 20), 0.125 microg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) of naloxone (Group 3, n = 20) or 0.167 microg x kg(-1) x hr(-1) of naloxone (Group 4, n = 20). Analgesia and side effects were evaluated by blinded observers. RESULTS: The combination of epidural morphine and bupivacaine provided good analgesia. Eight hours after the end of surgery, the pain score in the group receiving the highest dose of naloxone was lower than in the control group (VAS 1.2 vs. 2.0, P<0.05) but there was less pruritus in the high-dose naloxone group (itching score 1.3 vs. 1.9, P<0.05). Pain scores were no different in any of the naloxone groups from the control group. Itching was less in both of the higher dose naloxone groups (P<0.05 at 8, 16, and 32 hours). The incidence of vomiting in the control group was 40% vs. 5% for high dose naloxone group (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Epidural naloxone reduced morphine-induced side effects in dose-dependent fashion without reversal of the analgesic effect.     

Epidural patient-controlled analgesia: influence of bupivacaine and hydromorphone basal infusion on pain control after cesarean delivery.

Epidural administration of hydromorphone was evaluated using a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) delivery system in 170 healthy women undergoing elective cesarean delivery with epidural bupivacaine who were randomly assigned to one of four epidural PCA treatment groups: group I, hydromorphone alone by bolus administration; group II, hydromorphone, with a continuous (basal) infusion; group III, hydromorphone in combination with 0.08% bupivacaine by bolus administration; or group IV, hydromorphone and bupivacaine, with a concurrent infusion of both drugs. Patients in group I required significantly less opioid medication (2.1 +/- 1.1 mg [mean +/- SD]) during the first 24 h than patients in group II (3.3 +/- 1.3 mg). Similarly, patients in group III self-administered significantly less hydromorphone (2.0 +/- 1.0 mg) and bupivacaine (23.3 +/- 11.4 mg) during the first 24 h of PCA therapy, compared with patients in group IV (hydromorphone [2.7 +/- 1.1 mg] and bupivacaine [31.5 +/- 11.6 mg]). The concomitant use of a local anesthetic or basal opioid infusion with hydromorphone via epidural PCA did not decrease the number of PCA demands or delivered doses. In addition, patients in all four groups had similar pain, sedation, discomfort, fatigue, and anxiety scores. The frequency of awakening at night to self-administer analgesic medication was not decreased when a basal infusion was used.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

Postoperative analgesia by combined continuous infusion and patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) following hip replacement: ropivacaine versus bupivacaine

BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine is a new local anaesthetic, which compared to bupivacaine is less toxic and shows greater sensory and motor block dissociation. We hypothesised that treatment of postoperative pain with a combined regimen of continuous epidural infusion and Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia (PCEA) using ropivacaine could have given better results compared with those we had obtained using bupivacaine. METHODS: Patients undergoing total hip replacement were randomly assigned to two groups. They received epidural analgesia for postoperative pain treatment using ropivacaine, 2 mg x ml(-1) or bupivacaine 2 mg x ml(-1). Both drugs were administered as a constant infusion of 6 ml x h(-1) supplemented by PCEA bolus doses of 2 ml. Patients in both groups received morphine intravenously on demand from a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. An independent observer recorded pain scores, intensity of motor block and morphine consumption at regular intervals during the first 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: Fifty-one patients were evaluated. Ropivacaine and bupivacaine, in similar amounts, provided similar results assessed as adequate to very good postoperative analgesia, whereas motor block was significantly more intense in patients treated with bupivacaine. CONCLUSIONS: Despite similar analgesic effects, epidural infusion of ropivacaine combined with PCEA provides higher patient satisfaction than equal doses of bupivacaine due to lack of motor block.     

Epidural morphine improves pain relief and maintains sensory analgesia during continuous epidural bupivacaine after abdominal surgery

Twenty patients scheduled for elective major abdominal surgery were matched into two groups with regard to age, sex, height, body weight, and surgical procedure. Both groups received general anesthesia plus lumbar epidural analgesia with similar loading doses of bupivacaine 0.5% (23.1 +/- 1.0 and 23.3 +/- 0.8 ml) (mean +/- SEM) followed by continuous infusion of plain bupivacaine 0.5% (8 ml/hr) plus, in one group, epidural morphine (0.5 mg/hr). Pain score on a 5-point scale and sensory analgesia (pin prick) were assessed hourly for 16 hours after skin incision. If sensory analgesia decreased more than 5 segments from preoperative levels or if pain scores reached 2 (moderate pain), the patients were removed from the study, and pain was treated with other methods. Preoperative mean (+/- SEM) sensory levels of analgesia were similar in the bupivacaine and the bupivacaine-morphine groups (T3.4 +/- 0.5 and T3.3 +/- 0.4, respectively). In the group receiving only bupivacaine, sensory analgesia regressed over time with a simultaneous increase in pain score. Thus, within 10 hr after skin incision, seven patients in this group were discharged from the study, and 16 hr after incision only one patient maintained initial level of sensory analgesia. In contrast, each patient receiving bupivacaine plus morphine had stable sensory analgesia and was completely free of pain as indicated by a mean pain score of zero during the 16-hr observation period. Thus epidural morphine may improve pain relief and maintain analgesia during continuous epidural bupivacaine administration after abdominal surgery.     

Patient-controlled epidural analgesia reduces analgesic requirements compared to continuous epidural infusion after major abdominal surgery

PURPOSE: To compare the quality of pain relief and incidence of side effects between 24-hr postoperative continuous epidural infusion (CEI) and subsequent patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with different analgesics after major abdominal surgery. METHODS: Twenty-eight women undergoing extended gynecological tumour surgery received postoperative CEI with 0.15 mL x kg(-1) x hr(-1) 0.2% ropivacaine (R: n = 14) or 0.125% bupivacaine plus 0.5 micro g x mL(-1) sufentanil (BS: n = 14) during 24 postoperative hours. Twenty-four hours later, postoperative pain management was switched to PCEA without background infusion and 5 mL single bolus application of R or BS every 20 min at most. Visual analogue scales (VAS; 1-100 mm) were assessed by patients at rest and on coughing after 24 hr of CEI and PCEA. Side effects, doses of local anesthetics and opioids were recorded and plasma concentrations of total and unbound ropivacaine and bupivacaine were measured. RESULTS: Patients required lower doses of each respective analgesic medication with PCEA (R: 108 +/- 30 mL; BS: 110 +/- 28 mL) than with CEI (R: 234 +/- 40; BS: 260 +/- 45; P < 0.01). Ropivacaine plasma concentrations were lower 24 hr after PCEA when compared with CEI (P < 0.01). No patient after PCEA but two after CEI (n = 4; NS) presented motor block. PCEA with R provided better postoperative pain relief than CEI (37 +/- 32 vs 59+/-27, P < 0.05). No difference in parenteral opioid rescue medication between CEI and PCEA was seen. CONCLUSION: PCEA in comparison to preceding CEI provides equivalent analgesia with lower local anesthetic doses and plasma levels, and without motor blocking side effects, irrespective of the applied drug regimen.     

Postoperative epidural analgesia after upper abdominal surgery: the effects of low concentrations of bupivacaine combined with a low dose of opioid]

The efficacy and safety of postoperative analgesia with continuous epidural infusion of either morphine or fentanyl in combination with a low dose of bupivacaine were evaluated in 205 patients after upper abdominal surgery. Each patient was given bupivacaine alone (0.125% or 0.25%) or one of six combinations; 0.25%, 0.125%, or 0.0625% bupivacaine with morphine (M: 10 micrograms.ml-1) or fentanyl (F: 1 microgram.ml-1). After injection of 6 ml of each solution at the end of surgery, continuous epidural infusion was started at a rate of 4.2 ml.hr-1 for 48 hr. The degree of pain relief was assessed by the necessity of supplementary analgesics, the visual analogue pain scale and the Prince Henry pain scale. The most effective analgesic situation was obtained with the 0.25% M and the 0.25% F groups. The 0.125% M and 0.125% F groups showed adequate analgesia for elderly patients with few side effects. Regarding the plasma catecholamines measured 24 hr after the surgery, there was no significant change in fentanyl groups as well as in the group given 0.125% bupivacaine alone. Although the incidence of hypotension and pruritus was slightly higher in morphine groups, no patient developed respiratory depression. It is suggested, therefore, that a small dose of opioid should be added when continuous epidural infusion is required.     

Effects of epidural naloxone on pruritus induced by epidural morphine: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND: Epidural morphine produces prolonged analgesia but has many side effects including pruritus. Naloxone is an antagonist that can reverse the side effects of morphine. METHOD: We studied the effects of continuously administered epidural naloxone mixed with morphine on side effects and analgesia in a randomized, double blind, two-armed study. Fifty-eight pregnant women undergoing cesarean section were enrolled. All patients received a 4-mg epidural bolus of morphine in the post-anesthetic care unit. After this, patients in group M (n=28) received continuous epidural morphine (6 mg over 48 h) in 0.1% bupivacaine; patients in group N (n=30) received an epidural infusion containing naloxone (1.2 mg over 48 h) and morphine (6 mg over 48 h) in 0.1% bupivacaine. The infusion rate was 2 mL/h. RESULTS: The incidence (82% versus 47%) and severity of pruritus were lower in group N than group M (P=0.001). There were no significant differences in pain score or in the incidence of nausea, vomiting or urinary disturbance between groups. CONCLUSION: Continuous epidural infusion of naloxone combined with morphine is effective in reducing the incidence and severity of pruritus induced by epidural morphine.     

Continuous epidural infusion of morphine for treatment of pain after thoracic surgery: a new technique

We evaluated postoperative pain relief and the incidence of side effects of three methods of thoracic epidural analgesia. Ninety patients, divided into three equal groups, received postoperative analgesia after thoracic surgery either as intermittent epidural injections of bupivacaine (25 mg/5 ml, 0.5% solution) as needed, or, intermittent epidural injections of morphine (5 mg/5 ml of normal saline, 0.1% solution) as needed, or continuous epidural infusion of morphine (0.1 mg, in 1 ml of normal saline) per hour supplemented with intravenous morphine (2 mg) upon request. Pain relief was evaluated by each patient on a pain scale visual analogue and by pain relief questionnaire for a period of 72 hr. Postoperative pain relief was achieved equally with these three methods of epidural analgesia in all patients with no significant difference between groups. Intermittent epidural injection of bupivacaine relieved pain for 4.9 +/- 1.9 (SD) hr/injection and was associated with urinary retention in all patients, with numbness and weakness of the hands in 12 patients, and with severe hypotension in 7 patients. Intermittent epidural injection of morphine relieved pain for 5.8 +/- 2.3 hr/injection and was associated with urinary retention in all patients, with pruritus in 12 patients, and with central narcosis and respiratory depression in 8 patients. Continuous epidural infusion of morphine with occasional intravenous morphine (2 mg) supplementation also effectively relieved postoperative pain and was associated with minimal systemic side effects. One patient complained of pruritus, and two patients developed urinary retention.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)     

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.     

Epidural fentanyl markedly improves thoracic epidural analgesia in a low-dose infusion of bupivacaine, adrenaline and fentanyl. A randomized, double-blind crossover study with and without fentanyl

BACKGROUND: The objectives of the present study were to evaluate the effects on postoperative pain intensity, pain relief, and side effects when removing fentanyl from an optimally titrated epidural infusion consisting of bupivacaine, fentanyl and adrenaline. METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, crossover study was carried out in 20 patients after major upper abdominal surgery requiring a large longitudinal incision. Patients with only mild pain when coughing during thoracic epidural infusion of about 10 ml per hour of bupivacaine 1 mg x ml(-1), fentanyl 2 microg x ml(-1), and adrenaline 2 microg x ml(-1) were included. On the 1st and 2nd postoperative days, each patient was given a double-blind epidural infusion, at the same rate, with or without fentanyl. The effects were observed for 6 h or until pain when coughing became unacceptable in spite of rescue analgesia. Rescue analgesia consisted of up to two patient-controlled epidural bolus injections (4 ml) per hour and intravenous morphine if necessary. RESULTS: Main outcome measures, i.e. pain intensity when coughing and at rest, increased (P<0.001) when fentanyl (19.2+/-5.2 microg x h(-1)) was omitted from the epidural infusion: after 6 h pain intensity when coughing had increased to unacceptable levels in spite of increased consumption of rescue bupivacaine and adrenaline (P<0.001). Within 15-20 min after restarting the triple epidural mixture with fentanyl, pain intensity was again reduced to mild pain when coughing. CONCLUSIONS: A low dose of epidural fentanyl (20 microg x h(-1)) markedly improved the pain-relieving effect of bupivacaine and adrenaline infused epidurally at a thoracic level after major upper abdominal surgery. This dose of fentanyl is much too small to relieve severe dynamic pain when given systemically. Therefore, this study indirectly supports the view that a low-dose thoracic epidural infusion of fentanyl has a spinal analgesic site of action.     

Continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine and morphine for postoperative pain relief

Forty-five patients admitted to the intensive care unit following thoracic or abdominal surgery received continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine and morphine for 48 hours. During the first 10 hours, the patients received 0.25% bupivacaine solution with 0.005% morphine at the rate of 4 ml.h-1, and bupivacaine concentration was decreased to 0.125% with the same morphine concentration. The mean infusion rate of bupivacaine during 48 hours was 0.12 +/- 0.03 (SD) mg.kg-1.h-1 and that of morphine was 4.0 +/- 1.0 micrograms.kg-1.h-1. Thirty-one patients (69%) complained no pain on deep breathing at 24 hours and 33 patients (74%) required no other type of analgesics during this study. The mean plasma bupivacaine concentration was 0.6 +/- 0.3 microgram.ml-1 at 48 hours. Hypotension defined as systolic arterial pressure below 90 mmHg and itching were observed in 15 patients (33%), but no other severe side effects were noted. Continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine and morphine mixture for 48 hours postoperatively provided effective pain relief with a low incidence of side effects.     

Intraoperative intravenous ketamine in combination with epidural analgesia: postoperative analgesia after renal surgery

We designed this double-blinded, randomized, controlled study to evaluate the effect of small-dose ketamine IV in combination with epidural morphine and bupivacaine on postoperative pain after renal surgery. An epidural catheter was inserted, and the administration of morphine and bupivacaine was started before surgery. Forty patients were assigned to one of two groups (ketamine or control). The ketamine group was administered a ketamine bolus and infusion during surgery. The median visual analog pain scale (VAS) scores at rest were significantly lower in the ketamine group during the first 6 h (P < 0.01). VAS pain scores on coughing were also significantly lower in the ketamine group (P < 0.01). Cumulative postoperative total analgesic consumption was less in the ketamine group on Days 1 and 2 (P < 0.001). The first analgesic demand time was shorter in the control group (9.2 +/- 11.5 min) than in the ketamine group (22.3 +/- 17.1 min) (P < 0.0001). The incidence of nausea and pruritus was more frequent in the control group (P < 0.05). In conclusion, postoperative analgesia was more effective when spinal cord and brain sensitization were blocked by a combination of epidural morphine/bupivacaine and IV ketamine. IMPLICATIONS: Renal nociception conducted multisegmentally by both the spinal nerves (T10 to L1) and the vagus nerve cannot be blocked by epidural analgesia alone. We demonstrated that IV ketamine had an improved analgesic or opioid-sparing effect when it was combined with epidural bupivacaine and morphine after renal surgery.     

Central neuraxial opioid analgesia after caesarean section: comparison of epidural diamorphine and intrathecal morphine

In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study in 55 women undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia, we compared epidural diamorphine 3 mg (2 distinct boluses, group ED) with single-dose intrathecal morphine 0.2 mg (group SM), in terms of analgesic efficacy, patient satisfaction and side-effects at 2, 3, 4, 8, 12, 16, 24 and 28 h postoperatively. There were no significant differences between groups in pain (assessed by 100 mm visual analogue scale), incidence of pruritus, sedation or respiratory depression measured by continuous pulse oximetry. However, time to first request for supplementary oral analgesia was longer in SM than in ED (mean +/- SD: 22.3+/-12.0 h vs. 13.8+/-6.5 h, P=0.04). The incidence of nausea or vomiting was significantly higher in SM than ED (73% vs. 41%, P=0.01). In ED, the mean +/- SD time to requirement of the second bolus was 6.7+/-3.2 h. There was a high level of satisfaction in both groups. We conclude that two boluses of epidural diamorphine 3 mg and single-dose intrathecal morphine 0.2 mg provide satisfactory analgesia after caesarean section, but spinal morphine was associated with both delayed requirement for supplementary analgesia and a higher incidence of nausea and vomiting.     

Addition of 0.1% bupivacaine to buprenorphine and droperidol in patient-controlled epidural analgesia improved postoperative pain scores on coughing after gynecological surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic efficacy of additional 0.1% bupivacaine to patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) using buprenorphine and droperidol after gynecological surgery. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blinded study. SETTING: Operating theater and general ward at Jichi Medical School Hospital. PATIENTS: Thirty patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II scheduled for gynecological surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received combined general and epidural anesthesia for surgery and epidural analgesia for postoperative analgesia. Patients were assigned to receive PCEA with or without 0.1% bupivacaine. Group 1 (n = 15) received buprenorphine 20 microg and droperidol 0.1 mg diluted with saline, and group 2 (n = 15) received bupivacaine 2 mg, buprenorphine 20 microg, and droperidol 0.1 mg diluted with saline (0.1% bupivacaine solution) in a bolus dose of the PCEA, respectively. No background epidural infusion was used. MEASUREMENTS: Visual analog pain scale (VAPS) scores at rest and on coughing, and cumulative frequency of self-administrated analgesic solution in PCEA were recorded at 24 and 48 hours postoperatively. MAIN RESULTS: There were no significant differences noted between the groups in VAPS scores at rest or in cumulative volumes of PCEA solution in 24 or 48 hours postoperatively. Median VAPS scores on coughing in group 2 were significantly lower than those values in group 1 at 24 hours (36 vs 65 mm, P < .001) and 48 hours (32 vs 54 mm, P = .036) postoperatively. CONCLUSIONS: Addition of 0.1% bupivacaine to PCEA using buprenorphine and droperidol provides better analgesia on coughing after gynecological surgery.     

RETRACTED ARTICLE: Hemodynamics, intra-mucosal pH and regulators of circulation during perioperative epidural analgesia

PURPOSE: To evaluate the effects of perioperative epidural analgesia on hemodynamics, splanchnic perfusion and regulators of circulation. METHODS: Twenty patients undergoing aortic surgery were randomised into two groups: epidural analgesia group (EAG): epidural analgesia with bupivacaine (15 ml, 0.125%) was started before surgery. Eight and 16 hr postoperatively 10 ml bupivacaine 0.125% and 1 mg morphine were given. Control group (COG): patients received no epidural catheter. Monitoring included pulmonary artery catheter and gastric tonometer. Norepinephrine, epinephrine, renin, ADH, ANP and endothelin were measured: before epidural analgesia (T0), before aortic clamping (T1), 20 min after aortic clamping (T2), after declamping the first leg (T3), at end of surgery (T4), one hour (T5) and 24 hr postoperatively (T6). RESULTS: At T5 mean arterial blood pressure decreased in EAG compared with baseline (86 +/- 16 to 75 +/- 8 mmHg) and compared with COG (75 +/- 8 vs 84 +/- 11 mmHg). At T2 pulmonary capillary wedge pressure and cardiac index increased and at T6 decreased in both groups. Systemic vascular resistance decreased at T I and at T3-T5 in EAG compared with COG and at T1 and T3-T6 to baseline (1472 +/- 448 to 1027 +/- 184 dyn x sec x cm(-5) x m(-2)). In EAG and in COG, pHi decreased compared with baseline but without group differences. In both groups, epinephrine, norepinephrine, renin, and ADH levels increased from baseline. Endothelin and ANP levels showed no changes. CONCLUSIONS: Perioperatively administrated epidural bupivacaine has no beneficially effects on hemodynamics, pHi or release of regulators of circulation.     

罗哌卡因硬膜外持续输注下氯诺昔康PCIA的临床效应

目的 研究硬膜外持续输注罗哌卡因期间氯诺昔康静脉PCA的临床效应和不良反应,并以吗啡对照比较。方法 选择60例(ASAⅠ～Ⅱ)妇科经腹子宫全切手术病人,随机分为L组与M组,双盲观察,均采用双泵行PCA治疗。其PCA设置为Bolus 1ml/次,锁定时间为5min,1h限量12ml。镇痛效果和副作用评定:(1)采用视觉模拟评分(VAS),0为无痛、10为剧痛。(2)BCS舒适评分。(3)病人对PCA总体印象评分。(4)记录可能出现的并发症和不良反应。结果 两组病人的一般情况相似,24h硬膜外罗哌卡因使用剂量均为192mg,L组与M组未按压PCA泵的病人各为5例(21.7％),静脉PCA用药剂量分别为(3.4±2.8)mg(L组)和(4.7±3.5)mg(M组),两药用量比值为1:1.4(P>0.05);相同时间段内两组间VAS、BCS、Bromage评分及D1/D2比值均无统计学差异。结论0.2％罗哌卡因硬膜外持续输注(4ml/h)能明显减少静脉PCA用量,新型非甾体类抗炎药氯诺昔康与吗啡静脉用药效价相似,但氯诺昔康对病人恶心呕吐的不良反应具有明显减少的优点。     

Interpleural or thoracic epidural analgesia for pain after thoracotomy. A double blind study

The analgetic effect of bupivacaine given epidurally or interpleurally after thoracotomy was investigated in a randomized, double blind, placebo controlled study. 32 patients with both an epidural and an interpleural catheter, were randomized to receive either interpleural or epidural analgesia. The interpleural group was given bupivacaine 5 mg ml^-1 with 5 microgram epinephrine as a 30 ml interpleural bolus, followed by a continuous infusion starting at a rate of 7 ml per hour and epidurally a bolus of 0.9% NaCl followed by a continuous infusion of 0.9% NaCl. The epidural group was given bupivacaine 3.75 mg–ml^-1 with 5 microgram epinephrine as a 5 ml epidural bolus, followed by a continuous infusion starting at a rate of 5 ml per hour and interpleurally a bolus of 0.9% NaCl followed by a continuous infusion of 0.9% NaCl. The draining tubes were clamped during the injection of the interpleural bolus and 15 min afterwards. Adequacy of pain relief was evaluated with the Prins–Henry pain scale. Morphine requirement was registered, there was no difference between the groups in painscores or need for additional morphine.