Postoperative analgesia with epidural fentanyl.

A retrospective analysis of 133 patients who received continuous epidural fentanyl for postoperative analgesia is presented. Using a concentration of 5 micrograms/mL of fentanyl, patients received continuous epidural infusions for 24 to 72 hours postoperatively. The average rate of infusion was 60 micrograms/h. A total of 59.3% of the patients received no additional narcotics; 26.3% required supplemental narcotics during the first 24 hours only. Three percent had the infusion discontinued because it provided poor pain control. Side effects were less than, or comparable to, those of epidural morphine. Respiratory depression, defined as a respiratory rate of less than 8, or apnea did not occur. Urinary retention occurred in one patient. Pruritus occurred in 4% (6 patients). Nausea occurred in 25.5%, a rate comparable to that which occurred with epidural morphine. No side effects occurred in 70.6% of the patients reviewed. These data show that epidural fentanyl provides good to excellent pain relief with minimal side effects.     

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.     

The clinical effectiveness of epidural bupivacaine, bupivacaine with lidocaine, and bupivacaine with fentanyl for labor analgesia

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To examine the efficacy of bupivacaine alone and in combination with lidocaine or fentanyl for epidural analgesia during labor. DESIGN: Randomized, single-blind study. SETTING: Labor and delivery unit at a university medical center. PATIENTS: Forty-five primiparas requesting epidural analgesia. INTERVENTIONS: Following epidural placement at L3-4 interspace, patients received either bupivacaine 0.5% (Group 1, n = 15), bupivacaine 0.25% with lidocaine 1% (Group 2, n = 15), or bupivacaine 0.5% with fentanyl 50 micrograms in 10 ml of saline (Group 3, n = 15). Patients in Groups 1 and 2 received 6 to 10 ml of local anesthetic depending on patient height, while patients in Group 3 received 5 ml of local anesthetic plus 50 micrograms of fentanyl in 10 ml of saline. All solutions contained epinephrine 1:200,000. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Patients were assessed at regular intervals following administration of the epidural solution. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were used to measure onset of analgesia, time to complete pain relief, duration of analgesia, and patient satisfaction with therapy. The frequency of shivering and pruritus and the extent of sensory/motor block also were evaluated. There were no intragroup differences in time to complete pain relief or patient satisfaction. However, patients in Group 3 noted the most rapid onset and longest duration of pain relief. Patients in Group 3 also experienced significantly less shivering and had the lowest degree of motor block. Two patients in Group 3 experienced mild pruritus. CONCLUSIONS: Epidurally administered fentanyl safely extended the duration of labor analgesia while reducing bupivacaine dose requirements and magnitude of motor block. In this setting, the combination of bupivacaine and lidocaine offered no clinical advantage over bupivacaine alone.     

Does epidural fentanyl decrease the efficacy of epidural morphine after cesarean delivery?

Earlier studies have suggested that epidural fentanyl improves intraoperative analgesia during cesarean section, but others have suggested that it worsens postoperative analgesia from epidural morphine. The purpose of this study was to determine whether epidural fentanyl given before epidural morphine improves the quality of intraoperative epidural anesthesia without worsening postoperative analgesia provided by epidural morphine. Sixty patients having epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery were studied. Epidural anesthesia was established using 2% lidocaine with epinephrine 5 micrograms/mL. After delivery, either fentanyl 100 micrograms/10 mL or normal saline-control 10 mL was injected through the epidural catheter in a randomized, double-blind manner. All patients received 3.5 mg of morphine epidurally after uterine repair. After administration of the epidural study drug, there were no significant differences in the pain responses during surgery between the two groups. Patients in the fentanyl group experienced significantly less nausea and vomiting between delivery and the end of surgery than did patients in the normal saline-control group (P = 0.013). Postoperatively, visual analogue scale scores for pain, pruritus, nausea, and sedation were similar at 1, 2, 4, and 8 h in the two groups. We conclude that fentanyl 100 micrograms administered epidurally during cesarean delivery did not improve intraoperative analgesia, but significantly reduced intraoperative nausea and vomiting without diminishing the efficacy of postoperative analgesia provided by epidural morphine.     

A randomized,double-blinded comparison of thoracic epidural ropivacaine,ropivacaine/fentanyl,or bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia

Epidural ropivacaine has not been compared with bupivacaine for postthoracotomy analgesia. Eighty patients undergoing elective lung surgery were randomized in a double-blinded manner to receive one of three solutions for high thoracic epidural analgesia. A continuous epidural infusion of 0.1 mL. kg(-1). h(-1) of either 0.2% ropivacaine, 0.15% ropivacaine/fentanyl 5 micro g/mL, or 0.1% bupivacaine/fentanyl 5 micro g/mL was started at admission to the intensive care unit. We assessed pain scores (rest and spirometry), IV morphine consumption, spirometry, hand grip strength, PaCO(2), heart rate, blood pressure, respiratory rate, and side effects (sedation, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus) for 48 h. Thoracic epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl provided adequate pain relief similar to bupivacaine/fentanyl during the first 2 postoperative days after posterolateral thoracotomy. The use of plain 0.2% ropivacaine was associated with worse pain control during spirometry, larger consumption of IV morphine, and increased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. Morphine requirements were larger in the ropivacaine group, with no differences between bupivacaine/fentanyl and ropivacaine/fentanyl groups. Patients in the ropivacaine group experienced more pain and performed worse in spirometry than patients who received epidural fentanyl. There was no significant difference in motor block. We conclude that epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl offers no clinical advantage compared with bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: Thoracic epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl provided adequate pain relief and similar analgesia to bupivacaine/fentanyl during the first 2 postoperative days after posterolateral thoracotomy. Plain 0.2% ropivacaine was associated with worse pain control and an increased incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. We conclude that epidural ropivacaine/fentanyl offers no clinical advantage compared with bupivacaine/fentanyl for postthoracotomy analgesia.     

Adverse effects of epidural 0.03% bupivacaine during analgesia after cesarean section.

To develop a regimen that would provide good analgesia after cesarean section with minimal side effects in the setting of prolonged (> 24 h) epidural infusion, buprenorphine or fentanyl was combined with 0.03% bupivacaine in a double-blind study of 23 parturients. Patients were randomly assigned to two groups: group I (n = 12), patient-controlled analgesia by epidural infusion of buprenorphine (3 micrograms/mL) with 0.03% bupivacaine; group II (n = 11), patient-controlled analgesia by epidural infusion of fentanyl (2 micrograms/mL) with 0.03% bupivacaine. Plasma for determination of opioid concentrations was obtained at intermittent intervals. Pain relief was similar and satisfactory in both groups. The median overall satisfaction score was higher (10.0 vs 7.5; P < 0.03) for group II. Pruritus was mild in most patients. Nausea and vomiting, which were most disturbing to the patients, were seen only with buprenorphine. No patient had a respiratory rate of < 12 breaths/min. Mean plasma opioid concentrations did not exceed 1 ng/mL during the study. However, four patients (33%) in group I and six patients (55%) in group II experienced sensory loss in the lower extremities, which made ambulation difficult. One patient in each group developed extensive pressure blisters on both heels. These complications led us to terminate the study. We conclude that 0.03% bupivacaine used in combination with an opioid in prolonged epidural infusions produces a high incidence of sensory loss in the lower extremities and is unsuitable for situations in which early ambulation is desired.     

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.     

Epidural patient-controlled analgesia after cesarean section: buprenorphine-0.015% bupivacaine with epinephrine versus fentanyl-0.015% bupivacaine with and without epinephrine.

We compared the analgesia, side effects, and plasma concentrations of buprenorphine and fentanyl in a double-blind study of 78 parturients receiving one of these drugs by patient-controlled epidural infusion after elective cesarean section with epidural anesthesia. Patients were randomized to three epidural infusion groups: group 1 (n = 26), 3 micrograms/mL buprenorphine with 0.015% bupivacaine and 1 microgram/mL epinephrine; group 2 (n = 26), 3 micrograms/mL fentanyl with 0.015% bupivacaine and 1 microgram/mL epinephrine; and group 3 (n = 26), 3 micrograms/mL fentanyl with 0.015% bupivacaine. Plasma for determination of opioid concentrations was obtained in some subjects in each group at intervals up to 48 h during the infusion and in some subjects from each group at intervals after the infusion was stopped. Pain relief was similar and satisfactory in all three groups. The median overall satisfaction scores were high for all three groups. Pruritus was more common in the fentanyl groups (P less than 0.05). However, vomiting was more disturbing to the patients and seen only with buprenorphine. No patient had a respiratory rate less than 12 breaths/min. Epinephrine use was associated with a slower infusion rate (P less than 0.05, group 2 vs 3). All patients were able to ambulate without difficulty. Mean opioid plasma concentrations did not exceed 1.5 ng/mL. Thus, epidural patient-controlled analgesia in all three groups provided excellent analgesia, permitted ambulation, and was without serious side effects. Epidural buprenorphine offered no advantages over epidural fentanyl.     

The effectiveness of continuous epidural infusion of low-dose fentanyl and mepivacaine in perioperative analgesia and hemodynamic control in mastectomy patients

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To investigate, in mastectomy patients, the effectiveness of continuous cervical epidural block using a low-dose fentanyl infusion in combination with local anesthetics. DESIGN: Prospective, observational study. SETTING: 450-bed, university-affiliated hospital. PATIENTS: 21 ASA physical status I and II female patients undergoing modified radical mastectomy. INTERVENTIONS: An epidural catheter was inserted at the C(7)-Th(1) interspace before the induction of anesthesia. Anesthesia was maintained using a low concentration of sevoflurane with nitrous oxide-oxygen (N(2)O-O(2)). A mixture of 100 microg fentanyl and 49 mL of 1% mepivacaine was prepared, and 7 mL of this solution was epidurally injected before the initial incision. This same solution was continuously infused at a rate of 7 mL/hr (fentanyl 17.5 microg/hr) throughout the anesthesia, and at 2 mL/hr (fentanyl 5 microg/hr) postoperatively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Intraoperative mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR), postoperative pain and analgesic use, and the frequency of postoperative side effects of anesthesia, including nausea, dizziness, and respiratory depression, were recorded. The protocol described provided stable intraoperative hemodynamic control with no or low-dose nicardipine infusion. Sufficient postoperative analgesia was achieved in 18 of 21 patients. One patient reported postoperative nausea, and no other side effects were reported. CONCLUSIONS: Continuous epidural infusion of the low-dose fentanyl mixture described above provides adequate intraoperative hemodynamic control and postoperative pain relief, with a low rate of side effects in mastectomy patients.     

Comparison of continuous epidural bupivacaine infusion plus either continuous epidural infusion or patient-controlled epidural injection of fentanyl for postoperative analgesia.

We compared the postoperative epidural analgesia provided by the continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine supplemented with patient-controlled injection (PCA) of epidural fentanyl with that provided by a continuous infusion of bupivacaine supplemented with a continuous epidural infusion of fentanyl. Our patient population comprised 16 ASA physical status I or II patients undergoing laparotomy with a midline incision under general anesthesia combined with bupivacaine epidural analgesia. Post-operatively, a continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine (0.1 mg.kg-1.h-1) was combined with epidural fentanyl given by either (a) PCA (15-micrograms bolus with a lockout interval of 12 min, n = 8) or (b) continuous infusion (1 microgram.kg-1.h-1, n = 8). In the case of inadequate pain relief in the latter group, the fentanyl infusion rate was increased by 10 micrograms/h. Analgesia evaluated by a visual analogue pain score and by a verbal pain score was similarly effective in both groups. The sedation score was also similar in both groups. The total dose of epidural fentanyl administered during the first 24 h was significantly lower in the PCA group than in the continuous infusion group (405 +/- 110 micrograms vs 1600 +/- 245 micrograms, P less than 0.001). The dose of fentanyl given during each 4-h interval ranged between 40 and 160 micrograms in the PCA group and 251 and 292 micrograms in the continuous infusion group. Clinically detectable respiratory depression was not observed in either group. In conclusion, epidural administration of 0.1 mg.kg-1.h-1 bupivacaine combined with fentanyl provides effective postoperative analgesia with a total dose of fentanyl required that is lower when fentanyl is administered by epidural PCA rather than by continuous epidural infusion.     

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.     

Analgesic effects of epidurally administered fentanyl for postoperative pain relief--comparison with buprenorphine]

We did a retrospective study on 177 patients after upper and lower abdominal surgery, and compared the efficacy of epidural administration of fentanyl and that of buprenorphine for postoperative pain relief. In fentanyl (F) group, 73 patients received fentanyl 0.1 mg with saline 8 ml epidurally after operation, followed by a constant rate infusion of 0.025 mg.hr-1 for 18-24 hrs. In buprenorphine (B) group, 104 patients, received buprenorphine 0.2 mg with saline 9 ml epidurally. After upper abdominal surgery, 33 patients (76.7%) in F group and 27 patients (52.9%) in B group obtained satisfactory analgesia (P < 0.05). The difference of the degree of analgesia after lower abdominal surgery was not significantly different in both groups. Respiratory depression occurred in 19 patients in B group and 5 patients in F group (P < 0.05). It is concluded that epidural fentanyl delivered by continuous infusion offers a significant advantage compared with epidural buprenorphine for postoperative pain relief following upper abdominal surgery.     

Epidural fentanyl in labour

In a randomized double-blind trial in the first stage of labour, 20 patients given fentanyl 80 micrograms in the epidural test dose of bupivacaine, were compared with 20 patients receiving an intravenous infusion designed to produce comparable plasma fentanyl concentrations, at the same time as their epidural test dose. Despite slightly higher plasma fentanyl concentrations in the intravenous fentanyl group, epidural fentanyl produced analgesia which was more complete, more rapid in onset and slightly longer lasting. Supplementary doses of bupivacaine were needed to produce analgesia in 75% of the intravenous and 30% of the epidural fentanyl group. It is clear that epidural fentanyl produces satisfactory pain relief when added to the epidural test dose, but that the presence of fentanyl in the systemic circulation makes a negligible contribution to analgesia.     

Prolonged epidural infusions of ropivacaine (2 mg/mL) after colonic surgery: the impact of adding fentanyl

We evaluated the safety and efficacy of a 72-h epidural infusion of ropivacaine and measured the impact of adding fentanyl 2 microg/mL to the required infusion rate, on the quality of postoperative pain relief and the incidence of side effects, after colonic surgery. One hundred fifty-five patients scheduled for elective colonic surgery were randomized in this trial. Epidural infusions of ropivacaine 2 mg/mL with fentanyl 2 microg/mL (R + F) and without fentanyl (R) were commenced during surgery and continued for 72 h postoperatively. This was a prospective, randomized, double-blinded, multi-center trial. The median infusion rate required was less in the R + F group (9.3 vs 11.5 mL/h, P < 0.001). Median pain scores at rest and on coughing were lower in the R + F group (P < 0.0001). The incidence of hypotension was more in the R + F group (P = 0.01). Time to readiness for discharge was delayed in the R + F group (median 6.6 vs 5.5 days, P = 0.012). The addition of fentanyl to ropivacaine resulted in decreased infusion rates and enhanced pain control; however, adverse effects were increased and readiness to discharge was delayed. IMPLICATIONS: Epidural infusions of ropivacaine with and without fentanyl were administered to patients to control pain after colonic surgery. Patients who received ropivacaine with fentanyl had better pain control, increased side effects, and delayed readiness to discharge. This study questions the value of adding opioids to epidural infusions of local anesthetics.     

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 randomized double-blind comparison of epidural versus intravenous fentanyl infusion for analgesia after thoracotomy

This study compared epidural and intravenous fentanyl infusions for pain relief for the first 20 h after thoracotomy, in order to examine whether an thoracic epidural fentanyl infusion offers clinical advantage over an intravenous infusion. Forty patients were assigned randomly to receive either fentanyl epidurally and saline intravenously or fentanyl intravenously and saline epidurally in a double-blind fashion. For each patient the fentanyl infusion was titrated to a rate required for pain relief (pain score less than 3, maximum 10). Patients reported similar median pain scores, but in the epidural group the required mean fentanyl infusion rate was less (0.95 +/- 0.23 vs. 1.67 +/- 0.46 micrograms.kg-1.h-1, P = 0.0001) and plasma fentanyl concentrations were less at 4 and 18 h (4 h: 0.81 +/- 0.27 vs. 1.38 +/- 0.36 ng.ml-1, P = 0.0001; 18 h: 0.94 +/- 0.32 vs. 1.54 +/- 0.65 ng.ml-1, P = 0.0007) than those in the intravenous group. Respiratory function was better preserved and the incidence of nausea and sedation was less in the epidural group than in the intravenous group. In conclusion there appears to be a clinical advantage to the epidural infusion over the intravenous infusion of fentanyl for analgesia after thoracotomy.     

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.     

Automated regular boluses for epidural analgesia: a comparison with continuous infusion

BACKGROUND: Intermittent epidural bolus dosing is a method of drug delivery that can prolong the duration of labour analgesia induced by a combined spinal epidural (CSE). In this randomized, double-blinded study, we compared the analgesic efficacy of two drug delivery systems: regular intermittent epidural boluses and continuous epidural infusion and assessed the incidence of breakthrough pain after CSE. METHODS: With the approval of the Hospital Ethics Committee, we recruited 60 parturients into this randomized controlled trial. A CSE was performed with intrathecal fentanyl 25 mug in all patients. The parturients were then randomly allocated into two groups. The infusion group received a continuous epidural infusion of levobupivacaine 0.1% with fentanyl 2 microg/mL at a rate of 10 mL/h. The bolus group received 5-mL epidural boluses every half hour. The sample size was computed to detect a 40% reduction in the rate of breakthrough pain. RESULTS: The bolus group had a lower incidence of breakthrough pain than the infusion group (10% vs. 37%, P < 0.05). The bolus group also had significantly higher satisfaction scores for labour analgesia: 97+/-8 (mean+/-SD) vs. 89+/-7 (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Automated regular bolus delivery of epidural analgesia when compared with continuous infusion decreased the incidence of breakthrough pain and increased maternal satisfaction. In a busy obstetric unit, this may also serve to decrease the anesthetists' workload.     

Epinephrine markedly improves thoracic epidural analgesia produced by a small-dose infusion of ropivacaine,fentanyl, and epinephrine after major thoracic or abdominal surgery: a randomized,double-blinded crossover study with and without epinephrine

We have shown that epinephrine markedly improves the analgesic effect of a thoracic epidural infusion of bupivacaine and fentanyl. Ropivacaine has an intrinsic vasoconstrictive effect, and epinephrine may therefore not have the same pharmacokinetic interaction in a ropivacaine-fentanyl infusion; but a possible spinal cord alpha(2)-agonist effect of epinephrine would give the same positive pharmacodynamic interaction with ropivacaine and fentanyl during epidural analgesia. In a prospective, randomized, crossover study, a thoracic epidural infusion of ropivacaine 1 mg/mL and fentanyl 2 microg/mL with or without epinephrine 2 microg/mL was given to 12 patients in a double-blinded manner after major thoracic or upper abdominal surgery. Main outcome measures were pain intensity at rest and when coughing, evaluated on a visual analog scale. Extent of sensory blockade was evaluated by determining dermatomal hypoesthesia to cold. Pain increased (P < 0.001) and hypoesthetic dermatomal segments decreased (P < 0.001) when epinephrine was omitted from the triple epidural infusion. After 3 h without epinephrine, pain intensity when coughing was unacceptable despite rescue analgesia. After restarting the triple epidural mixture with epinephrine, pain was again reduced to mild pain when coughing, and the sensory blockade was restored. The mixture with epinephrine caused less nausea and facilitated mobilization. We conclude that epinephrine improves the pain relief and reduces the side effects of a thoracic epidural infusion of ropivacaine and fentanyl after major thoracic or upper abdominal surgery. IMPLICATIONS: Epidural epinephrine markedly improves the pain relief and sensory blockade of a small-dose thoracic epidural infusion of ropivacaine and fentanyl. Nausea was reduced, and mobilization of the patients was facilitated.     

A randomized, double-blind comparison of lumbar epidural and intravenous fentanyl infusions for postthoracotomy pain relief. Analgesic, pharmacokinetic, and respiratory effects.

Although epidural opioids frequently are used to provide postoperative analgesia, several articles have suggested that the analgesia after epidural fentanyl is similar to that after an equal dose of fentanyl given intravenously. To address this issue further, 29 postthoracotomy patients were studied in a randomized, double-blinded trial comparing a lumbar epidural fentanyl infusion with an intravenous fentanyl infusion for analgesia, plasma fentanyl pharmacokinetics, and respiratory effects for 20 h postoperatively. In all patients in both groups, good analgesia was achieved (pain score less than 3, maximum 10) over a similar time course, although the patients receiving epidural infusion required a significantly larger fentanyl infusion dose than did the patients receiving intravenous infusion (group receiving epidural fentanyl infusion: 1.95 +/- 0.45 micrograms.kg-1.h-1; group receiving intravenous fentanyl infusion: 1.56 +/- 0.36 micrograms.kg-1.h-1; P = 0.0002). The time course for the plasma fentanyl concentrations was similar in the two groups, and plasma fentanyl concentrations were not significantly different at any sampling period (T7-T20; group receiving epidural fentanyl infusion: 1.8 +/- 0.5 ng/ml; group receiving intravenous fentanyl infusion: 1.6 +/- 0.6 ng/ml; P = 0.06). Similarly, calculated clearance values for the two groups were not significantly different (group receiving epidural fentanyl infusion: 0.95 +/- 0.26 l.kg-1.h-1; group receiving intravenous fentanyl infusion: 0.87 +/- 0.25 l.kg-1.h-1; P = 0.3). Both groups demonstrated a similar degree of mild to moderate respiratory depression postoperatively, which was assessed with continuous respiratory inductance plethysmography and sequential arterial blood gas analysis. Side effects (nausea, vomiting, pruritus) were mild and did not differ between groups.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)