Epidural midazolam with bupivacaine--optimal dose for postoperative pain relief]

Optimal dose of epidural midazolam with bupivacaine for postoperative pain relief was investigated. Forty seven patients for upper abdominal surgery were divided into 5 groups. Each group had either 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml (control group), 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml + midazolam 0.025 mg.kg-1 (0.025 group), 0.05 mg.kg-1 (0.05 group), 0.075 mg.kg-1 (0.075 group), or 0.1 mg.kg-1 (0.1 group) administered epidurally for complaint of first postoperative pain. Blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR) and sedation score (SS) were monitored for 120 minutes, and the time interval for next analgesics (TNA) was checked. In each group, BP fell down 10 minutes after injection, HR was unchanged, and RR (except for 0.1 group) decreased, compared with the preinjection level. There was no difference between control group and others in BP, HR and RR. But 3 cases in 0.075 group and 4 cases in 0.1 group needed chin lift with a pillow under the shoulder for slight airway obstruction. The most optimal SS was obtained in 0.05 group. TNA was significantly longer in 0.025 and 0.05 groups than in the control group. It was concluded that the optimal dose of epidural midazolam with 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml was 0.05 mg.kg-1 for postoperative pain relief after an upper abdominal surgery.     

Epidural administration of midazolam with saline or bupivacaine for postoperative pain]

Postoperative pain relief and sedation with epidural midazolam-saline or midazolam-bupivacaine were studied in 46 patients after elective upper abdominal surgery. They were divided into 6 groups. In each group, 10 ml saline, 10 ml saline+midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1, 10 ml saline+midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1 (saline group), 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml, 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml + midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1 or 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml + midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1 (bupivacaine group) was administered via epidural catheter for complaint of pain. For 120 minutes after epidural injection, blood pressure (BP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rate (RR), sedation score, and serum concentration of midazolam (conc midazolam) were evaluated. The time interval until next complaint of pain (pain relief time) was measured. In midazolam injected group, BP, HR, RR were not changed from preinjection value, but sufficient sedation was obtained and pain relief time was significantly prolonged compared with saline or bupivacaine injected group. Midazolam level was lower than that of sedation level. There were no significant differences between saline group and bupivacaine group, but the pain relief effect was slightly stronger in bupivacaine group. It is concluded that epidural saline - midazolam or 0.25% bupivacaine - midazolam is useful for postoperative pain relief after upper abdominal surgery.     

Epidural midazolam for treatment of postoperative pain

Postoperative pain relief and sedation with epidural midazolam were studied. Twenty-one patients for elective upper abdominal surgery were divided into 3 groups. Epidural catheter was inserted into thoracic epidural space before induction of general anesthesia. In each group, either 10 ml saline only, midazolam 0.05 mg.kg-1 + 10 ml saline, or midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1 + 10 ml saline was injected into epidural catheter for complaint of pain in recovery room. For 120 minutes after epidural injection, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, serum concentration of midazolam, and sedation score were monitored. In midazolam injected groups, only slight changes were seen in blood pressure, heart rate, and respiratory rate. Sedation score was graded from 1 to 6:1 means complete sleep, and not responded to verbal command, 6 means agitated and many complaints. Midazolam 0.1 mg.kg-1 + 10 ml saline group had the lowest score, and saline 10 ml group had the highest score. Prolonged sedation and pain relief were obtained in midazolam injected group, especially 0.1 mg.kg-1 + 10 ml saline group. Serum midazolam concentrations were lower than 200 ng.ml-1. These values were considered as the lower limit for sedation by intravenous administration. In conclusion, epidural midazolam was useful for postoperative pain relief. The mechanism is considered to involve spinally mediated CNS action or direct spinal action.     

妇科术后病人硬膜外注射不同剂量咪达唑仑对舒芬太尼镇痛效果的影响

目的 评价妇科术后病人硬膜外注射不同剂量咪达唑仑对舒芬太尼镇痛效果的影响.方法 妇科术后病人120例,年龄30～50岁,ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级,体重指数<30 kg/m2,随机分为4组,每组30例,S组经硬膜外注射负荷剂量舒芬太尼10 ml,M.组、M1组和M3组分别经硬膜外注射咪达唑仑0.025、0.050、0.075 mg/kg+舒芬太尼10 ml作为负荷剂量,各组均以2 ml/h速率持续输注.按序贯法进行试验,各相邻浓度之间的比值为1.2.采用视觉模拟评分法(VAS评分)评价疼痛程度,VAS评分≤3分为镇痛有效,计算各组舒芬太尼的半数有效镇痛浓度(EC50)及其95%可信区间;采用Rammsay评分法评价镇静水平;观察不良反应的发生情况.结果 S组、M1组、M2组和M3组舒芬太尼的EC50及其95%可信区间分别为0.87(0.79～0.96)、0.82(0.74～0.90)、0.67(0.61～0.74)、0.63(0.56～0.71)μg/ml;与S组比较,M2组、M3组舒芬太尼的EC50降低(P<0.05);Rammsay评分M3组M2组M1组及S组(P<0.05);M3组镇静过度及呼吸抑制发生率较其余3组高(P<0.05).结论 妇科术后病人硬膜外注射舒芬太尼复合咪达唑仑镇痛时,推荐咪达唑仑剂量为0.050～0.075 mg/kg.     

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.     

Continuous epidural administration of midazolam and bupivacaine for postoperative analgesia

BACKGROUND: Midazolam has been reported to have a spinally mediated analgesic effect. Clinically, single-shot epidural or spinal administration of midazolam has been shown to have an analgesic effect on perioperative pain. In this study, we investigated the analgesic effect of continuous epidural administration of midazolam with bupivacaine on postoperative pain. METHODS: Four groups of 20 patients who underwent gastrectomy or cholecystectomy were studied. Continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine 100 mg (Group C), bupivacaine 100 mg + midazolam 10 mg (Group M10), or bupivacaine 100 mg + midazolam 20 mg (Group M20) in 40 ml per 12 h was started after surgery using the balloon infuser. Group I received intermittent epidural bupivacaine (2.5 mg.ml-1) 6 ml every 2 h. When necessary, an indomethacin suppository and then a single epidural shot of bupivacaine (2.5 mg.ml-1) 6 ml was administered. Blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, analgesic area, analgesia score, and sedation score were monitored for 12 h postoperatively. Memory and frequencies of supplemental analgesia (indomethacin suppositories and epidural bupivacaine) were also checked. RESULTS: Group M20 showed a significantly wider area of pinprick analgesia and better analgesia scores than other groups. The need for rescue analgesics were significantly less in Group M20. Sedation and amnesia were more pronounced in Group M20 than the other groups. CONCLUSION: Adding midazolam (10 to 20 mg per 12 h) to continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine for postoperative pain can provide a better analgesia, amnesia and sedation than bupivacaine alone.     

Prospective audit comparing intrathecal analgesia (incorporating midazolam) with epidural and intravenous analgesia after major open abdominal surgery

Potentiation of opioid analgesia can be achieved by the addition of midazolam intrathecally. At our institution, analgesia following open abdominal surgery is provided by continuous infusion of analgesic solutions either intravenously, intrathecally (incorporating midazolam) or epidurally. We report the results of a study comparing outcomes with these three analgesic regimens following major open abdominal surgery. This was an unblinded prospective audit of pain service intervention rates, pain scores and other outcomes after intravenous, intrathecal and epidural analgesia after open abdominal surgery in patients over 60 years of age. Both elective and emergency cases were included over a nine-month period. Patients ventilated for 24 hours or more were excluded. The analgesic regimens were as follows: (1) Intravenous: patient controlled analgesia with morphine+ketamine infusion 0.1 to 0.2 mg/kg/h. (2) Intrathecal: (morphine 10 microg/ml+midazolam 100 microg/ml+bupivacaine 0.05%) commenced at 2 ml/h. (3) Epidural: bupivacaine 0.125% +fentanyl 2 microg/ml at 6 to 14 ml/h. Co-analgesic administration was as per our usual practice but was not standardised. The median number of calls per patient to the pain service differed between the intravenous (1), intrathecal (1) and epidural (3) groups. The number of unintentional analgesic regimen terminations differed between the intravenous (1), intrathecal (1) and epidural (5) groups. Pain scores differed significantly between groups and were lowest in the intrathecal group at all time points. The findings indicate that the intrathecal group had both a low requirement for postoperative interventions/resources and excellent analgesia. It appears to be a suitable alternative to the other techniques.     

Caudal epidural morphine for control of pain following open heart surgery in children

The safety and efficacy of epidural morphine injected into the caudal space for control of postoperative pain following open cardiac surgery in children was studied. Thirty-two children between the ages of 2-12 yr for whom early postoperative tracheal extubation was anticipated were randomly assigned to control and study groups. Study subjects received a caudal injection of preservative free morphine sulfate (0.075 mg/kg) in preservative-free normal saline (5-10 ml) following completion of surgery, but prior to awakening and extubation of the trachea. Supplemental intravenous morphine administration and pain scores were recorded for 24 h. Patients in the study group received significantly less (P less than 0.03) morphine (0.32 mg.kg-1.24 h-1) and had significantly lower pain scores than did patients in the control group (0.71 mg.kg-1.24 h-1). The mean duration of complete analgesia in patients receiving caudally administered morphine was 6 h (range 2-12), but decreased analgesic requirements were noted for the entire 24 h. No respiratory depression was evident by clinical variables or repeated arterial blood gas values. Nausea without vomiting occurred in 4/16 patients in the study group. No patient described pruritis. The authors were unable to evaluate the occurrence of urinary retention because all patients had indwelling urinary catheters. They found caudal epidural morphine to be safe and effective in the treatment of postoperative pain in children following open heart surgery.     

I.m. midazolam as premedication produces a concentration-dependent decrease in core temperature in male volunteers

We tested the hypothesis that premedication with i.m. midazolam decreases core temperature dose-dependently. We studied six male volunteers, in random order, on 3 days: (1) no midazolam administration (control day), (2) midazolam 0.025 mg kg-1 i.m., (3) midazolam 0.075 mg kg-1 i.m. On the first day, subjects were maintained alert during a 30- min control period. On the second and third days, midazolam 0.025 or 0.075 mg kg-1 was administered i.m. Core temperatures were measured at the right tympanic membrane. Four adhesive skin surface probes were fixed on the chest, upper right arm, lateral calf and thigh. Finger tip perfusion was evaluated using forearm minus fingertip and calf minus toe, skin surface temperature gradients. Thirty minutes after midazolam i.m., the level of sedation in the volunteers was assessed. Peripheral venous blood was obtained immediately after the assessment of the level of sedation. Tympanic membrane temperatures after administration of midazolam 0.075 mg kg-1 i.m. were significantly lower than those on the control and midazolam 0.025 mg kg-1 i.m. days at 20 and 30 min. The decreases in tympanic membrane temperatures at 30 min after midazolam i.m. became larger as the volunteers were more deeply sedated. i.m. midazolam produced a concentration-dependent decrease in tympanic membrane temperature at 30 min after midazolam 0.025 and 0.075 mg kg-1 i.m. We conclude that midazolam impaired tonic thermoregulatory vasoconstriction, allowing core-to-peripheral heat redistribution in a dose-dependent manner after i.m. administration.      

Low concentration/high volume is more effective than high concentration/low volume for postoperative continuous epidural analgesia with the combination of bupivacaine and fentanyl

In 40 females undergoing gynecologic laparotomy, lumbar epidural analgesia using a disposable infusion pump was continued for postoperative 48 hours. Then the analgesic effect of epidural bupivacaine (4.8 mg.kg-1) plus fentanyl (12 micrograms.kg-1) diluted with normal saline was prospectively compared between the two groups; high concentration/low volume group (HC/LV, 96 ml of total volume and 2 ml.h-1 of infusion rate, n = 20) versus low concentration/high volume group (LC/HV, 240 ml of total volume and 5 ml.h-1 of infusion rate, n = 20). On postoperative day 1, LC/HV group showed the significantly lower visual analog scale and verbal pain score at rest than HC/LV group (P < 0.05). No significant differences in the incidence of side effects were observed between the groups. These results suggest that when the equivalent dose is given, the volume rather than the concentration of the solution is important for postoperative continuous epidural analgesia with the combination of bupivacaine and fentanyl.     

Improved postoperative analgesia with coadministration of preoperative epidural ketamine and midazolam

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess postoperative pain regulation and pharmacokinetic effects of preoperative administration of ketamine and midazolam. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized clinical study. SETTING: University hospital. PATIENTS: 46 ASA physical status I and II patients (age, 26-58 yrs), scheduled for gastrectomy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to three treatment groups: a preoperative epidural injection of 10 mL (1) ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) solution (Ket group); (2) ketamine (0.5 mg/kg) plus midazolam (0.05 mg/kg) solution (KM group); or (3) normal saline solution (Ctr group). MEASUREMENTS: Analgesic effects were evaluated by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain scores at rest, time to first request for analgesic (TFA), and morphine consumption during the initial postoperative time of 48 hours. Plasma concentration of ketamine in the Ket group and the KM group was measured by high-performance liquid chromatography, and the elimination half-life of ketamine was calculated. MAIN RESULTS: Compared with the Ctr group, the Ket and KM groups had lower VAS pain scores, longer TFA, and lower morphine consumption. The KM group had the longest TFA and the lowest morphine consumption of the three groups. The KM group also had higher plasma concentrations of ketamine 90 to 240 minutes after injection, and a longer elimination half-life of ketamine, than did the Ket group. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative epidural coadministration of a low dose of ketamine with midazolam is more effective in relieving postoperative pain than using ketamine alone. In addition, epidural midazolam prolongs the elimination of ketamine.     

Continuous epidural infusion of ropivacaine for the prevention of postoperative pain after major orthopaedic surgery: a dose-finding study

Purpose

A dose-finding study to investigate the use of epidural infusions of ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia following orthopaedic surgery.

Methods

This was a randomized, double-blind study. Surgery was performed using a combination of a lumbar epidural block utilizing ropivacaine 0.5% and a standardized general anaesthetic. Postoperatively, an epidural infusion of the study solution (saline, ropivacaine 0.1%, 0.2% or 0.3%) was started at the rate of 10 ml · hr^?1 and continued for 21 hr after arrival in the PACU. Analgesia was supplemented with PCA morphine (dose = 1.0 mg, lock-out = 5 min).

Results

Forty-four patients completed the study. The ropivacaine 0.1%, 0.2%, 0.3% groups required less morphine over the 21 hr than the saline group (P < 0.01). The VAS pain scores were also lower in the three ropivacaine groups (P < 0.001). The ropivacaine groups maintained sensory anaesthesia to pinprick when compared with saline (P < 0.05). The motor block in the 0.3% group was significantly higher than the saline group at all times (P < 0.05), and higher than the 0.1% group at eight hours (P < 0.01), while the 0.2% group had higher Bromage scores than saline at 4 and 21 hr (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

The use of continuous epidural infusions of ropivacaine 0.1%, 0.2% and 0.3% at 10 ml · hr^?1 improved postoperative pain relief and decreased PCA morphine requirements in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. The 0.1% and 0.2% concentrations produced similar sensory anaesthesia with less motor blockade than the 0.3% concentration.     

Postoperative analgesia by intraarticular and epidural neostigmine following knee surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVES: To define the analgesic efficacy, and to identify a possible site of action, of epidural and intraarticular neostigmine. DESIGN: Randomized, double-blind study. SETTING: Postoperative analgesia, teaching hospital. PATIENTS: 58 ASA physical status I and II patients undergoing knee surgery. INTERVENTIONS: All patients were premedicated with 0.05 to 0.1 mg/kg intravenous midazolam and received combined epidural/intrathecal technique. Intrathecal anesthesia consisted of 20 mg bupivacaine. A 10 mL epidural and intraarticular injection was administered to all patients; this consisted of either the study drug or normal saline. Postoperatively, pain was assessed using the 10 cm Visual Analog Scale (VAS), and intramuscular (IM) 75 mg diclofenac was available at patient request. The control group (CG) received both epidural and intraarticular saline. The 1 microg/kg epidural group (1 microg/kg EG) received epidural neostigmine and intraarticular saline. The 1 microg/kg intraarticular group (1 microg/kg AG) received epidural saline and intraarticular neostigmine. Finally, the 500 microg intraarticular group (500 microg AG) received epidural saline and intraarticular neostigmine. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: 56 patients were evaluated. Groups were demographically the same and did not differ in intraoperative characteristics. The VAS score at first rescue analgesic and the incidence of adverse effects were similar among groups (p< 0.05). The time (min) to first rescue analgesic was shorter for both the CG (228+/-54) and 1 microg/kg AG (251+/-87) groups compared to the 1 microg/kg EG (333+/-78) and 500 microg AG (335+/- 111) groups (p<0.05). The analgesic consumption (number of IM diclofenac injections (mean [25(th)-75(th) percentile]) in 24 hours was higher in the CG group than both the 1 microg/kg EG and 500 microg AG groups (p<0.05). The overall 24-hour pain VAS score (cm) was higher in the CG group than in the 1 microg/kg EG (p<0.05) group. CONCLUSION: Although peripheral neostigmine 1 microg/kg did not result in postoperative analgesia, the same dose applied epidurally resulted in over 5 hours of analgesia, similar to a fivefold dose applied peripherally. The results suggest that epidural neostigmine has a greater analgesic efficacy than peripherally applied neostigmine.     

Usefulness of midazolam for premedication before local anesthesia

The optimal dose and adverse effects of midazolam for premedication were evaluated in 45 patients undergoing local anesthesia. The patients were divided into 3 groups and administered midazolam intramuscularly: group-A 0.075 mg.kg-1, group-B 0.1mg.kg-1, group-C 0.125 mg.kg-1. In this study, concerning sedative and hypnotic effects, the administration of midazolam (0.075-0.1mg.kg-1) showed satisfactory results except in conduction anesthesia of upper extremities (brachial plexus block). However, severe decrease in PaO2 was observed in relatively younger patients. Therefore, it is necessary to observe patients carefully during perioperative period.     

Attenuation of suxamethonium myalgias. Effect of midazolam and vecuronium

We studied the incidence of fasciculations and postoperative myalgias in 100 female outpatients who had laparoscopy under thiopentone, N2O, isoflurane anaesthesia. Four groups of 20 patients each were pretreated with saline (group 1), tubocurarine 0.05 mg/kg (group 2), vecuronium 0.006 mg/kg (group 3), or midazolam 0.025 mg/kg (group 4), followed by suxamethonium 1.5 mg/kg. Group 5 received only vecuronium 0.1 mg/kg as relaxant (no suxamethonium). Fasciculations were graded, and postoperative myalgias rated on the first and third postoperative days. In groups 1-5 the incidence of fasciculations was 95, 15, 25, 95 and 0%; the incidence of myalgias on the first day after operation was 70, 45, 65, 75 and 60%, and on the third day after operation 20, 5, 20, 20, and 5%, respectively. We conclude that pretreatment with vecuronium, but not midazolam, decreases the incidence of fasciculations after suxamethonium (p less than 0.05) and that in this patient population, postoperative myalgias appear to be unrelated to the use of suxamethonium.     

Perioperative effects of oral ketorolac and acetaminophen in children undergoing bilateral myringotomy

Prophylactic administration of analgesics before surgery can decrease the intraoperative anaesthetic requirement and decrease pain during the early postoperative period. In a double-blind, placebo-controlled study involving 90 healthy ASA physical status I or II children undergoing bilateral myringotomy, we compared the postoperative analgesic effects of oral acetaminophen and ketorolac, when administered 30 min before induction of anaesthesia. Patients were randomized to receive saline (0.1 ml.kg-1), acetaminophen (10 mg.kg-1) or ketorolac (1 mg.kg-1) diluted in cherry syrup to a total volume of 5 ml. Anaesthesia was induced and maintained with halothane and nitrous oxide via a face mask. Postoperative pain was assessed by a blinded observer using an objective pain scale. The three study groups were similar with respect to demographic data, duration of anaesthesia and surgery, induction behaviour, oxygen saturation, incidence of postoperative emesis and, recovery times. The ketorolac group had lower postoperative pain scores and required less frequent analgesic therapy in the early postoperative period compared with the acetaminophen and placebo groups. In contrast, there were no differences in pain scores or analgesic requirements between the acetaminophen and the placebo groups. We conclude that the preoperative administration of oral ketorolac, but not acetaminophen, provided better postoperative pain control than placebo in children undergoing bilateral myringotomy.     

布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛安全性探讨

目的探讨布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛的效果、并发症及安全陛。方法1600例行连续术后硬膜外镇痛的患者,按所用镇痛药物配伍不同分为：0．1％布比卡因＋5μg／ml芬太尼组（B组,n=920）和0．2％罗哌卡因＋2μg／ml芬太尼组（R组,n=680）。对两组镇痛效果（视觉模拟评分及患者对镇痛效果的满意度）、并发症和处理措施进行总结分析。结果视觉模拟评分两组无差异（P〉0．05）。患者对镇痛的满意度R组明显高于B组（P〉0．05）。并发症的发生率B组高于R组（P〉0．05）。两组内年龄≥60岁的患者低血压的发生率高于年龄〈60岁者（P〈0．05）;女性患者恶心呕吐的发生率高于男性（P〈0．05）;腰段硬膜外镇痛患者下肢乏力或麻木的发生率明显高于胸段硬膜外镇痛患者（P〈0．05）。结论布比卡因、罗哌卡因与芬太尼不同配伍均可安全有效地用于连续术后硬膜外镇痛,罗哌卡因组并发症较少,并发症的发生与镇痛药物、年龄、性别及硬膜外置管部位有关。     

Prophylactic antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery.

OBJECTIVE: To investigate the prophylactic antiemetic effect of midazolam after middle ear surgery. STUDY DESIGN: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: Ninety women patients undergoing middle ear surgery with general anesthesia received intravenously either midazolam 0.075 mg/kg or normal saline (n = 45 each) after induction of anesthesia. The incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting, rescue antiemetics, pain intensity, and side effects such as headache, dizziness, and drowsiness were assessed during the first 24 hours after anesthesia. RESULTS: Midazolam groups showed total incidence and severity of nausea and vomiting. Patients who required rescue antiemetics were significantly lower than in saline group (P < 0.05), but there were no significant differences in pain intensity and side effects such as headache, dizziness, and drowsiness between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Midazolam 0.075 mg/kg is effective for reducing nausea and vomiting after middle ear surgery.     

Patient-controlled analgesia versus epidural analgesia using bupivacaine or morphine following major abdominal surgery. No difference in postoperative morbidity]

In 1987, Yeager et al. reported that intraoperative epidural anesthesia with local anesthetics and postoperative epidural analgesia with opiates diminished postoperative morbidity. In our first clinical trial on this topic, the better postoperative analgesia with epidural bupivacaine-fentanyl failed to improve the outcome after major abdominal operations over that obtained with parenteral piritramide. This randomized controlled investigation was designed to assess whether intraoperative epidural anesthesia with bupivacaine plus light general anesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia with morphine would diminish the overall rate of postoperative complications after major abdominal operations compared with general anesthesia (without epidural) followed by patient controlled analgesia with morphine, and with intraoperative epidural anesthesia with bupivacaine and light general anesthesia followed by postoperative bupivacaine-morphine analgesia. METHODS. A total of 292 patients undergoing infrarenal aortic bypass operation, gastric resection, gastrectomy, duodenum-preserving pancreatic resection, Whipple's operation or cystectomy and neobladder formation were randomly divided into three groups: 1. PCA group (patient controlled analgesia, n = 107): patients were operated on under general anesthesia (midazolam, fentanyl, N2O/O2, if necessary with addition of halothane, enflurane or isoflurane; muscle relaxation with pancuronium bromide). Postoperative management consisted in patient-controlled analgesia with morphine (Prominject), bolus 2 mg, lock-out 5 min (recovery room, intensive care unit) or 15 min (surgical ward). 2. EBM group (epidural bupivacaine+morphine, n = 95): operation under light general anesthesia (midazolam, low-dose fentanyl, N2O/O2, pancuronium bromide). In addition, a mixture of bupivacaine (0.25%) and morphine (60 micrograms/ml) was infused (approximately 0.1 ml/kg.h) via an epidural catheter during and after the operation (approximately 72 h). 3. EM group (epidural morphine, n = 90): operation under the same kind of general-epidural anesthesia as in the EBM group. Postoperatively, epidural injection of morphine (0.05 mg/kg in 10 ml of saline) on request up to the 3rd postoperative day. Quality of analgesia (at rest and when patients coughed vigorously), strength of cough, and rate-pressure product were recorded at 8:00 h, 12:00 noon, 16:00 h and 20:00 h on the 1st, 2nd and 3rd postoperative days. Incidence and intensity of all postoperative complications (cardiovascular, pulmonary, renal and other organ failure, reoperations, major infection, sepsis, thromboembolism, metabolic and mental disturbances) were assessed from the day of operation until discharge or death (n = 10), respectively. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION. In the PCA and EM groups analgesia was equal but of slightly inferior quality compared with the EBM group. The ability to cough was best in the EBM group and significantly worse in the PCA and EM groups, with no difference between the last two. (ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 400 WORDS)     

硬膜外泵入布托啡诺复合小剂量氯胺酮用于妇科患者术后镇痛

目的 观察术后硬膜外持续泵人布托啡诺复合小剂量氯胺酮用于妇科患者术后的镇痛效果.方法 60例ASA Ⅰ或Ⅱ级在腰-硬联合麻醉下行腹式子宫切除的妇科患者术后随机均分为两组,A组为观察组,用布托啡诺0.1 mg/kg 氯胺酮1 mg/kg 生理盐水至100 ml持续泵人;B组为对照组,用布托啡诺0.1 mg/kg 生理盐水至100 ml持续泵入.观察患者术后各时间段的视觉模拟镇痛评分(VAS)、Ramsay镇静评分及对术后镇痛的满意度进行评估,并观察不良反应情况.结果 A组在给药后4 h的VAS低于B组(P<0.05);B组在给药后4、8和12 h的Ramsay镇静评分高于A组(P<0.05),但是两组的评分均在镇静满意的范围.结论 硬膜外持续泵入布托啡诺0.1mg/kg对于妇科术后患者能提供安全有效的镇痛,同时复合小剂量的氯胺酮能增强其镇痛效果,不增加其不良反应的发生.