Comparison of remifentanil versus regional anaesthesia in children anaesthetised with isoflurane/nitrous oxide. International Remifentanil Paediatric Anaesthesia Study group

We compared the efficacy and safety of a remifentanil (0.25 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1)-based balanced anaesthetic technique with a bupivacaine-based regional anaesthetic technique in an open label, multicentre study in 271 ASA physical status 1 or 2 children aged 1-12 years. Subjects requiring major intra-abdominal, urological or orthopaedic surgery were randomly allocated to receive either intravenous remifentanil (group R; n = 185) or epidural bupivacaine (group B; n = 86) with isoflurane/nitrous oxide for their anaesthesia. The majority of children in both groups (85% in group R, 78% in group B) showed no defined response to skin incision, and although the mean increase in systolic blood pressure (+11 mm Hg) was significantly greater in group R than in group B, this change did not represent a serious haemodynamic disturbance. More children in group R (31%) required interventions to treat hypotension and/or bradycardia than those in group B (12%), but these were easily managed by administration of fluids or anticholinergic drugs. Adverse events, mainly nausea and/or vomiting, occurred in 45% of group R and 42% of group B (NS). The adverse event profile of remifentanil in this study was typical of a potent mu-opioid receptor agonist. Remifentanil was as effective as epidural or caudal block in providing analgesia and suppressing physiological responses to surgical stimuli in children aged between 1 and 12 years undergoing major abdominal, urological, or orthopaedic surgery under isoflurane/nitrous oxide anaesthesia.     

Continuous epidural analgesia with bupivacaine-fentanyl versus patient-controlled analgesia with i.v. morphine for postoperative pain relief after knee ligament surgery

BACKGROUND: Both epidural analgesia and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) have been found efficacious after various types of surgery. We compared the efficacy, safety, side effects and patient satisfaction of these methods in a randomized double-blind fashion after elective anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction of the knee. METHODS: Fifty-six patients had an epidural catheter placed at the L2-L3 interspace. Spinal anaesthesia with 15 mg of plain bupivacaine 5 mg/ml was performed at the L3-L4 interspace. After surgery the patients were randomly divided into three groups: 19 received a continuous epidural infusion with bupivacaine 1 mg/ml and fentanyl 10 mg/ml (F10), 19 patients received bupivacaine 1 mg/ml and fentanyl 5 microg/ml (F5) and 18 patients received saline (S). The rate of the epidural infusions was 0.1 ml kg(-1) h(-1). Each patient could also use an intravenous (i.v.) PCA device with 40 microg/kg bolus doses of morphine with a lockout period of 10 min and a maximum dose 240 microg kg(-1) h(-1). At the end of surgery ketoprofen 100 mg i.v. was given and continued orally three times a day. Patients were assessed for pain with a visual analogue scale (VAS) at rest and during activity, side effects and satisfaction at 3, 9 and 20 h. RESULTS: Both epidural infusions (F10, F5) provided better analgesia than epidural saline plus i.v. PCA (S) (P<0.05). There was slightly less nausea in the S group (NS). In spite of the difference in the quality of pain relief, there was no difference between the groups in patient satisfaction regarding analgesic therapy. CONCLUSION: Epidural infusion of fentanyl (1 microg kg(-1) h(-1) or 0.5 microg kg(-1) h(-1)) and bupivacaine (0.1 mg kg(-1) h(-1)) provided better pain relief but more side effects than intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia after knee ligament surgery. Almost all patients in all groups were satisfied with their pain relief.     

Comparison of combined spinal epidural anesthesia and epidural anesthesia for cesarean section

BACKGROUND: Epidural anesthesia (EA) is popular for cesarean section, but has some drawbacks such as incomplete block, inadequate muscle relaxation and delayed onset. Combined spinal epidural anesthesia (CSEA) has gained increasing interest as it combines the reliability of a spinal block and the flexibility of an epidural block. We investigated the efficacy of CSEA that combines the main spinal and the supporting epidural anesthesia, comparing with pH-adjusted EA, for cesarean section. METHODS: Sixty-four pregnant women at full term were divided into two groups. Patients in the CSEA group (n=32) were given 1.5-1.6 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine intrathecally, followed by 10 ml of 0.25% plain bupivacaine through the epidural catheter 10 min later. Patients in the EA group (n=32) received 20-25 ml of 2% lidocaine which was already mixed with 0.1 ml of 0.1% epinephrine, 100 g of fentanyl and 1.5 ml of 8.4% sodium bicarbonate. The quality and side effects of surgical anesthesia, neonatal state, and postoperative course were compared between the two groups. RESULTS: In the EA group, 22% (7 cases) complained of intraoperative pain but none in the CSEA group (P=0.011). Muscle relaxation and motor block were much better in the CSEA group (P<0.001 and P=0.011 each). Significantly more women in the EA group had shivering (P=0.001). They also had more nausea and vomiting but the differences were not significant. Not only the time to T4 block (9.7 vs. 18.3 min, mean, P<0.001) but also the stay in the postanesthesia care unit, recovery of sensory and motor block and start of postoperative pain were all significantly shorter in the CSEA group. No one in either group had postdural puncture headache (PDPH). CONCLUSION: We can conclude that, when combining the main spinal and the supporting epidural anesthesia, CSEA has greater efficacy and fewer side effects than the pH-adjusted EA in cesarean sections.     

Day-case laparoscopy: a comparison of prophylactic opioid, NSAID or local anesthesia for postoperative analgesia

BACKGROUND: The study was aimed to evaluate the analgesic efficacy, postoperative comfort, recovery characteristics and side effects of three different analgesic agents administered prophylactically. METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing day-case minor operative laparoscopy were randomly allocated into four groups to receive tenoxicam 20 mg i.v. (Group T), fentanyl 100 microg i.v. (Group F), 5 ml of bupivacaine 2.5 mg/ml for infiltration of trocar sites (Group B), 30, 10 and 5 min before incision respectively. Bupivacaine, 35 ml, 2.5 mg/ml was also administered into the pelvic cavity in Group B. Group P received only placebo. Postoperative pain, analgesic requirements, first response to verbal stimulus, first analgesic requirement, ability to walk without help, to drink and to void, blood pressures, SpO2 and respiration rates were recorded in the PACU. Postoperative pain was evaluated by verbal rating scale. Pain scores, analgesic requirements and side effects were evaluated by telephone calls until the 48th postoperative hour. RESULTS: Postoperative pain scores were lower and time to requirement of rescue analgesics was longer in groups F and B compared to Group P. In the PACU, analgesic requirements were lower in Group B, compared to Group P. Nausea and vomiting were increased in Group F. CONCLUSION: Tenoxicam 20 mg i.v. was found to be ineffective whereas bupivacaine was superior to other groups in reducing pain and analgesic requirements. Bupivacaine also increased time to first analgesics and obtained better recovery characteristics, underlining its value in prophylactic pain management compared to the other two agents.     

No difference between bupivacaine in 0.9% and 8% glucose for spinal anaesthesia in small children

BACKGROUND: Baricity is one of the most important factors to influence the characteristics of distribution of the local anaesthetic and hence success and spread of the blockade. Bupivacaine is rendered hyperbaric by adding glucose. The effect of differing degrees of hyperbaricity remains to be evaluated. METHODS: Two hyperbaric bupivacaine solutions, in 0.9% and in 8% glucose, for spinal anaesthesia were investigated in 60 children, aged 1-7 years, in a double-blind, randomised, parallel group, prospective study. The children were premedicated with diazepam orally. Bupivacaine 5 mg ml(-1) in either 0.9% or 8% glucose was injected in a dose of 0.4 mg kg(-1). Maximum cephalad extent and regression of sensory block were tested by transcutaneous electrical stimulation. RESULTS: Success rate, spread and duration of sensory block were similar in both groups. Only one child required a single dose of fentanyl during surgery. The highest median level of sensory block was T3 (T2-T7) (median (10th/90th percentiles)) in both groups. Time to reach T10 did not differ between the groups. The incidence of adverse effects was similar. Atropine was administered to one child in each group to treat bradycardia and 6 children (10%) experienced shivering. One child in each group vomited once. CONCLUSION: These results demonstrate that bupivacaine in 0.9% glucose and in 8% glucose solutions are equally suitable for spinal anaesthesia in small children. Similar success rate, spread and duration of the sensory and motor block are achieved with both baricities of bupivacaine.     

Effects of peribulbar bupivacaine as an adjunct to general anaesthesia on peri-operative outcome following retinal detachment surgery

Sixty premedicated, ASA physical status I or II patients weighing > 25 kg scheduled for elective retinal detachment repair were randomly assigned to receive either peribulbar block with 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine (block group) or intravenous morphine 150 microg.kg-1 (morphine group), prior to the induction of general anaesthesia (n = 30 in each group). Patients were evaluated for intra-operative oculocardiac reflex, peri-operative pain relief, recovery from anaesthesia and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Apart from significantly reducing the incidence of oculocardiac reflex (30% vs. 70%, p = 0.0019), peribulbar bupivacaine also attenuated the severity of the reflex. Postoperative pain relief was superior in the block group. More block group patients had the maximum recovery score in the immediate postoperative period (80% vs. 27%, p < 0. 0001) and they achieved complete recovery significantly faster than the morphine group (17.3 (14.7) min vs. 66.7 (29.7) min, p < 0.0001). The incidence (40% vs. 77%, p = 0.004) and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting were significantly less in the block group. In summary, peribulbar bupivacaine, when administered together with general anaesthesia, attenuated oculocardiac reflex, provided comparable intra-operative and superior postoperative analgesia, resulted in significantly earlier and better recovery from anaesthesia, and significantly reduced the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting.     

罗哌卡因和布比卡因对心脏毒性作用的比较

目的 :探讨 1%罗哌卡因和 0 .75 %布比卡因用于硬膜外麻醉时对心脏的毒性作用。方法 :选择择期硬膜外麻醉患者 4 0例 ,ASAⅠ级～Ⅱ级。随机分为罗哌卡因组 (R组 ,2 0例 )和布比卡因组 (B组 ,2 0例 ) ,分别于麻醉前 (T0 )和麻醉平面绝对后 (T1)抽取静脉血 3mL ,测定血清心肌肌钙蛋白I(cTnI)的浓度 ,CK MB与CK的活性 ,记录相应时点的MAP ,HR和SpO2 值。结果 :两组患者于麻醉平面绝对后相应指标均较麻醉前有所增高 (P <0 .0 1)。两组间相比麻醉平面绝对后相应指标R组低于B组 ,但无统计学意义 (P >0 .0 5 )。结论 :罗哌卡因用于硬膜外麻醉时对心脏的毒性作用小于布比卡因 ,对血流动力学的影响小 ,用于心脏病非心脏手术的患者较布比卡因安全可靠。     

不同的阻滞方法对75岁以上高龄老人阻滞效果及循环功能的影响

为比较硬膜外隙阻滞(硬外)、蛛网膜下隙阻滞(腰麻)和单侧蛛网膜下隙阻滞(腰麻)在75岁以上高龄股骨颈骨折手术中的阻滞效果及对循环的影响.选ASAⅢ～Ⅳ级90例,随机等分为3组,Ⅰ组为硬外阻滞组(A组),用1.5%Lidocaine 4ml试验剂量并确认无脊麻后,根据情况追加1.5%Lidocaine 4～6ml;Ⅱ组为腰麻组,Ⅲ组为单侧腰麻组,两组注药速度均为0.1ml·s-1,注药过程均不作往返吸注.Ⅱ组用0.75%布比卡因1ml(7.5mg),注药后仰卧;Ⅲ组患侧在下侧卧,用0.75%布比卡因0.6ml(4.5mg)、10%葡萄糖液0.4ml,注药20min后平卧.结果显示:①患侧痛觉阻滞起效由快到慢为Ⅱ组、Ⅲ组和Ⅰ组.②三组阻滞前后的心率比较,均无显著性差异;Ⅲ组阻滞前后的平均动脉压也无显著性差异,但Ⅰ和Ⅱ组的阻滞前后的平均动脉压均有显著性差异.③患侧痛觉阻滞达标率(无痛平面达L1的百分率)为Ⅰ组93.3%,Ⅱ和Ⅲ组均为100%.④阻滞不全者Ⅰ组3例,而Ⅱ和Ⅲ组则无.⑤发生低血压者Ⅰ和Ⅱ组各3例,且同时都伴有ECG的ST段下移;Ⅲ组则无.表明①单侧腰麻组起效较快、阻滞完善和患侧痛觉阻滞达标率高.②单侧腰麻所用剂量小,阻滞范围小,对循环干扰轻和阻滞平面似乎更易控制.因此,小剂量布比卡因单侧腰麻可能更适合高龄老人下肢手术.     

7例妇女应用布比卡因硬膜外阻滞后的药物动力学和药效学

采用HPLC法对7例妇女应用布比卡因硬膜外阻滞后的药物动力学(药动学)和药效学进行研究,数据用PKBP-N_1药动学程序包经IBM-PC计算机处理,结果符合血管外开放二室模型。T_p=19±8min;C_p=1.6±0.7μg/ml;T_((1/2)β)=166±59min;AUC=273±124μg/(min·ml);V_d=2.0±0.7L/kg。测得该药的作用完善时间和麻醉持续时间分别为21±3min和104±30min。手术期间未见明显不良反应。应用测得之药动学参数估算作用完善时和局麻持续时间的血药浓度.     

罗比卡因与布比卡因用于连续臂丛神经阻滞术后镇痛的比较

目的观察0.125%罗比卡因与0.125%布比卡因应用于上肢连续臂丛阻滞患者术后自控镇痛的可行性和有效性。方法45例拟行上肢择期手术的患者随机分为罗比卡因组(R组)、布比卡因组(B组)和对照组(N组),每组15例。术前均予肌间沟径路或腋路臂丛阻滞以及臂丛神经鞘内置管。术后R组与B组使用便携式患者自控镇痛泵,泵内液体分别为0.125%的罗比卡因和0.125%的布比卡因,N组为对照组,观察24h。记录3组患者的疼痛视觉模拟评分和镇痛药使用情况,记录R组与B组患者的运动阻滞、麻木感、局麻药用量、满意度、镇痛技术问题和并发症。结果R组与B组两组在术后各个时间点的疼痛评分均较低,组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05)。N组疼痛评分在术后0h、3h时与R组和B组比较差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);在术后6h、12h、18h、24h均较高,与前两组间相比差异有统计学意义(P<0.05)。R组与B组两组镇痛满意度较高,组间差异无统计学意义(P>0.05),运动阻滞、麻木感、补充用药、局麻药用量差异无统计学意义(P>0.05);技术问题与并发症两组发生率均低。结论0.125%罗比卡因与0.125%布比卡因均可有效地用于上肢术后的连续臂丛阻滞患者自控镇痛,并且效果相似。