PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

A Albertin

Publications and source records attributed to A Albertin.

At least 19 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed2006

Predictive performance of 'Servin's formula' during BIS-guided propofol-remifentanil target-controlled infusion in morbidly obese patients.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to assess the predictive performance of 'Servin's formula' for bispectral index (BIS)-guided propofol-remifentanil target-controlled infusion (TCI) in morbidly obese patients. METHODS: Twenty patients (ASA physical status II-III, age 32-64 yr) undergoing bilio-intestinal bypass surgery, were recruited. Anaesthesia was induced by using a TCI of propofol with an initial target plasma concentration of 6 microg ml(-1), then adapted to maintain stable BIS values ranging between 40 and 50. A TCI of remifentanil was added to achieve pain control and haemodynamic stability. For propofol, weight was corrected as suggested by Servin and colleagues. With ideal body weight (IBW) corrected according to formula suggested by Lemmens and colleagues. For remifentanil, weight was corrected according to IBW. Arterial blood samples for the determination of blood propofol concentrations were collected at different surgical times. The predictive performance of propofol TCI was evaluated by examining performance accuracy. RESULTS: Median prediction error and median absolute prediction error were -32.6% (range -53.4%; -2.5%) and 33.1% (10.8%; 53.4%), respectively. Wobble median value was 5.9% (2.5%; 25.2%) while divergence median value was -1.5% h(-1) (-7.7; 33.8% h(-1)). CONCLUSION: Significant bias between predicted and measured plasma propofol concentrations was found while the low wobble values suggest that propofol TCI system is able to maintain stable drug concentrations over time. As already suggested before, a computer simulation confirmed that the TCI system performance could be significantly improved when total body weight is used.

Adult↗
PubMed2006

Target-controlled infusion during monitored anesthesia care in patients undergoing EUS: propofol alone versus midazolam plus propofol. A prospective double-blind randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: It has been speculated that midazolam may be effective in reducing the required dose of propofol during sedation. AIM: To evaluate the sparing effect of midazolam during target-controlled propofol infusion. METHODS: Two hundred-seventy patients undergoing upper endoscopic ultrasound were randomised to receive sedation with propofol plus placebo (group A) or plus midazolam (group B). Outcome parameters were the procedure duration, the discharge time and the satisfaction of patients, operator and nurse about the quality of sedation. RESULTS: The mean propofol dose administered was 364+/-207 mg in group A and 394+/-204 mg in group B. Mean procedure duration (group A: 32+/-17 min, group B: 35+/-22 min) and discharge time (group A: 39+/-30 min, group B: 38+/-24 min) were similar in both groups. No severe complications were observed. The quality of sedation was judged satisfactory for all patients by both the endoscopist and the nurse assistant without any difference between the two groups. No patient remembered the procedure or reported it as unpleasant. CONCLUSIONS: Target-controlled propofol infusion provides safe and effective sedation; premedication with low dose of midazolam does not reduce the total amount of propofol administered. Further studies are needed to compare propofol alone with propofol co-administered with opioid.

Aged↗
PubMed2006

The effect of adding two target-controlled concentrations (1-3 ng mL -1 ) of remifentanil on MAC BAR of desflurane.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to determine the effects of adding two different target-controlled concentrations of remifentanil (1 and 3 ng mL(-1)) on the desflurane requirement for blunting sympathetic responses after surgical incision (minimum anaesthetic concentration (MAC(BAR)). METHODS: 67 patients, aged 20-50 yr, ASA I, undergoing general anaesthesia for elective abdominal surgery were enrolled and randomly allocated to receive no remifentanil infusion (n = 21) or a target-controlled effect-site concentration of 1 ng mL(-1) (n = 24) or 3 ng mL(-1) remifentanil (n = 22). All patients were anaesthetized with propofol, cisatracurium and desflurane with a mixture of 60% nitrous oxide in oxygen. Sympathetic responses to surgical incision were determined after a 20-min period of stable end-tidal desflurane and target-controlled remifentanil concentrations. Predetermined end-tidal desflurane concentrations and the MAC(BAR) for each group were determined using an up-and-down sequential-allocation technique. RESULTS: The MAC(BAR) of desflurane was higher in the group receiving no remifentanil (6.25% [95% confidence interval: 5.9-6.5%]) as compared with patients of the groups receiving 1 ng mL(-1) (2.7% [2.6-2.8%]; P < 0.001) and 3 ng mL(-1) remifentanil (2% [1.9-2.2%]; P < 0.01). When considering a MAC value in this age population and the contribution of 60% nitrous oxide (0.55 MAC), the combined MAC(BAR) values, expressed as multiples of the MAC, were 1.9, 0.8 and 0.6 MAC, in the three groups, respectively. CONCLUSION: A target-controlled concentration of 1 ng mL(-1) remifentanil results in a 57% decrease in the MAC(BAR) of desflurane combined with 60% nitrous oxide. Increasing the target concentration of remifentanil to 3 ng mL(-1) produces a further 26% decrease in the MAC(BAR) values of desflurane.

Abdomen↗
PubMed2006

Effect site concentrations of remifentanil maintaining cardiovascular homeostasis in response to surgical stimuli during bispectral index guided propofol anestesia in seriously obese patients.

AIM: The aim of this prospective study was to determine the effect site concentrations of remifentanil maintaining cardiovascular homeostasis in response to surgical stimuli during bispectral index (BIS) guided propofol anesthesia in seriously obese patients. METHODS: Twenty-two patients, female/male 15/7, ASA physical status II - III, aged 29-69 years, body mass index (BMI) 54.5+/-12, undergoing major open bariatric surgery, were enrolled to receive a propofol-remifentanil total intravenous anesthesia. All patients were intubated by using a flexible fiberoptic bronchoscopic technique facilitated by a target controlled effect site concentration of remifentanil set at 2.5 ng/mL. After endotracheal intubation, anesthesia was started with a target controlled infusion of propofol initially set at 6 microg/mL, then adjusted to maintain a BIS value between 40 and 50. The mean effect site concentration of remifentanil was recorded at different intervals time during surgery: skin incision-opening of peritoneum (T1), bowel resection (T2), cholecystojejunal anastomosis (T3), ileojejunal anastomosis (T4), closing of peritoneum (T5). RESULTS: The mean plasma concentrations of propofol required to maintain a BIS value between 40 and 50 were 4+/-0.55, 3.8+/-0.64, 3.8+/- 0.63, 3.8+/-0.65 and 3.8+/-0.63 microg/mL at T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 interval time, respectively. The mean values of remifentanil target effect site concentration were 5.2+/-1.3, 7.7+/-1.7, 9.1+/-1.8, 9.7+/- 2.2 and 9.9+/-2.5 ng/mL at T1, T2, T3, T4 and T5 interval time. CONCLUSIONS: This study suggests that tolerance to remifentanil infusion is profound and develops very rapidly in morbidly obese patients submitted to open bariatric surgery during BIS guided propofol anesthesia. The administration of opiates during anesthesia based on target-controlled infusion should include corrections for the development of tolerance.

Adult↗
PubMed2005

The effect of adding nitrous oxide on MAC of sevoflurane combined with two target-controlled concentrations of remifentanil in women.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to determine the effects of adding nitrous oxide on sevoflurane requirement for blunting sympathetic responses after surgical incision combined with two different target-controlled concentrations of remifentanil (1 and 3 ng mL(-1)) in female. METHODS: 102 female patients, aged 20-50 yr, ASA I, undergoing general anaesthesia for elective abdominal surgery were enrolled and randomly allocated to receive sevoflurane anaesthesia alone (Group A, n=53), or with the addition of 60% nitrous oxide (Group N, n=49). Patients of both groups were further assigned to receive a target-controlled remifentanil infusion with an effect-site concentration of either 1 ng mL(-1) (Group N1, n=27; Group A1, n=30), or 3 ng mL(-1) (Group N3, n=22; Group A3, n=23). Sympathetic responses to surgical incision were determined after a 20-min period of stable end-tidal sevoflurane and target-controlled remifentanil concentrations. Predetermined end-tidal sevoflurane concentrations and minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) for each group were determined using an up-and-down sequential allocation technique. RESULTS: The MAC of sevoflurane was 3.96% (95% confidence interval, CI95: 3.69-4.23%) in Group A1 and 1.2% (CI95: 0.9-1.3%) in Group N1 (P < 0.01), while in Groups A3 and N3 the MAC of sevoflurane was 0.36% (CI95: 0.24-0.47%) and 0.18% (CI95: 0.1-0.3%), respectively (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Adding 60% nitrous oxide reduces the MAC of sevoflurane by 70% when using a remifentanil concentration of 1 ng mL(-1) and 50% when using a remifentanil concentration of 3 ng mL(-1).

Adult↗
PubMed2004

Acute Pain Service and multimodal therapy for postsurgical pain control: evaluation of protocol efficacy.

AIM: The institution of a postoperative Acute Pain Control Service is mandatory to improve the control of pain induced by surgical injury. Treatment of postoperative pain may be achieved using a combination of analgesic agents and techniques, reducing the incidence of side effects owing to the lower doses of the individual drugs. In 1997 we established an Acute Pain Service (APS) at the San Raffaele Hospital in Milan. The aim of this study was to assess the efficacy and safety of our APS both in terms of treatment protocols and organisational issues. METHODS: In this prospective observational study we included 592 patients undergoing abdominal, gynecological, or orthopedic surgery with severe expected pain. According to general guidelines on pain treatment, the patients were assigned to different treatment protocols based on the kind of operation. All protocols were based on the multimodal therapy, with the association of nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDS), opioids and regional anesthesia techniques. During the first 48 h of the postoperative period we recorded vital signs, level of pain and occurrence of any side effect. RESULTS: Our analgesic protocols proved to be effective and safe (low incidence of side effects) for every surgery. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was higher in patients receiving patient-controlled morphine than that with continuous epidural or nerve block. After lower abdominal surgery, pain at movement at 24 h was significantly lower in the epidural group than in the Patient Control Analgesia group. Nausea and vomiting, numbness and paresthesias at the lower limbs were higher in gynecological patients. A larger percentage of orthopedic patients in the epidural group reported numbness and paresthesias at the lower limbs in comparison with patients receiving continuous peripheral nerve block. CONCLUSION: In agreement with previous literature, this study confirmed that a multimodal approach to pain treatment provides an adequate control of postoperative pain, minimizing side effects.

Abdomen↗
PubMed2002

Spinal block or total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil for gynaecological outpatient procedures.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the preparation and discharge times, the side-effects and patient satisfaction after gynaecological outpatient procedures performed using either spinal block or total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. METHODS: With Ethics Committee approval and written informed consent, 40 healthy females scheduled for hysteroscopic ablation of endometrial neoplasm were randomly allocated to receive either a spinal block with bupivacaine 0.5% hyperbaric solution 10 mg (n = 20) or total intravenous anaesthesia with propofol and remifentanil (n = 20). Preparation and discharge times, as well as occurrence of untoward events and anaesthesia-related costs, were recorded. RESULTS: The median (range) preparation time was 7 (7-10) min with general anaesthesia, and 11 (7-21) min with spinal block (P = 0.00005). No differences in discharge time from the postanaesthesia care unit and incidence of hypotension or bradycardia, or both, were reported between the two groups. Hospital discharge times were 156 (101-345) min after general anaesthesia and 296 (195-720) min after spinal anaesthesia (P = 0.0005). Acceptance of the anaesthesia technique was better after general (100%) than after spinal anaesthesia (75%) (P = 0.04). No differences in total costs were reported between spinal block ([symbol: see text] 155 ([symbol: see text] 117-[symbol: see text] 224)) and propofol-remifentanil general anaesthesia ([symbol: see text] 143 ([symbol: see text] 124-[symbol: see text] 203) (P = 0.125)). CONCLUSIONS: Accurate titration of short-acting intravenous anaesthetic drugs such as propofol and remifentanil results in shorter preparation times and earlier home discharge after outpatient gynaecological procedures compared with spinal anaesthesia with hyperbaric bupivacaine 10 mg, with better patient acceptance and no increased costs.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Randomized comparison of isoflurane and sevoflurane for laparoscopic gastric banding in morbidly obese patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and recovery profile of sevoflurane and isoflurane as the main anesthetics for morbidly obese patients. DESIGN: Randomized, blinded study. SETTING: Inpatients. PATIENTS: 30 ASA physical status II and III obese patients [body mass index (BMI) > 35 kg/m(2)] undergoing laparoscopic gastric banding for morbid obesity. INTERVENTIONS: After standard intravenous induction of general anesthesia and tracheal intubation, anesthesia was maintained with either sevoflurane or isoflurane as the main anesthetics. The end-tidal concentrations of the volatile drugs were adjusted to maintain systolic arterial blood pressure within +/-20% from baseline values. When the surgeon started the skin suture, the end-tidal concentration of the inhalational drug was reduced to 0.5 minimum alveolar concentration in both groups. At the last skin suture, the inhalational drug was discontinued and the vaporizator was removed to allow blinded evaluation of the emergence times. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: No differences in anesthetic exposure, hemodynamic parameters, incidence of untoward events, or postoperative pain relief were reported between the two groups. Extubation, emergence, and response times were shorter after sevoflurane [6 min (3-15 min), 8 min (5-18 min), and 12 (6-25 min)] than isoflurane [10 min (6-26 min), 14 min (6-21 min), and 21 min (14-41 min)] (p = 0.001, p = 0.03, and p = 0.0005, respectively). The median time for postanesthesia care unit discharge was 15 minutes (25th-75th percentiles: 10-18 min) after sevoflurane and 27 minutes (25th-75th percentiles: 20-30 min) after isoflurane (p = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Sevoflurane provides a safe and effective intraoperative control of cardiovascular homeostasis in morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic gastric banding, with the advantage of a faster recovery and earlier discharge from the postanesthesia care unit than isoflurane.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Fentanyl does not improve the nerve block characteristics of axillary brachial plexus anaesthesia performed with ropivacaine.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective, randomized, double-blind study was to evaluate the effects of adding 1 microg. kg-1 fentanyl to ropivacaine 7.5 mg. ml-1 for axillary brachial plexus anaesthesia. METHODS: With Ethics Committee approval and written consent, 30 ASA physical status I-II in-patients, scheduled for orthopaedic hand procedures were randomly allocated to receive axillary brachial plexus block with 20 ml of either ropivacaine 7.5 mg. ml-1 (n=15) or ropivacaine 7.5 mg. ml-1+1 microg. ml-1 fentanyl (n=15). Nerve blocks were placed using a nerve stimulator with the multiple injection technique. A blinded observer recorded the time to onset of surgical block (loss of pinprick sensation in the innervation areas of the hand (C6-C8) with concomitant inability to flex the wrist against gravity and move the fingers when squeezing the hand) and first request for pain medication after surgery. RESULTS: No differences in demography, degree of sedation or peripheral oxygen saturation were observed between the two groups. Median (range) time required to achieve readiness for surgery was 15 min (5-36 min) with ropivacaine alone and 15 min (5-40 min) with the ropivacaine-fentanyl mixture. No differences in the intraoperative quality of nerve block were reported between the two groups. Four patients receiving ropivacaine plain and two patients receiving the ropivacaine-fentanyl mixture did not require analgesics during the first 24 h after surgery (P=0.62). The degree of pain experienced at first analgesic request in those patients asking for pain medication, as well as median consumption of postoperative analgesics, were similar in the two groups. First postoperative analgesic request was made at 11 h (25th-75th percentiles: 9.1-14 h) in patients receiving ropivacaine alone and at 11.8 h (25th-75th percentiles: 9.8-15 h) in patients receiving the ropivacaine-fentanyl mixture (P=0.99). CONCLUSION: The addition of fentanyl 1 microg. ml-1 to ropivacaine 7.5 mg. ml-1 does not improve the nerve block characteristics of axillary brachial plexus anaesthesia for orthopaedic procedures involving the hand.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

Interscalene brachial plexus anaesthesia with small volumes of ropivacaine 0.75%: effects of the injection technique on the onset time of nerve blockade.

BACKGROUND AND AIM: We evaluated the effect of the injection technique on the onset time and efficacy of interscalene brachial plexus anaesthesia. METHODS: With Ethical Committee approval and written consent, 30 patients undergoing elective shoulder acromioplasty or capsuloplasty were randomly allocated to receive interscalene brachial plexus block with 20 mL of ropivacaine 0.75% by using either a single injection (Single group, n = 15) or multiple injection (Multiple group, n = 15). Nerve blocks were placed with the aid of a nerve stimulator using short bevelled, Teflon coated needles. The stimulation frequency was set at 2 Hz and the intensity of stimulating current, initially set at 1 mA, was gradually decreased to < or = 0.5 mA after each muscular twitch was observed. In the Single group, the anaesthetic solution was slowly injected after the first muscular twitch had been observed. In the Multiple group, 8 mL were injected at shoulder abduction, 6 mL were injected at arm flexion, and 6 mL at the extension of the arm. RESULTS: Placing the block required 5 min (4-8 min) in the Multiple group and 3 min (1-10 min) in the Single group (P = 0.001); however, total preoperative time (from skin disinfection to complete loss of pinprick sensation from C4 to C7 with inability to elevate the limb from the operating table) was shorter in the Multiple group (15 min; range 10-28 min) than in the Single group (23 min; range 14-60 min) (P = 0.03). Additional intravenous fentanyl supplementation was required in two patients of the Multiple group (13%) and eight patients of the Single group (53%) (P = 0.05). CONCLUSION: We conclude that using a multiple injection technique shortened the preparation time and improved the quality of interscalene brachial plexus anaesthesia performed with small volumes of ropivacaine 0.75%.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Small doses of remifentanil or sufentanil for blunting cardiovascular changes induced by tracheal intubation: a double-blind comparison.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To compare the effects on cardiovascular changes induced by tracheal intubation when small doses of either remifentanil or sufentanil are used in the presence of midazolam. METHODS: Thirty normotensive, ASA physical status I-II patients, receiving general anaesthesia for major abdominal surgery, received an intravenous midazolam premedication (0.05 mg kg-1) 10 min before induction. They were randomly allocated to receive in a double-blind fashion an intravenous bolus of either (a) remifentanil given as a bolus dose 1 microgram kg-1 (n = 15), or else (b) sufentanil 0.1 microgram kg-1 infused over 60 s (n = 15). In each instance this loading dose was followed by a continuous intravenous infusion (0.1 microgram kg-1 min-1 or 0.01 microgram kg-1 min-1 of remifentanil or sufentanil, respectively). General anaesthesia was induced with propofol (2 mg kg-1), followed by atracurium besilate (0.5 mg kg-1) to facilitate tracheal intubation. Following intubation, the lungs were mechanically ventilated with a 60% nitrous oxide in oxygen mixture and a 1% inspired sevoflurane. RESULTS: Arterial pressure and heart rate were recorded before induction of anaesthesia (baseline), immediately before intubation, immediately after tracheal intubation and every minute for the first five minutes thereafter. No differences in systolic and diastolic arterial pressures were observed between the two groups. At the end of the study period, systolic and diastolic pressures slightly decreased from preinduction values in both groups. Four patients in the remifentanil group (26%) and five patients in sufentanil group (33%) showed at least one systolic pressure value < 90 mmHg during the study period (P = not significant); however, the observed decreases in systolic pressure were transient and did not require treatment. Heart rate values were not affected by tracheal intubation in either group. CONCLUSIONS: In healthy normotensive patients without cardiovascular disease the use of a relatively small dose of either remifentanil or sufentanil after standard midazolam premedication results in a similar and clinically acceptable effectiveness in blunting the cardiovascular changes induced by tracheal intubation.

Adjuvants, Anesthesia↗
PubMed2001

The effects of single or multiple injections on the volume of 0.5% ropivacaine required for femoral nerve blockade.

UNLABELLED: We compared the effects of using a single- or multiple-injection technique on the volume of 0.5% ropivacaine required to block the femoral nerve, in a prospective, randomized, blinded fashion in which 50 premedicated patients received a femoral nerve block with 0.5% ropivacaine by use of a nerve stimulator and either a single- (n = 25) or multiple- (n = 25) injection technique. Muscular twitches were elicited at < or =0.5 mA before anesthetic injection. The designated volume of local anesthetic was equally divided among contraction of the vastus medialis, vastus intermedius, and vastus lateralis for the multiple injections, or it was injected at the contraction of the vastus intermedius with motion of the patella for the single injection. The local anesthetic volumes were varied for consecutive patients by using an up-and-down staircase method; a blinded observer determined the adequacy of nerve blockade (loss of pinprick sensation in the medial, patellar, and lateral portions of the knee, with concomitant block of the quadriceps muscle) 20 min after injection. The mean (95% confidence interval) volume required for blocking the femoral nerve with the multiple-injection technique (14 [12-16] mL) was significantly smaller than that observed with the single injection (23 [20-26] mL) (P = 0.001). According to logistic regression analyses, the 95% effective volumes of ropivacaine required to block the femoral nerve within 20 min after injection were 29 and 21 mL with a single or multiple injection, respectively. We conclude that searching for multiple muscular twitches reduces the volume of 0.5% ropivacaine required to produce blockade of the femoral nerve. IMPLICATIONS: We evaluated the effects of using a single- or multiple-injection technique on the volume of 0.5% ropivacaine required to block the femoral nerve. The 95%effective concentration values for producing the same degree of sensory and motor blockade of the femoral nerve within 20 min after injection were 29 mL after elicitation of a patella twitch and 21 mL when the three main branches of the femoral nerve were identified, potentially leading to an important benefit for patients receiving peripheral nerve blocks.

Adolescent↗
PubMed2001

A new posterior approach to the sciatic nerve block: a prospective, randomized comparison with the classic posterior approach.

UNLABELLED: To evaluate the efficacy and acceptance of a new posterior subgluteus approach to the sciatic nerve, as compared with the classic posterior approach, 128 patients undergoing foot orthopedic procedures were randomly allocated to receive either the classic posterior sciatic nerve block (Group Labat, n = 64) or a modified subgluteus posterior approach (Group subgluteus, n = 64). All blocks were performed with the use of a nerve stimulator (stimulation frequency, 2 Hz; intensity, 1-0.5 mA). In Group subgluteus, a line was drawn from the greater trochanter to the ischial tuberosity; then, from the midpoint of this line, a second line was drawn perpendicularly and extended caudally for 4 cm. The end of this line represented the needle entry. In both groups, a proper sciatic stimulation was elicited at 0.5 mA; then 20 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine was injected. The time from needle insertion to successful sciatic nerve stimulation was 60 s (range, 10-180 s) with the Labat's approach and 32 s (range, 5-120 s) with the new subgluteus approach (P = 0.0005). The depth of appropriate sciatic stimulation was 45 +/- 13 mm (mean +/- SD) after 2 (range, 1-7) needle redirections in Group subgluteus and 67 +/- 12 mm after 4 (range, 1-10) needle redirections in Group Labat (P = 0.0001 and P = 0.00001, respectively). The failure rate was similar in both groups. Severe discomfort during the procedure was less frequent and acceptance better in Group subgluteus (5 patients [8%] and 60 patients [94%], respectively) than in Group Labat (20 patients [31%] and 49 patients [77%], respectively) (P = 0.0005 and P = 0.005, respectively). We conclude that this new subgluteus posterior approach to the sciatic nerve is an easy and reliable technique and can be considered an effective alternative to the more traditional Labat's approach. IMPLICATIONS: Evaluating the efficacy and acceptance of a new approach to the sciatic nerve block, this prospective, randomized study demonstrated that the new subgluteus posterior approach is an easy and reliable technique and can be considered an useful alternative to the more traditional Labat's approach in patients undergoing foot surgery, facilitating the performance of the sciatic nerve blocks.

Adult↗
PubMed2001

Implementing sevoflurane anesthesia with small doses opioid for upper abdominal surgery. Postoperative respiratory function after either remifentanil or fentanyl.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this prospective, randomized study was to compare the effects on intraoperative cardiovascular homeostasis, recovery profile and postoperative oxygen saturation after sevoflurane anesthesia with small doses of either remifentanil or fentanyl in combination with postoperative epidural analgesia. METHODS: With Ethical Committee approval and written patient consent, 30 ASA physical status I-II patients scheduled for elective upper abdominal surgery were randomly allocated to receive sevoflurane general anesthesia implemented with small doses of either remifentanil (n = 15) or fentanyl (n = 15), followed by postoperative epidural analgesia. Remifentanil group patients received a 1 mg kg-1 bolus infused during a 60 sec period followed by a 0.15 mg kg-1 min-1 infusion; while patients of Fentanyl group were given a 3 mg kg-1 initial dose followed by 50 mg boluses as requested (according to the time to peak effect of the two drugs, the initial dose was given 5 min before induction in Fentanyl group, and 1 min before induction in Remifentanil group). Postoperatively, oxygen saturation was continuously recorded and stored on a computer during the first 12 h after surgery. SpO2 decrease < 90% for more than one minute was considered as a minor respiratory complication. RESULTS: The median sevoflurane's MAC-hour was 2.7 (1.4 - 4.9) in patients receiving remifentanil infusion and 4.1 (2.2 - 5.7) in those patients receiving fentanyl during surgery (P = 0.005). However, no differences in the recovery times were observed between the two groups. Similar pain relief was reported during coughing in the two studied groups at discharge from the recovery area and during the following study period. No major respiratory complication was observed throughout the study. Oxygen therapy was required in three patients of Fentanyl group only 20% (P = 0.22); however, 11 patients in the same group (73%) showed at least one minor respiratory complication (SpO2 < 90% for more than 1 min), with a median of 1 (range 0 - 12) episode per patient, compared with no episode in Remifentanil group (P = 0.0005). CONCLUSIONS: Implementing sevoflurane anesthesia with very small remifentanil infusion provides a safe and effective hemodynamic control reducing sevoflurane consumption during the procedure, and produces less respiratory effects postoperatively as compared with intermittent bolus administration of fentanyl.

Abdomen↗
PubMed2001

[Systemic analgesia after peripheral block].

Over the past few years, increasing emphasis has been placed on the need to improve the management of acute pain. Despite a growing trend in acute pain management, many difficulties are still present for the treatment of postoperative pain. Loco-regional techniques together with an effective pain management should accelerate rehabilitation, decrease risk of postoperative complications and speed return to normal activities. A multimodal approach should be used for a reduction of pharmacological side effects, improving pain reduction. The association between NSAIDs and opioids permits reduction of full dose opioids with better pain relief and less side effects. If NSAIDs are contraindicated, acetaminophen is an alternative, though considered by someone to be an NSAID It's action is believed to result from inhibition of prostaglandin synthesis within the central nervous system. It doesn't cause gastrointestinal ulceration or bleeding, but we have to note that large amounts may lead to hepatic necrosis. Newer NSAIDs (COX-2 inhibitors), affect mainly COX-2, and appear to be associated with less adverse effect. Rofecoxib showed a reduction of morphine consuming after spinal fusion and has been admitted by FDA for the treatment of post operative pain. Newer methods of pain relief, as patient controlled analgesia (PCA), can provide excellent and safe pain relief. When high-tech options such as PCA are used, patients need a management by an anesthesiologist-based acute pain service (APS), allowing a better pain relief with less side effects compared to patients supervised by less experienced medical staff.

Analgesia↗
PubMed2000

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.

Abdomen↗
PubMed2000

0.2% ropivacaine with or without fentanyl for patient-controlled epidural analgesia after major abdominal surgery: a double-blind study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effects of adding low concentration of fentanyl to 0.2% ropivacaine when providing patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) outside the Post-Anesthesia Care Unit. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, double-blind study. SETTING: Inpatients at a University Department of Anesthesia. PATIENTS: 32 ASA physical status I, II, and III patients, who were scheduled for elective major abdominal surgery, including bowel resection, hepatic resection, and pancreaticoduodenectomy. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received standard general/epidural anesthesia. After surgery patients were randomly allocated in a double-blind fashion to receive PCEA with either 0.2% ropivacaine (n = 16) or 0.2% ropivacaine/2 microg/mL fentanyl (n = 16) [background infusion ranging between 4 and 6 mL/hr, with 1.5-mL incremental doses and a 20-min lock-out time]. Dynamic pain during coughing, sedation, pulse oxymetry, hemodynamic variables, and motor block were evaluated at 1, 6, 12, 24, and 48 hours after the end of surgery by a blinded observer. Occurrence of untoward events, including nausea, vomiting, pruritus, need for supplemental oxygen (for SpO(2) < 90%), and respiratory complications, as well as total consumption of PCEA solution and incremental doses given to the patient were also recorded. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: No differences in pain relief, motor block, degree of sedation, recovery of gastrointestinal motility, and other side effects were observed between the two groups. Patients receiving 0.2% ropivacaine alone requested far more incremental doses (23 doses [0-60] vs. 5 doses [0-25]) (p = 0.006) and needed far more analgesic solution (230 mL [140-282] vs. 204 [130-228]) (p = 0.003) than patients receiving the ropivacaine/fentanyl mixture. Peripheral oxygen saturation was lower at 12, 24, and 48 hours during ropivacaine/fentanyl infusion than in patients receiving ropivacaine alone (12 h: 91% +/- 2% vs. 95% +/- 2%, p < 0.006; 24 h: 93% +/- 1% vs. 96% +/- 2%, p = 0.003; 48 h: 92% +/- 1.8% vs. 96% +/- 1%, p = 0.004). CONCLUSIONS: A thoracic epidural infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine, with or without fentanyl, provided effective pain relief in most patients with a very low degree of motor blockade. Adding 2 microg/ml fentanyl to 0.2% ropivacaine reduced total consumption of local anesthetic solution and need for incremental doses, but did not provide clinically relevant advantages in quality of pain relief and incidence of motor block, leading to a significant decrease in peripheral SpO(2), lasting up to 48 hours after surgery.

Abdomen↗