Rapacuronium: why did it fail as a replacement for succinylcholine?
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Biomedical subjects
Publications and source records attributed to P F White.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
The fast-tracking recovery concept examines different paradigms for streamlining the postoperative recovery process. Fast-tracking anesthetic techniques allow suitable outpatients to be discharged earlier after ambulatory surgery. Outpatients are normally transferred from the OR to the PACU, followed by transfer to the Phase II step-down (day-surgery unit) before discharge home. With conventional fast-tracking, it is possible to bypass the PACU and take patients directly from the OR to the step-down unit if they meet specific criteria before leaving the OR. Alternatively, if the step-down unit is already functioning at maximum capacity, the PACU can be restructured to include a fast-track area, where appropriate patients are treated as if they had been admitted directly to the step-down unit. For these PACU fast-track patients, less monitoring is performed, a family member is permitted to be with the patient, and the patient is allowed to ambulate, change into street clothes, and be discharged home directly from the PACU without any time restrictions. Preliminary studies have shown that outpatients who are fast-tracked can be discharged home earlier without any increase in complications or side effects. Importantly, fast-tracking after ambulatory surgery does not seem to compromise patient satisfaction with the surgical experience.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
UNLABELLED: Corticosteroids can decrease pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting after ambulatory surgery. Therefore, we designed a study to evaluate if the routine use of dexamethasone would facilitate the early recovery process after anorectal surgery. A secondary aim of the study was to determine if dexamethasone would increase the incidence of postoperative wound complications. Eighty adult outpatients undergoing anorectal surgery with a standardized monitored anesthesia care technique were randomly assigned to receive either dexamethasone 4 mg IV or an equal volume of saline before the start of surgery. All patients were premedicated with midazolam 2 mg IV and received ketorolac 30 mg IV as a preemptive analgesic. A propofol infusion, 50 microg. kg(-1). min(-1) IV, was initiated and subsequently titrated to maintain an observer's assessment of alertness/sedation score of 2 or 3 (with 5 = awake/alert to 1 = asleep). Fentanyl 25 microg IV was administered 3-5 min before infiltrating the surgical field with a 30-mL local anesthetic mixture containing 15 mL of lidocaine 1% and 15 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% (with epinephrine 1:200,000 and sodium bicarbonate 3 mL). All patients were fast-tracked directly from the operating room to the step-down recovery area. Even though the incidences of postoperative pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting were small in both treatment groups, the time to "home readiness" was significantly shorter in the dexamethasone group. Importantly, there was no increase in the incidence of wound infections (8% vs 12%) or hematoma formation (3% vs 5%) in the dexamethasone (versus saline) group. We conclude that the administration of dexamethasone, 4 mg IV, shortened the time to home readiness without increasing the incidence of postoperative wound infections in a high-risk outpatient population undergoing anorectal surgery. IMPLICATIONS: A single dose of dexamethasone (4 mg IV) decreased the time to "home readiness" without increasing the incidence of postoperative wound complications in an outpatient population undergoing anorectal surgery.
IMPLICATIONS: Compared to propofol, maintenance of anesthesia with desflurane provided significantly better intraoperative conditions during office-based surgery. In addition, desflurane with routine antiemetic prophylaxis was associated with a faster early recovery and similar incidence of postoperative side effects.
We compared esmolol and remifentanil infusions with respect to their effect on intraoperative hemodynamic stability and early recovery after outpatient laparoscopic surgery when administered as IV adjuvants during desflurane anesthesia. After premedication with midazolam 2 mg IV, anesthesia was induced with propofol 2 mg. kg(-1) IV in combination with either esmolol 1 mg. kg(-1) IV (n = 27) or remifentanil 1 microg. kg(-1) IV (n = 26) and succinylcholine 1 mg. kg(-1) IV according to a randomized, double-blinded protocol. Anesthesia was initially maintained with desflurane 2.5% (subsequently titrated to maintain an electroencephalogram-bispectral index value of 60) and nitrous oxide 65% in oxygen. Before skin incision, an infusion of either esmolol (5 microg. kg(-1). min(-1)) or remifentanil (0.05 microg. kg(-1). min(-1)) was started and titrated to maintain the heart rate within 25% of the baseline value. Mivacurium, 0.04 mg/kg IV, bolus doses were administered to maintain a stable peak inspiratory pressure. Esmolol (12.8 +/- 13.1 microg. kg(-1). min(-1)) and remifentanil (0.04 +/- 0.02 microg. kg(-1). min(-1)) infusions were equally effective in maintaining a stable heart rate during these laparoscopic procedures. Although the mivacurium requirement was larger in the Esmolol group (7 +/- 5 vs 3 +/- 4 mg), the Esmolol group reported a smaller incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (4% vs 35%). Both drugs were associated with frequent "postanesthesia care unit bypass" rates (78-81%), short times to "home readiness" (119-120 min), excellent patient satisfaction (81-85%), and rapid resumption of normal activities (2.6-3.2 d). Fast-tracked patients were ready for discharge home significantly earlier (112 +/- 46 vs 151 +/- 50 min). We concluded that esmolol infusion is an acceptable alternative to remifentanil infusion for maintaining hemodynamic stability during desflurane-based fast-track anesthesia for outpatient gynecologic laparoscopic surgery.
The analgesic response to percutaneous neuromodulation therapy (PNT) is influenced by the location, frequency, and duration of electrical stimulation. We evaluated the effect of different patterns of stimulation (montages) on the acute analgesic response to PNT when applied at the same dermatomal levels in 72 consenting patients with low back pain. All of the patients received a standardized montage (I) and three alternative montage (II-IV) patterns according to a randomized, single-blinded, crossover study design. All of the PNT treatments were administered at identical alternating stimulation frequencies of 15 and 30 Hz for a period of 30 min, three times per week for two consecutive weeks, with 1 wk "off" between each modality. Pretreatment assessments included the health status survey short form (SF-36) questionnaire, as well as visual analog scale scores for pain, physical activity, and quality of sleep (with 0 = the best to 10 = the worst). The pain visual analog scale was repeated 5--10 min after each treatment session. The daily oral analgesic usage was recorded in a patient diary. All four montages produced significant improvements in pain (42%--64%), physical activity (35%--51%), and quality of sleep (28%--46%), as well as 23% to 47% reductions in the daily oral analgesic usage. However, Montage II was significantly more effective than the standard (Montage I) and the other two montages studied. These data suggest that the pattern of stimulation (i.e., montage) can influence the acute analgesic response to PNT.
Interest in nonpharmacologic alternatives to conventional analgesic drugs for the management of acute and chronic pain has lead to an evaluation of the use of electroanalgesic therapies.
UNLABELLED: Nonpharmacologic techniques may be effective in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). This sham-controlled, double-blinded study was designed to examine the antiemetic efficacy of transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation (TAES) in a surgical population at high risk of developing PONV. We studied 221 outpatients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy with a standardized general anesthetic technique in this randomized, multicenter trial. In the TAES group, an active ReliefBand(Woodside Biomedical, Inc., Carlsbad, CA) device was placed at the P6 acupoint, whereas in the Sham and Placebo groups, an inactive device was applied at the P6 acupoint and at the dorsal aspect of the wrist, respectively. The ReliefBand was applied after completion of electrocautery and remained in place for 9 h after surgery. The incidence of PONV and need for "rescue" medication were evaluated at predetermined time intervals. TAES was associated with a significantly decreased incidence of moderate-to-severe nausea as denoted on the Functional Living Index-Emesis score for up to 9 h after surgery (5%-11% for the TAES group vs 16%-38% [P < 0.05] and 15%-26% [P < 0.05] for Sham and Placebo groups, respectively). TAES was also associated with a larger proportion of patients free from moderate to severe nausea symptoms (73% vs 41% and 49% for Sham and Placebo groups, respectively; P < 0.05). However, there were no statistically significant differences among the three groups with regard to incidence of vomiting or the need for rescue antiemetic drugs. We conclude that TAES with the ReliefBand at the P6 acupoint reduces nausea, but not vomiting, after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. IMPLICATIONS: Transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation at the P6 acupoint reduced postoperative nausea, but not vomiting, in outpatients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedures.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
We assessed the analgesic efficacy of IV propacetamol and ketorolac in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled study involving patients undergoing total hip or knee replacement procedures. On the first morning after major joint replacement surgery, 164 patients experiencing moderate-to-severe pain were randomly assigned to receive an IV infusion of propacetamol (2 g), ketorolac (15 or 30 mg), or placebo (saline). Patient-controlled analgesia with morphine was made available as a "rescue" analgesic on patient's request during the 6-h postdosing evaluation period. The median time to onset of analgesia with propacetamol (8 [95% confidence interval 6,10] min) was shorter than ketorolac 15 mg (14 [7,16] min), and placebo (16 [8; not estimable] min) although the differences did not reach statistical significance. However, compared with ketorolac 30 mg, propacetamol had a shorter duration of analgesia (3.5 [2;5.4] vs 6 [3.3; not estimable] h). Analysis of pain intensity and pain relief scores demonstrated that propacetamol produced a significantly greater improvement in pain relief than saline from 45 min until 5 h after the injection. Propacetamol was not significantly different from ketorolac 15 mg and 30 mg with respect to the main analgesic efficacy variables during the 6-h assessment period. The most frequently reported adverse event with propacetamol was injection site pain (28% vs 19% for ketorolac 15 mg, 29% for ketorolac 30 mg, and 10% for placebo, respectively). In conclusion, propacetamol (2 g IV) possesses a similar analgesic efficacy to ketorolac (15 or 30 mg IV) after total hip or knee replacement surgery.
IMPLICATIONS: In this study, although 41%-94% of the patients were fast-track eligible after laparoscopic surgery, only 35%-53% of the patients actually bypassed the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) because of anesthetic-related factors and surgical complications. Residual sedation was the most common anesthetic-related cause of failure to bypass thePACU.
UNLABELLED: Dolasetron (12.5 mg IV) is effective in both preventing and treating postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after ambulatory surgery. However, the optimal timing of dolasetron administration and its effect on the patient's quality of life after discharge have not been established. One-hundred-five healthy, consenting women undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic procedures with a standardized general anesthetic technique were enrolled in this randomized, double-blinded study. Group 1 received dolasetron 12.5 mg IV 10-15 min before the induction of anesthesia; Group 2 received dolasetron 12.5 mg IV at the end of the laparoscopy (79 +/- 48 min later than Group 1); and Group 3 received dolasetron 12.5 mg IV at the end of anesthesia (93 +/- 52 min later than Group 1). The incidence of PONV, complete responses (defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication within the 24-h period after anesthesia), recovery profiles, and patient satisfaction were recorded. In the postanesthesia care unit and during the 24-h follow-up period, the incidence of nausea and vomiting, as well as the need for rescue antiemetics, did not differ significantly among the three groups. The percentages of patients with complete responses to the study drug within the first postoperative 24 h were also similar in all three groups (55%, 59%, and 52% for Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively). The early and intermediate recovery profiles, including resumption of a normal diet and patient satisfaction with the control of PONV, were not different among the three study groups. Dolasetron 12.5 mg IV administered before the induction of anesthesia is as effective as dolasetron given at the end of laparoscopy or at the end of anesthesia in preventing PONV after outpatient laparoscopy. IMPLICATIONS: The timing of dolasetron administration appears to have little effect on its efficacy when administered as a prophylactic antiemetic in the ambulatory setting.
UNLABELLED: Because noise in the operating room has been alleged to interfere with the ability to sedate patients before surgery, we evaluated the effect of noise on the Bispectral index (BIS) value during propofol sedation. Thirty unpremedicated patients were studied before the start of surgery while receiving propofol sedation on two separate occasions according to a randomized, crossover protocol design. After achieving a stable baseline BIS value of either 75 or 80 with a target-controlled infusion of propofol, an external sound source administered noise at 50, 80, 110, and 120 dB. The changes in the BIS value were recorded over a 1-min interval at each noise level. In the BIS 75 group, increasing levels of noise did not significantly alter the BIS value. However, in the BIS 80 group, the BIS values at 80, 110, and 120 dB were significantly higher compared to the value at 50 dB. In conclusion, experimental noise increases the BIS and appears to have a greater effect on the BIS value at "lighter" levels of propofol sedation. IMPLICATIONS: Experimental noise levels can increase the Bispectral index (BIS) values during propofol sedation in the operating room. However, the magnitude of the BIS response is influenced by the depth of sedation.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
UNLABELLED: We evaluated the cognitive recovery profiles in elderly patients after general anesthesia with desflurane or sevoflurane. After IRB approval, 70 ASA physical status I-III consenting elderly patients (> or =65 yr old) undergoing total knee or hip replacement procedures were randomly assigned to one of two general anesthetic groups. Propofol and fentanyl were administered for induction of anesthesia, followed by either desflurane 2%-4% or sevoflurane 1%-1.5% with nitrous oxide 65% in oxygen. The desflurane (2.5 +/- 0.6 MAC. h) and sevoflurane (2.7 +/- 0.5 MAC. h) concentrations were adjusted to maintain comparable depths of hypnosis using the electroencephalogram bispectral index monitor. The Mini-Mental State (MMS) test was used to assess cognitive function preoperatively and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 24-h intervals. The use of desflurane was associated with a more rapid emergence from anesthesia (6.3 +/- 2.4 min versus 8.0 +/- 2.8 min) and a shorter length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (213 +/- 66 min versus 241 +/- 87 min). However, there were no significant differences between the Desflurane and the Sevoflurane groups when the MMS scores were compared preoperatively, and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 24 h. Compared with the preoperative (baseline) MMS scores, the values were significantly decreased at 1 h postoperatively (27.8 +/- 1.7 versus 29.5 +/- 0.5 in the Desflurane group, and 27.4 +/- 1.7 versus 29.2 +/- 1.0 in the Sevoflurane group, respectively). However, the MMS scores returned to preoperative baseline levels within 6 h after surgery. At 1 h and 3 h after surgery, 51% and 11% (versus 57% and 9%) of patients in the Desflurane (versus Sevoflurane) Group experienced cognitive impairment. In conclusion, desflurane is associated with a faster early recovery than sevoflurane after general anesthesia in elderly patients. However, recovery of cognitive function was similar after desflurane and sevoflurane-based anesthesia. IMPLICATIONS: Desflurane was associated with a faster early recovery than sevoflurane after general anesthesia in elderly patients. However, recovery of cognitive function was similar with both volatile anesthetics.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
BACKGROUND: The use of volatile anesthetics for maintenance of anesthesia can enhance the action of non-depolarizing muscle relaxants and interfere with the reversal of neuromuscular blockade. In this study, we studied the antagonism of rocuronium with edrophonium-atropine during propofol- versus sevoflurane-based anesthesia. METHODS: Following induction of anesthesia with propofol (2-2.5 mg kg(-1), i.v.) and fentanyl (1-2 microg kg(-1) i.v.), rocuronium 0.6 mg kg(-1) i.v. was administered to facilitate tracheal intubation. Patients were then randomized to receive either a propofol infusion (100 microg kg(-1) min(-1)) or sevoflurane (1.0%, end-tidal) in combination with nitrous oxide 66% for maintenance of anesthesia. Neuromuscular blockade was monitored using electromyography at the wrist, and reversed with edrophonium 1.0 mg kg(-1) and atropine 0.015 mg kg(-1) when the first twitch hight (T1) of the train-of-four (TOF) stimulation recovered to 25% of the baseline value. Anesthetic maintenance with propofol or sevoflurane was continued following reversal until a TOF ratio of 0.7 was attained. RESULTS: The clinical duration of action (i.e., time to 25% T1 recovery) was similar during both propofol- (39.3+/-14.6 min) and sevoflurane-based (48.1+/-19.7 min) anesthesia. However, the reversal time from 25% T1 to TOF ratio of 0.7 was significantly longer with sevoflurane [Median 2.8 (range 0.5-18.8) min] compared with propofol [1.5 (0.75-3) min] (P<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that the clinical duration of action after a single dose of rocuronium, 0.6 mg kg(-1) i.v., was similar during both propofol- and sevoflurane-based anesthesia. However, the reversal of rocuronium-induced residual blockade was slower and more variable in the presence of sevoflurane.