PubMed Health⌕ Search

Biomedical subjects

S A Schweitzer

Publications and source records attributed to S A Schweitzer.

13 recordsLinked to original sources
PubMed1992

Effect of epidural and general anaesthesia compared with general anaesthesia alone in large bowel anastomoses. A prospective study.

OBJECTIVE: To find out whether patients did better after operations that entailed a large bowel anastomosis if they were given combined epidural and general anaesthesia with spontaneous ventilation rather than standard general anaesthesia with muscle relaxation and ventilation. DESIGN: Prospective randomised trial. SETTING: Specialist unit, teaching hospital. SUBJECTS: 80 patients undergoing large bowel anastomoses. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Incidence of chest infection, wound infection, anastomotic breakdown, urinary tract infection, deep vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, median hospital stay and death. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups, but the results were better during the trial period (1985-89) than during the period 1978-83. CONCLUSION: Factors that influence anastomotic healing are complex and improved surgical techniques, postoperative monitoring and patient care may account for the improvement in results compared with the earlier period.

Aged↗
PubMed1987

Plasma bupivacaine concentrations during postoperative continuous epidural analgesia.

Postoperative analgesia and plasma concentrations of bupivacaine were evaluated in six patients receiving intermittent epidural bupivacaine for a period of 72 hours following large bowel surgery. Repeated doses were administered every hour by a new automatic, specially designed pump. Venous plasma bupivacaine concentrations showed accumulation for up to 48-60 hours during administration and were mostly less than 2 micrograms/ml except in an elderly, frail patient in whom a peak of 3.9 micrograms/ml was observed. This convenient, low-dose, pulsed technique provided excellent analgesia although special care may be necessary in the elderly and frail patient if potentially toxic levels are to be avoided.

Adult↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Continuous axillary brachial plexus block for postoperative pain relief. Intermittent bolus versus continuous infusion.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of continuous axillary brachial plexus block by infusion and by intermittent injection of bupivacaine 0.25% in the management of postoperative pain. METHODS: Two methods of continuous axillary brachial plexus block for pain management were compared in a prospective randomized trial. Twenty 16- to 62-year-old male patients (ASA I and II), undergoing microsurgery, received 0.25% bupivacaine following surgery, by either continuous infusion (group C, n = 10), or intermittent hourly bolus (group B, n = 10), via an axillary brachial plexus catheter inserted prior to operation. Efficacy assessments and analysis of plasma bupivacaine levels were performed for up to 38 hours postsurgery. RESULTS: There was no difference between groups with respect to pain scores, degree of motor block, or supplemental narcotic requirements. Plasma bupivacaine levels were higher in group C, with the difference reaching significance after 26 hours (means +/- SEM: C = 1.03 +/- 0.10 micrograms/mL, B = 0.73 +/- 0.08 microgram/mL, P < .05). There were no significant differences in cumulative bupivacaine doses or infusion rates between the groups. Complications included one case of axillary artery puncture at insertion, two unplanned premature catheter removals, and a self-limited grand mal convulsion in a known epileptic. CONCLUSIONS: Overall, both techniques provided safe and effective postoperative analgesia. As compared with continuous infusion, intermittent bolus administration resulted in lower plasma bupivacaine levels despite similar infusion rates.

Adolescent↗
PubMedDate not supplied

Combined general and epidural anesthesia versus general anesthesia for major abdominal surgery: postanesthesia recovery characteristics.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Outcome studies comparing general anesthesia combined with epidural anesthesia (GEN-EPI) to general anesthesia (GEN) for major abdominal surgery have been equivocal. However, many believe that patients anesthetized with GEN-EPI fair better than GEN. This study tests the hypothesis that there are favorable recovery characteristics associated with GEN-EPI as compared with GEN following abdominal surgery. METHODS: A prospective randomized double-blind trial, consisting of 30 patients ages 18-74 undergoing abdominal surgery was undertaken. Patients received either GEN-EPI or GEN by standardized protocol. At the end of surgery the epidural catheter was removed and psychological testing was performed over 24 hours to determine recovery characteristics. These included the modified Slater test, the Self-Assessment Manikin, the Kendrick Digital Copying Test, the Hospital Anxiety and Depression Scale, as well as visual analog scales for pain and appearance. RESULTS: Patients receiving GEN-EPI emerged from anesthesia faster (P < .03) with less pain on awakening (P < .04 at rest; P < .01 on coughing), had better psychomotor function at 2 hours (P < .04), and were less drowsy at 4 hours (P < .04), than patients with GEN. There was no difference in pain intensity after the initial assessment, morphine usage, mood, anxiety, and depression at any other measurement period. CONCLUSION: Transient quantifiable differences in recovery characteristics exist between patients receiving GEN-EPI and GEN.

Abdomen↗