U Kirste | PubMed Health

PubMed1993

[Ambulatory laparoscopic sterilization--should local analgesia and intravenous sedation replace general anesthesia? A comparative clinical trial].

A prospective, randomized study comprised 125 outpatient laparoscopic sterilization patients who had received either general anaesthesia or local anaesthesia together with intravenous sedation. The patients who had received local anaesthesia suffered significantly less postoperative pain and sore throat. Recovery and discharge were similar in the two groups, but those given a general anaesthetic were more drowsy in the evening on the day of operation. The time spent in the operating theatre was significantly shorter for the group given local anaesthesia, and the costs were lower. The majority of patients from both groups would prefer local anaesthesia and sedation for a similar procedure in the future. We conclude that local anaesthesia by intravenous sedation is the method of choice for laparoscopic sterilization.

Adult↗

PubMed1993

Laparoscopic sterilization under local or general anesthesia? A randomized study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the safety, acceptability, and economy of local anesthesia and intravenous (IV) sedation versus short-term general anesthesia for laparoscopic sterilization. METHODS: We randomly allocated 125 of 150 consecutively sterilized women to either local or general anesthesia. No women were excluded, but 25 chose not to participate. The women were interviewed before surgery, and they returned a standardized questionnaire after discharge from the hospital. All laparoscopic tubal sterilizations were performed by senior gynecologists. Midazolam was used as premedication. In the local-anesthesia group, lidocaine with adrenaline was infiltrated infraumbilically and bupivacaine was applied to each tube. Midazolam and alfentanil were used as IV sedation. In the general-anesthesia group, intubation anesthesia was accomplished with alfentanil and propofol; atracurium was used for muscle relaxation. RESULTS: In the local-anesthesia group, operation time was shorter, perioperative discomfort was modest, and the costs of equipment were lower than in the general-anesthesia group. There was less postoperative abdominal pain and less need of analgesics, and the patients were more awake in the evening. The rise in heart rate and blood pressure were higher in the local-anesthesia group, and external oxygen was necessary to avoid apnea. Anesthetic surveillance was therefore mandatory. CONCLUSIONS: Local analgesia was highly acceptable to the majority of patients as well as to the gynecologists. The operation time was less, postoperative recovery was quicker, and the women were less bothered by abdominal pain and sore throat. There was a substantial reduction in anesthesia costs. Anesthetic surveillance during surgery was necessary.

Adult↗