SEARCH · PubMed Health
Explore indexed PubMed citations for clinical trials, systematic reviews and public health research. Read source abstracts and follow each citation to its original PubMed record.
Quote a phrase for an exact phrase match. Source license links do not imply unrestricted reuse.
Prolonged regional anesthesia used for relieving pain was given to 65 patients with closed traumas of the chest complicated by fractures of the ribs. The method was shown to be effective, simple and safe. It may be used both at the hospital and at prehospital stage. The prolonged regional anesthesia allowed reducing the amount of pulmonary complications from 4.5% to 1.7%.
The majority of obstetric patients are concerned about labor pains but also have fears regarding regional anesthesia and its potential effects on themselves and their babies. Anesthesiologists and obstetricians alike must be familiar with potential complications of obstetric regional anesthesia and analgesia, and also be able to provide the information and reassurance each patient needs. If a problem occurs during labor and delivery, it must be dealt with expertly and immediately. This article discusses the diagnostic clues, laboratory tests, and management of neurologic complications related to obstetric delivery and regional anesthesia, as well as the topics of infections, obstetric- and anesthetic-related neurologic deficits, and special tips on neurologic examination. The most common neurologic complication of spinal and epidural anesthesia, postdural puncture headache, will not be discussed in detail here.
BACKGROUND: Recently, a national survey in France including 35,439 patients who had received spinal anesthesia showed that the incidences of cardiac arrest and mortality associated with spinal anesthesia were 2.5 and 0.8 per 10,000 anesthetics, respectively. In this study, we investigated these values using data obtained from annual surveys conducted by the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologist (JSA). METHODS: Since 1994, JSA has conducted annual surveys concerning critical incidents in the operating theater by sending confidential questionnaires to JSA-certified training hospitals, then collecting and analyzing the responses. We investigated critical incidents associated with regional anesthesia using data from annual surveys between 1999 and 2002. The questionnaire was identical in each survey conducted during these years. The total number of anesthetics available for this analysis was 3,855,384, of which spinal anesthesia, combined spinal-epidural anesthesia and epidural anesthesia were performed in 409,338, 146,282, and 69,001 patients, respectively. In patients receiving regional anesthesia, 628 critical incidents including 108 cardiac arrests, and 45 subsequent deaths were reported. The causes of critical incidents were classified as follows: totally attributable to anesthetic management, due mainly to intraoperative pathological events, preoperative complications, and surgical management. IP consists of coronary ischemia including coronary vasospasm not suspected preoperatively, arrhythmias including severe bradycardia, pulmonary thromboembolism, and other conditions. Mortality was determined by postoperative day 7. Statistical analysis was performed by chi-square test and Mann-Whitney test. A p value less than 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: The incidences of cardiac arrest and mortality due to all etiologies were 1.69 and 0.76 with spinal anesthesia, 1.78 and 0.68 with combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, and 1.88 and 0.58/10,000 anesthetics with epidural anesthesia, respectively. The incidences of cardiac arrest and mortality due to anesthetic management were 0.54 and 0.02 with spinal anesthesia, 0.55 and 0.00 with combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, and 0.72 and 0.14/10,000 anesthetics with epidural anesthesia, respectively. These values did not significantly differ among regional anesthesia. Death attributable to anesthetic management was reported in 2 patients: both patients were classified as ASA-PS 3 E, and developed cardiac arrest; one due to inadvertent high spinal anesthesia with spinal anesthesia, and the other due to local anesthetic intoxication with epidural anesthesia. Anesthetic management and intraoperative pathological events comprised 33 and 43% of cardiac arrests, respectively. The distribution of causes of death was as follows: anesthetic management, 5%; intraoperative pathological events, 34%; preoperative complications, 35%; surgical management, 26%. Among the causes of anesthetic management-induced critical incidents, inadvertent high spinal anesthesia was the leading cause of cardiac arrest in spinal and combined spinalepidural anesthesia: 90% of arrests occurred in patients with ASA-PS 1+2; 88% in patients below 65 years of age; 45 and 25% in patients undergoing hip or lower extremities surgery, and cesarean section, respectively. Among the causes of intraoperative pathological event-induced critical incidents, pulmonary thromboembolism was the leading cause of cardiac arrest in spinal and combined spinal-epidural anesthesia: 59% of arrests occurred in patients with ASA-PS 1+2; 81% in patients above 66 years of age; 91% in patients undergoing hip or lower extremity surgery. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of cardiac arrest and mortality associated with spinal anesthesia in Japan was shown to be in the same order as in France by analyzing a larger population. In patients with good ASA-PS, critical incidents occurred more often under regional anesthesia than under general anesthesia. Inadvertent high spinal anesthesia should be carefully avoided. We should also pay much attention to subclinical deep vein thrombosis in patients who were scheduled for hip or lower extremity surgery, and tourniquet- or bone cement-associated pulmonary embolism in these patients.
BACKGROUND: High-risk patients may not be good candidates for laparoscopic surgery due to the metabolic consequences of transperitoneal absorption of insufflated CO(2) gas and the necessity of general anesthesia because CO(2) insufflation produces pain. Helium gas is metabolically inert and does not produce pain. Thus it permits an alternative approach to performing laparoscopic surgery in high-risk patients. METHODS: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy, appendectomy, hernia repair, and peritoneal dialysis catheter procedures were performed under local or regional anesthesia in high-risk patients utilizing helium gas as the insufflation agent. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients underwent laparoscopic procedures under local or regional anesthesia. None of the procedures initiated under local-regional anesthesia required abandonment of the laparoscopic approach or conversion to general anesthesia. There were no operative or perioperative mortalities. Two incidences of pneumothorax occurred with extraperitoneal hernia repair; one required a tube thoracostomy. CONCLUSIONS: Helium gas should be considered the agent of choice for intraperitoneal insufflation in high-risk patients not only because helium avoids the metabolic consequences of CO(2) insufflation but also because it permits selected procedures to be performed under local-regional anesthesia. Helium may be contraindicated for laparoscopic procedures involving extraperitoneal insufflation due to the increased risk for pneumothoraces.
BACKGROUND: Ropivacaine may be useful for intravenous regional anesthesia, but its anesthetic effectiveness and toxicity have not been evaluated. METHODS: Two doses of ropivacaine (1.2 and 1.8 mg/kg) and one dose of lidocaine (3 mg/kg) were compared for intravenous regional anesthesia in 15 volunteers. An arm tourniquet was inflated for 30 min after injection and then deflated in two cycles. Sensory block was measured by response to touch, cold, pinprick, and transcutaneous electric stimulation, and motor function was measured by hand grip strength and muscle power. Median, ulnar, radial, and musculocutaneous nerve functions were tested before local anesthetic injection and then at 5-min intervals until blocks resolved. The plasma ropivacaine and lidocaine concentrations were determined from arterial and venous blood samples drawn from the unanesthetized arm. RESULTS: Sensory and motor blocks were complete within 25 min and 30 min, respectively, in all three treatment groups. However, recovery of sensory and motor block after tourniquet release was slowest in the high-dose ropivacaine group. Anesthesia to pinprick and transcutaneous electric stimulation was sustained in all the volunteers in the high-dose ropivacaine group for 55 min and 85 min, respectively, whereas complete recovery was observed in the lidocaine group (P = 0.008) and partial recovery in the low-dose ropivacaine group (P < 0.05) during the same period. Motor block also was sustained in the high-dose ropivacaine group for 70 min, which was significantly longer than in the lidocaine group (P < 0.05). All volunteers (five of five) given lidocaine and one volunteer given high-dose ropivacaine reported light-headedness and hearing disturbance during tourniquet release when the arterial plasma lidocaine and ropivacaine concentrations were 4.7+/-2.1 microg/ml (mean) and 2.7 micro/ml, respectively. CONCLUSION: Compared with lidocaine, intravenous regional anesthesia with ropivacaine appears to be comparable but has longer-lasting residual anesthesia.
BACKGROUND: Lower systemic toxicity reported with ropivacaine and levobupivacaine may produce less reliable recognition of inadvertent intravenous injection during regional anesthesia. This study was undertaken to determine whether ropivacaine and levobupivacaine are suitable for use as intravenous test doses by evaluating central nervous system (CNS) symptoms after intravenous bolus injection. METHODS: Institutional approval and informed consent were granted for the study. One hundred twenty patients scheduled to undergo elective surgery were randomly assigned to receive 5 ml intravenous saline, 100 mg lidocaine, 25 mg ropivacaine, or 25 mg levobupivacaine before anesthesia. Patients reported CNS symptoms after injection and were monitored for hemodynamic change. RESULTS: Intravenous ropivacaine or levobupivacaine produced CNS symptoms in only 52% and 57% of patients, respectively, compared with 87% of patients after lidocaine (P < 0.02). Despite preparatory instruction, many patients receiving ropivacaine or levobupivacaine did not spontaneously volunteer symptoms because they were subtle and admitted symptoms only after in-depth questioning by the investigator. CONCLUSIONS: Plain ropivacaine and levobupivacaine (25 mg) solutions are unsuitable for use as intravenous test doses during regional anesthesia because CNS symptoms are insufficient. When using ropivacaine or levobupivacaine for regional anesthesia, for test dose purposes, the authors recommend the addition of epinephrine to the local anesthetic solution or the use of a separate agent with more predictable CNS characteristics.
BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have become a popular component of analgesia regimens, particularly in combination with narcotics. We questioned whether there might also be a place for their use in conjunction with regional anesthesia and whether there was a preferable route for NSAID administration. METHODS: Ilioinguinal and field blocks were performed preoperatively on seventy patients undergoing outpatient inguinal hernia repair. Patients were divided into a control group who received no ketorolac and four study groups who received a preoperative dose of 30 mg ketorolac by one of the following routes: i.v., i.m., p.o., or intrawound (i.w.). The ketorolac in the i.w group was mixed in the syringe with the local anesthetic used for the field block. i.v. and i.m. groups also received ketorolac at the time of the preoperative regional anesthesia and the PO group received the dose at least one hour preoperatively. All patients received a similar general anesthetic intraoperatively. RESULTS: Postoperative pain scores and analgesic requirements were lowest for the i.m., i.v., and i.w. groups. Pain scores and analgesic requirements for the PO group were less than for the control group but more than for the other three groups. Analgesic efficacy therefore ranked: i.m. = i.v. = i.w. > p.o. > control. Though no differences were found between groups in the time to discharge from the recovery room, the ease of nursing care paralleled the findings for pain scores and analgesia requirements. CONCLUSION: Beyond the analgesia provided by the regional anesthesia of the ilioinguinal and field blocks, the preoperative use of ketorolac further reduced postoperative pain scores and the need for additional postoperative analgesic medication. Comparable outcomes for the i.v., i.m. and i.w. groups indicate the lack of any benefit to concentrating the non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drug at the wound (i.w.) or to achieving high blood levels rapidly (i.v.). In conclusion, ketorolac is a useful supplement to ilioinguinal plus field block regional anesthesia for hernia surgery and is most effective administered parenterally.
PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review will bring to the reader's attention recent developments in the literature regarding regional anesthesia in the outpatient setting, and allow the reader to evaluate whether these developments are appropriate for inclusion in clinical practice. RECENT FINDINGS: The most stimulating developments in the area of regional anesthesia for outpatients revolve around the use of continuous analgesic therapy for outpatients after discharge. This is reflected in recent publications describing the use of continuous catheters for peripheral nerve blockade using portable pumps to provide 48-72 h of postoperative analgesia. These devices have raised the hope of opioid-free pain relief for virtually the entire duration of postsurgical pain in the outpatient setting. There are also increasing numbers of suggestions on ways to improve the quality of spinal anesthesia in the outpatient setting, particularly by using lower doses of lidocaine to reduce the problem of transient neurologic symptoms after spinal blockade. Several authors have investigated the cost implications of regional techniques in the outpatient setting, and have concluded that they are very competitive with the general anesthetic techniques that are frequently employed. SUMMARY: Recent publications suggest additional ways to add regional anesthesia techniques to outpatient surgical practice, particularly with the promise of extensive postoperative pain relief for the ambulatory surgery patient.
In children, regional anesthetic techniques are safe and effective adjuncts to general anesthesia and for postoperative pain relief. Application of the techniques described in this article will contribute to improved care for pediatric patients undergoing surgical procedures. The judicious choice of local anesthetics, along with the blockades of targeted nerves, decrease the need for supplemental analgesics in the recovery phase.
Experiences, with about 1500 cases of intravenous regional anesthesia in outpatient surgery of the limbs over 10 years are reported. In 1975, 158 operations out of 5960 were done using this technique. Intravenous regional anesthesia is suitable for surgery of the limbs, but time of operation should not exceed 90 min, nor should hemostasis be a major problem to consider and the course of surgery should be predictable. Contraindications for this type of anesthesia are hypertonia, lack of accessible veins, heart failure, children, as well as surgery of undefinite extent or for local sepsis. When these rules were followed, no serious complications were seen.
BACKGROUND: The treatment of post-cesarean section (C/S) pain is very important. Since no previous report discussed the preemptive effect of regional anesthesia on post-C/S pain, the present study was undertaken to evaluate the efficacy of the preemptive effect of regional anesthesia on post-C/S pain. METHODS: Ninety parturients scheduled for C/S were enrolled into one of the three groups (n = 30, per each group). The parturients in group 1 and 2 received spinal anesthesia and epidural anesthesia, respectively, while those in group 3 received general anesthesia for C/S. Postoperative patient-controlled analgesia, by means of intravenous morphine, was used for all paturients to relieve post-C/S pain. The VAS of pain and total morphine consumption were evaluated in all 3 groups of patients. RESULTS: The results showed that groups 1 and 2 consumed less morphine than that of group 3. Also, there was no difference between groups 1 and 2 in the amount of morphine consumed. The incidence of side effects was significantly higher in group 3 than in groups 1 and 2. CONCLUSIONS: We demonstrated that spinal or epidural anesthesia reduced the need of parenteral morphine postoperatively when compared with general anesthesia. We suggest that the use of regional anesthesia may provide a better preemptive effect for post-C/S pain.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.
Explore the source record for details and available documents.