Patient-controlled analgesia versus patient-controlled analgesia plus continuous infusion after hip replacement surgery

OBJECTIVE: To compare the efficacy and adverse effect profile of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) versus PCA plus continuous infusion (PCACI) after hip replacement surgery. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, open pilot study. SETTING: Large teaching institution. PARTICIPANTS: Thirty-four patients undergoing hip replacement or revision of hip replacement surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomized to receive PCA morphine: 1 mg with 6-minute lockout, or PCACI, using the same dose, with a 0.5-1 mg/h continuous infusion. Pain intensity, sedation, narcotic use, injection/attempt ratio (I/A), and adverse effects were assessed. RESULTS: No significant differences in pain intensity were identified. Morphine use was not different between groups: PCA 61.8 +/- 35.0 and PCACI 74.2 +/- 54.9 mg (p =0.394). A trend toward an increased 12-hour I/A ratio was evident in the PCACI group: PCA 0.73 +/- 0.18 and PCACI 0.86 +/- 0.17 (p =0.073). Patient-reported adverse effects, sedation, and inability to sleep secondary to pain occurred similarly. Eight of 18 PCACI patients required discontinuation of either the continuous infusion mode or of PCA therapy entirely secondary to adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: When compared with PCA therapy, PCACI was not associated with improved pain control and more patients receiving PCACI required discontinuation of therapy secondary to adverse effects.     

The safety and utilization of patient-controlled analgesia

Between December 1989 and March 1996, more than 6000 patients were treated with patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) at Auckland Hospital. The overall incidence of potentially life-threatening complications was low (0.28%). A small number (276) received PCA with a background opioid infusion. This technique was associated with a higher incidence of such complications (1.08%, P < 0.05). To further characterize the safety and utilization of PCA, a subgroup of 300 patients was analyzed. The average duration of PCA was 76.4 +/- 39.2 hr. The peak morphine consumption was highest on the day of operation (45.4 +/- 37.0 mg) and rapidly declined over the next 3 postoperative days (40.6 +/- 39.0, 33.3 +/- 26.2, and 27.8 +/- 36.6 mg, respectively). The ratio of drug demands to deliveries decreased from 1.76 on the morning of the first postoperative day to 1.17 on the evening of the third. The percentage of patients with inadequate analgesia (pain score > or = 3/10) and an inability to comply with physiotherapy (Bruggemann comfort score < or = 2/10) was high on the first postoperative day (42% and 18%, respectively). Men used significantly more morphine than women (141.7 +/- 123.6 versus 102.7 +/- 111.2 mg, P < 0.0001) and general surgical patients used more morphine than urology and orthopedic patients (152.6 +/- 136.9 versus 96.0 +/- 84.2 and 83.7 +/- 97.9 mg, P < 0.0001). There was no association between morphine consumption and age (r = -0.216). Of the 6% of patients who experienced hypoxemia and 2% who experienced respiratory depression, virtually all had one of three risk factors: bolus dose greater than 1 mg morphine, age greater than 65 years, or intra-abdominal surgery. The most common side effects were nausea and sedation. The incidence of nausea was highest on day 1 (28%) and decreased over the next 2 days (14.3% and 4.7%, respectively). A similar pattern was observed with sedation (incidence over the first 3 days: 28%, 9.3%, and 3.3%, respectively). Overall patient satisfaction scores were high (8.3/10 +/- 1.9). We conclude that the risk of serious complications with PCA is very low, but worrying degrees of hypoxemia and bradypnea do occur. We suggest prescribing regimens that may reduce complications and identify patients at high risk.     

Postoperative hypoxaemia: continuous extradural infusion of bupivacaine and morphine vs patient-controlled analgesia with intravenous morphine

We carried out a randomized prospective study in 60 patients who had undergone major abdominal surgery for cancer. For postoperative pain control, 30 patients received continuous extradural infusion of 0.125% bupivacaine 12.5 mg h-1 and morphine 0.25 mg h-1 (EXI group) and 30 received patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine (1 mg bolus, 5-min lock-out and maximum dose 20 mg 4h-1). Both groups had general anaesthesia. The two groups were compared for postoperative pain scores, satisfaction, sedation and oxygen saturation. Oxygen saturation was recorded continuously the night before surgery and for two consecutive postoperative nights. Episodes of moderate desaturation (90% > SpO2 85%) were more frequent in the EXI group than in the PCA group (P < 0.05). Pain scores were lower in the EXI group compared with the PCA group at rest and while coughing (P < 0.05). No significant difference was found for patient sedation and satisfaction.     

Opioid-sparing effects of a low-dose infusion of naloxone in patient-administered morphine sulfate

BACKGROUND: A naloxone infusion is effective in reducing epidural and intrathecal opioid-related side effects. The use of naloxone infusion concomitant with intravenous morphine patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) has not been evaluated, probably because of an expected direct antagonism of the systemic opioid effect. The authors compared the incidence of morphine-related side effects and the quality of analgesia from two small doses of naloxone infusion. METHODS: Sixty patients classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1, 2, or 3 who were scheduled for total abdominal hysterectomies were enrolled in the study. Patients received a standardized general anesthetic. In the postanesthetic care unit, patients received morphine as a PCA. They were randomized to receive either 0.25 microg x kg(-1) x h(-1) naloxone (low dose), 1 microg x kg(-1) x h(-1) (high dose), or saline (placebo) as a continuous infusion. Verbal rating scores for pain, nausea, vomiting, and pruritus; sedation scores; requests for antiemetic; and morphine use were recorded for 24 h. Blood pressure, respiratory rate, and oxyhemoglobin saturation were also monitored. RESULTS: Sixty patients completed the study. Both naloxone doses were equally effective in reducing the incidence of nausea, vomiting, and pruritus compared with placebo (P < 0.05 by the chi-squared test). There was no difference in the verbal rating scores for pain between the groups. The cumulative morphine use was the lowest in the low-dose group (42.3 +/- 24.1 mg; means +/- SD) compared with the placebo (59.1 +/- 27.4 mg) and high-dose groups (64.7 +/- 33.0 mg) at 24 h (P < 0.05 by analysis of variance). There was no incidence of respiratory depression (<8 breaths/min) and no difference in sedation scores, antiemetic use, respiratory rate, and hemodynamic parameters among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Naloxone is effective in preventing PCA opioid-related side effects. Naloxone infusion at 0.25 microg x kg(-1) x h(-1) not only attenuates these side effects but appears to reduce postoperative (beyond 4-8 h) opioid requirements. This dosing regimen can be prepared with 400 microg naloxone in 1,000 ml crystalloid given in 24 h to a patient weighing 70 kg.     

Evaluation of the safety and efficacy of ketorolac versus morphine by patient-controlled analgesia for postoperative pain

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare ketorolac tromethamine with morphine for pain management after major abdominal surgery. DESIGN: Double-blind, randomized study. SETTING: Hospital recovery room and postoperative surgical unit. PATIENTS: One hundred ninety-one patients with at least moderate pain after major abdominal surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Patients received ketorolac by patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) bolus alone (Ket B), ketorolac by bolus plus infusion (Ket I), or morphine by PCA bolus (morphine), with injectable morphine available for supplementation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Levels of sedation, pain intensity, pain relief, and adverse events were recorded at baseline, at 2, 4, and 6 hours, and at termination. Supplemental morphine was required by 71% of Ket B patients, 67% of Ket I patients, and 38% of morphine patients (p < or = 0.001 for Ket B vs morphine). Although patients receiving ketorolac required more supplemental morphine than the morphine group (6.0 mg Ket I, 6.2 mg Ket B, 4.0 mg morphine), there was a large morphine-sparing effect in both ketorolac groups (total morphine 6.0 mg Ket I, 6.2 mg Ket B, 33.3 mg morphine). Overall pain relief scores were similar for morphine and Ket I groups, and were lower for Ket B than for morphine (p = 0.002). There were no differences among groups in numbers of patients with adverse events. CONCLUSION: Ketorolac may be effective when administered by PCA device, and has a clear morphine-sparing effect.     

Clinical efficacy and safety of a novel controlled-release morphine suppository and subcutaneous morphine in cancer pain: a randomized evaluation

PURPOSE: A significant number of cancer patients will require an alternate route of morphine administration at some point during their illness. This study compared the clinical efficacy and safety of a novel morphine sulfate controlled-release suppository (MS-CRS) and subcutaneous (SC) morphine in patients with cancer pain. METHODS: Thirty patients with cancer pain were randomized in a double-blind crossover study to MS-CRS every 12 hours or SC morphine every 4 hours for 4 days each, using a 2.5:1 analgesic equivalence ratio. Pain intensity was assessed using a visual analog scale (VAS) and the Present Pain Intensity Index of the McGill Pain Questionnaire. Nausea and sedation were also assessed with a VAS. Evaluations were made by the patient at 8 AM, noon, 4 PM, and 8 PM and rescue morphine consumption recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-three patients completed the study (13 men and 10 women; mean age, 64.0 +/- 2.0 years) and were treated with mean daily MS-CRS and SC morphine doses of 326 +/- 69 mg and 138 +/- 28 mg, respectively. There was a small but significant difference in overall ordinal pain-intensity scores in favor of MS-CRS (0.7 +/- 0.1 v 0.9 +/- 0.1, P = .0459). There were no significant differences between MS-CRS and SC morphine in overall VAS scores for pain intensity (13 +/- 3 v 13 +/- 3 mm), sedation (23 +/- 3 v 25 +/- 4 mm), and nausea (8 +/- 2 v 9 +/- 2 mm). The mean daily rescue analgesic consumption during MS-CRS and SC morphine did not differ significantly (1.2 +/- 0.4 v 1.2 +/- 0.4 doses/d). CONCLUSION: MS-CRS, administered every 12 hours, provides analgesia comparable to SC morphine and represents a reliable, noninvasive alternative method of pain control for patients unable to take oral morphine.     

Effectiveness, side effects and costs of postoperative pain therapy: intravenous and epidural patient-controlled analgesia (PCA)

PURPOSE: Improvement of the quality of analgesia, reduction of side effects and costs by application of epidural (PCEA) in comparison to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in postoperative pain treatment. METHODS: 62 patients with upper abdominal surgery took part in this randomised prospective study which was approved by the local ethics committee. Epidural catheters were inserted at T 8/9 (group PCEA). General anaesthesia was performed with propofol, sufentanil 2 micrograms/kg, pancuronium, enflurane and O2:N2O = 1:2. Postoperative analgesia consisted of epidural bupivacaine 0.25% + sufentanil 2 micrograms/ml (BS). (bolus 0.05 ml/kg, lockout 10 min) in group PCEA, or of intravenous morphine (bolus 2 mg. lockout 10 min) in group PCA. The following parameters were recorded until the evening of postoperative day 4: pain intensity at rest (VASR, 1-10) and on coughing (VASH, 1-10), blood pressure, heart rate, blood gas analysis, ability to ambulate, pruritus, nausea/vomiting (PONV), patient satisfaction (0-4), time and expenses for postoperative pain treatment. RESULTS: Median VASR (1 vs 2) and VASH (3 vs 4.5) were lower, cough intensity (2 vs 1) and patient satisfaction score (4 vs 3) were higher in PCEA compared to PCA. Ability to ambulate, pruritus, PONV, haemodynamics, paO2 and paCO2 were comparable. Postoperative pain treatment with PCEA was more time-consuming (407 vs 299 min) and expensive (71 vs 40 S/day) than PCA. CONCLUSION: PCEA in comparison to PCA after major abdominal surgery provides superior analgesia with comparable side effects at approximately 80% higher costs.     

Comparison of tramadol and tramadol/droperidol mixture for patient-controlled analgesia

PURPOSE: To compare the analgesic efficacy and side effects of tramadol vs tramadol and droperidol for post-operative patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). METHODS: Randomised, double-blind study. Thirty-four patients undergoing elective colorectal or head and neck surgery were allocated to Group 1 (n = 18, PCA bolus 10 mg tramadol) or Group 2 (n = 16, PCA bolus 10 mg tramadol + 0.1 mg droperidol). Anaesthesia was induced with fentanyl and thiopentone and maintained with O2, N2O plus enflurane or isoflurane with iv morphine at doses decided by the attending anaesthetists. Muscle relaxation was achieved with atracurium or vecuronium. Patients were observed four-hourly for pain using an 11-point verbal rating scale (VRS). Nausea and vomiting, and sedation were assessed using four-point scales post-operatively. Vital signs, request for rescue anti-emetic and analgesic, and overall satisfaction were recorded. RESULTS: The mean nausea scores were lower in Group 2 (1.00 +/- 1.33 vs 0.06 +/- 0.25 at 0-8 hr, 1.22 +/- 1.93 vs 0.06 +/- 0.25 at 8-16 hr, P < 0.01; 0.81 +/- 1.68 vs 0 at 32-40 hr, P < 0.05; Group 1 vs Group 2). The vomiting scores were also lower (0.50 +/- 1.04 vs 0 at 0-8 hr, 0.67 +/- 1.50 vs 0, at 8-16 hr, P < 0.05; Group 1 vs Group 2). Seven (39%) patients in Group 1, but none in Group 2 requested rescue anti-emetic (P < 0.01). There were no differences in VRS, sedation score, overall satisfaction or vital signs. CONCLUSION: Tramadol and droperidol combination is superior to tramadol alone for post-operative PCA. It provides a similar quality of analgesia with less nausea and vomiting and without an increase in sedation.     

Extent and severity of periodontal destruction based on partial clinical assessments

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the postoperative analgesic efficacy, side effects and acceptance by patients and nurses of intravenous "patient-controlled analgesia" (PCA) with morphine, metamizole and buprenorphine. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this randomized double blind prospective study of 150 patients in three groups receiving morphine (group A), metamizole (group B) or buprenorphine (group C), the patients had undergone low abdominal surgery with the same anesthetic protocol. Pain was recorded during the first 48 h after surgery on an orally-communicated scale of none or slight = 0, moderate = 1 and severe = 2. Upon the first report of moderate pain, patients were administered an intravenous bolus containing 5 mg morphine, 1 g metamizole or 0.15 mg buprenorphine. A perfusion pump was then connected and set with one bolus of 1.2 mg morphine, one of 333 mg metamizole or one of 0.04 buprenorphine. The maximum dose allowed in 24 h was 40 mg morphine, 8 g metamizole or 1.2 mg buprenorphine. The minimum interval between doses was 30 min for all three groups. Side effects reported were respiratory depression, sedation, nausea, vomiting, pruritus, perspiration and pain upon administration. Patients and nurses were asked to evaluate the system when the pump was disconnected and the results were then analyzed statistically. RESULTS: The analgesic effect was satisfactory in all three groups, with no significant differences among them. The percentages of patients reaching the maximum allowed dose on the first day were 2% with morphine, 18% (p < 0.05) with metamizole and 8% with buprenorphine. No respiratory depression was observed. Sedation was greater with morphine and buprenorphine than with metamizole (p = 0.0001). Pruritus was also greater with morphine and buprenorphine than with metamizole (p = 0.02) and pain upon infusion was greater with metamizole (p = 0.0002). CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous postoperative PCA was effective with all three drugs studied. Patient and nurse acceptance was good and side effects were few in the three groups. The lower rate of side effects for metamizole makes it the drug of choice.     

Residual pneumoperitoneum: a cause of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy

After laparoscopic cholecystectomy, residual gas is inevitably retained in the peritoneal cavity. An active attempt is not always made to remove it. Using a double-blind prospective protocol in 40 healthy patients, we evaluated the effect of residual pneumoperitoneum on post-laparoscopic cholecystectomy pain intensity. On completion of surgery, prior to removal of the surgical instruments, the patients were randomly divided into two groups: in the active aspiration (AA) group an active attempt was made to remove as much gas as possible from the peritoneal cavity, while in the nonactive aspiration (NAA) group no such effort was made. Postoperative pain was assessed hourly over a 4-h period with a visual analog scale (VAS) and a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. During the first postoperative hour, the NAA patients made significantly (P < 0.05) more demands (mean +/- SD) for morphine than those in the AA group (31.3 +/- 26.2 vs 15.3 +/- 15.7) and also received a borderline significantly (P = 0.056) larger dose (mean +/- SD) of PCA morphine (3.9 +/- 1.9 mg vs 2.7 +/- 1.3 mg). The VAS scores (mean +/- SD) over the 4-h study period were similar in both groups, being high during the first postoperative hour (AA = 5.1 +/- 2.1 vs NAA = 6.1 +/- 2.2) and then decreasing. We conclude that residual pneumoperitoneum is a contributing factor in the etiology of postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.     

Risk factors for early infection of central venous catheters in pediatric patients

OBJECTIVE: To compare standard nurse-based pain therapy with a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) regimen. DESIGN: Prospective, randomized study. SETTING: Single-institutional, clinical investigation in an urban, university-affiliated hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Sixty patients undergoing elective first-time cardiac surgery were included. INTERVENTIONS: In 30 patients, a standard analgesic regimen was used, and in 30 patients, a PCA regimen was used. The perioperative and postoperative management was similar for all patients. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Degree of sedation, satisfaction, and pain (by visual analog scale [VAS]) was assessed within the first 3 postoperative days. Vital capacity (VC) and forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) were measured using a portable spirometry system. Cortisol and troponin T (TnT) plasma levels were also measured. The expectation of pain was similar in both groups, and the postoperative pain score was significantly lower in the PCA than in the standard group throughout the study period. Significantly more piritramid was used in the PCA (total, 75.6 +/- 33.4 mg) than in the standard group (total, 20.1 +/- 31.9 mg). VC and FEV1 were significantly lower in the standard group compared with the PCA patients. Cortisol and TnT plasma levels were similar in both groups. Frequency of side effects were similar for both groups. CONCLUSION: Because of the beneficial effects with regard to degree of pain and satisfaction, pain management using PCA systems can be recommended for cardiac surgery patients. It appears to be superior to standard nurse-based pain therapy.     

A single dose of morphine sulfate increases the incidence of vomiting after outpatient inguinal surgery in children

BACKGROUND: In children, opioids are valuable both for their analgesic properties and for their salutary effect on emergence delirium. Although intraoperative administration of opioids is often cited as the cause of postoperative emesis, few data quantitating the magnitude of this effect exist. METHODS: Patients undergoing inguinal surgery as outpatients were randomly assigned to one of two groups. One group received a single intravenous dose of morphine 0.1 mg/kg (morphine group), and the other (control) group had the identical anesthetic but instead received saline. Intravenous ketorolac was administered in response to verbal complaints of pain or a Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario Pain Score greater than 9 on two successive evaluations performed at 5-min intervals. The authors compared the incidence of postoperative emesis and emergence, behavior, and pain scores between the two groups. RESULTS: Patients in the morphine group (n = 48) were 5.6 +/- 2.8 yr old and weighed 20.8 +/- 7.8 kg, and those in the control group (n = 49) were 4.5 +/- 2.9 yr old and weighed 18.9 +/- 9.2 kg. More patients in the morphine group were cooperative and deeply asleep both on arrival and through the first 30 min of their stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) (P < 0.05). Sixty-three percent of the children in the control group received ketorolac in the PACU compared with 20% of the morphine group (P < 0.01). The incidence of emesis for the 24 h after arrival in the PACU was 56% for those who received morphine compared with 25% in the control group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: For children undergoing inguinal surgery, the administration of a single dose of intravenous morphine after the induction of anesthesia smooths emergence from anesthesia as assessed by improved cooperation and sedation in the PACU, decreases the need for postoperative analgesics, but increases the incidence of vomiting in the first 24 h after surgery.     

Schizophrenia and the dopamine-beta-hydroxylase gene: results of a linkage and association study

PURPOSE: A dose-finding study to investigate the use of epidural infusions of ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia following orthopaedic surgery. METHODS: This was a randomized, double-blind study. Surgery was performed using a combination of a lumbar epidural block utilizing ropivacaine 0.5% and a standardized general anaesthetic. Postoperatively, an epidural infusion of the study solution (saline, ropivacaine 0.1%, 0.2% or 0.3%) was started at the rate of 10 ml.hr-1 and continued for 21 hr after arrival in the PACU. Analgesia was supplemented with PCA morphine (dose = 1.0 mg, lock-out = 5 min). RESULTS: Forty-four patients completed the study. The ropivacaine 0.1%, 0.2%, 0.3% groups required less morphine over the 21 hr than the saline group (P < 0.01). The VAS pain scores were also lower in the three ropivacaine groups (P < 0.001). The ropivacaine groups maintained sensory anaesthesia to pinprick when compared with saline (P < 0.05). The motor block in the 0.3% group was significantly higher than the saline group at all times (P < 0.05), and higher than the 0.1% group at eight hours (P < 0.01), while the 0.2% group had higher Bromage scores than saline at 4 and 21 hr (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: The use of continuous epidural infusions of ropivacaine 0.1%, 0.2% and 0.3% at 10 ml.hr-1 improved postoperative pain relief and decreased PCA morphine requirements in patients undergoing major orthopaedic surgery. The 0.1% and 0.2% concentrations produced similar sensory anaesthesia with less motor blockade than the 0.3% concentration.     

Postoperative patient-controlled epidural analgesia with opioid bupivacaine mixtures

PURPOSE: To determine the efficacy and safety of patient-controlled epidural analgesia of morphine or fentanyl in combination with bupivacaine for postoperative pain relief. METHODS: Forty ASA I-II patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery were studied. After insertion of a lumbar epidural catheter, patients were given a non-opioid general anaesthetic. After surgery patients complaining of pain, received a loading dose of 2 mg morphine (Group I) or 50 micrograms fentanyl (Group II). For continuing pain, 1 mg morphine in 4 ml bupivacaine 0.125% (0.25 mg.ml-1 morphine and 1 mg.ml-1 bupivacaine, Group I) or 20 micrograms fentanyl in 4 ml bupivacaine 0.125% (5 micrograms.ml-1 fentanyl and 1 mg.ml-1 bupivacaine Group II) were administered. Blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate and SpO2 were monitored. Assessments of pain (VAS), nausea-vomiting, motor block, pruritus and sedation were recorded for 24 hr. RESULTS: No difference in pain or sedation was observed between groups. The 24 hr postoperative opioid consumption was 15.50 +/- 7.53 mg morphine and 555.10 +/- 183.85 micrograms fentanyl. Total bupivacaine 0.125% consumption was 58.00 +/- 30.14 ml in Group I and 101.05 +/- 36.77 ml in Group II. One patient in Group II complained of motor weakness in one leg. The incidence of nausea (Group I 45%, Group II 10% P < 0.05) and pruritus (Group I 30%, Group II 5% P < 0.05) was less in patients receiving fentanyl. CONCLUSION: Both methods were effective in the prevention of pain but, because of fewer side effects, fentanyl may be preferable to morphine.     

Is patient-controlled sedation good for elderly patients?

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the safety and advantage of intra-operative patient-controlled sedation (PCS) in elderly patients. Propofol PCS was compared with anesthesiologist-controlled sedation (ACS) during knee arthroplasty under epidural anesthesia. Eleven elderly patients scheduled for unilateral knee total or partial arthroplasty were divided randomly into PCS group (n = 6) and ACS group (n = 5). Epidural anesthesia was performed to produce an appropriate level of sensory block (T 10 through S). Firstly a mixture of pentazocine 0.2 mg.kg-1 and 2% mepivacaine 6-9 ml was injected to the epidural space, and anaesthesia was maintained using 2% mepivacaine afterward. Patients in both groups received propofol 0.3 mg.kg-1 i.v. as a loading dose and 0.6 mg.kg-1.h-1 continuous infusion. Furthermore patients in PCS group received propofol PCS (bolus: 0.2 mg.kg-1, lockout time: 3 min). Patients in ACS group were administered propofol continuously and infusion rates were regulated to maintain a sedation score 3 (Wilson et al) by anesthesiologist. Respiratory rate, blood pressure, heart rate, SpO2, arterial blood gas analysis and plasma levels of propofol were measured 4 times during and after the surgery. Satisfaction of patients and surgeons was questioned. Patients in PCS group received a mean propofol dose of 1.9 +/- 0.1 mg.kg-1 during procedures with a mean duration of 147 min. On the other hand patients in ACS group received propofol 2.9 +/- 0.3 mg.kg-1 with 142 min of procedures. Satisfaction of patients and surgeons, the incidence of complication were similar between the groups. For elderly patients who undergo epidural anesthesia, PCS is a safe and effective technique providing similar good sedation as with ACS.     

Drug-resistant tuberculosis in Singapore, 1995 to 1996

BACKGROUND: Thymectomy can induce a remission or at least an improvement in myasthenia gravis (MG) patients. After sternotomy MG patients with compromised muscle strength need an excellent postoperative pain relief. This study was designed to evaluate the efficacy of intrathecal morphine (ITM) on ventilatory function among MG patients undergoing trans-sternal thymectomy, when intravenous morphine served as control. METHODS: Twenty consecutive MG patients were randomised to receive either morphine (10 micrograms/kg) intrathecally at induction or intravenous morphine (30 micrograms/kg) with a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device. Anaesthesia was standardised. Forced vital capacity (FVC), forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, arterial blood gases, pain intensity and morphine consumption were assessed during 48 hours. RESULTS: The mean age of the patients was 35 +/- 3.4 years and the mean duration of the disease 1.9 +/- 0.5 years. According to Osserman's classification 70% of the patients belonged to Class IIA and 30% to Class IIB. ITM restored ventilatory function significantly better than iv PCA morphine. FVC recovered to 60% and FEV1 to 57% of the baseline values in the ITM group compared with 32% (P < 0.05) and 37% in the PCA morphine group, respectively. Postpuncture headache occurred in 4/10 patients. CONCLUSION: Intrathecal morphine provided effective postoperative analgesia and significantly improved ventilatory function when compared with intravenous morphine.     

Influence of dose and timing of administration of morphine on postoperative pain and analgesic requirements

In a randomized, double-blind study, we have investigated the effect of dose and timing of administration of morphine on postoperative pain and analgesic requirements in 60 patients undergoing hysterectomy, with or without salpingo-oophorectomy. Patients were allocated randomly to one of three groups: during standardized general anaesthesia, group post received morphine 0.15 mg kg-1 i.v. at peritoneal closure after hysterectomy; group pre-low received morphine 0.15 mg kg-1 on induction of anaesthesia; and group pre-high received morphine 0.3 mg kg-1 on induction of anaesthesia. Median postoperative morphine consumption (first 24 h) from a PCA system was 68 mg (group post), 56 mg (group pre-low) and 43 mg (group pre-high), and total perioperative morphine consumption (induction of anaesthesia to end of 24 h after surgery) was 77 mg (group post), 65 mg (group pre-low) and 63 mg (group pre-high). Pain scores (at rest and on movement) were similar in the three groups. A large dose of morphine 0.3 mg kg-1 i.v. on induction of anaesthesia significantly reduced postoperative PCA morphine requirements compared with the smaller dose (0.15 mg kg-1) administered at induction or peritoneal closure, in patients undergoing hysterectomy, with or without salpingo-oophorectomy.     

High-Resolution Infrared Fourier-Transform Spectroscopy and Rotational Constants of the nu4 Band of BrNO2

In this study, we assessed the influence of three analgesic techniques on postoperative knee rehabilitation after total knee arthroplasty (TKA). Forty-five patients scheduled for elective TKA under general anesthesia were randomly divided into three groups. Postoperative analgesia was provided with i.v. patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine in Group A, continuous 3-in-1 block in Group B, and epidural analgesia in Group C. Immediately after surgery, the three groups started identical physical therapy regimens. Pain scores, supplemental analgesia, side effects, degree of maximal knee flexion, day of first walk, and duration of hospital stay were recorded. Patients in Groups B and C reported significantly lower pain scores than those in Group A. Supplemental analgesia was comparable in the three groups. Compared with Groups A and C, a significantly lower incidence of side effects was noted in Group B. Significantly better knee flexion (until 6 wk after surgery), faster ambulation, and shorter hospital stay were noted in Groups B and C. However, these benefits did not affect outcome at 3 mo. We conclude that, after TKA, continuous 3-in-1 block and epidural analgesia provide better pain relief and faster knee rehabilitation than i.v. PCA with morphine. Because it induces fewer side effects, continuous 3-in-1 block should be considered the technique of choice. Implications: In this study, we determined that, after total knee arthroplasty, loco-regional analgesic techniques (epidural analgesia or continuous 3-in-1 block) provide better pain relief and faster postoperative knee rehabilitation than i.v. patient-controlled analgesia with morphine. Because it causes fewer side effects than epidural analgesia, continuous 3-in-1 block is the technique of choice.     

Observations on the zinc protoporphyrin/heme ratio in whole blood

The aim of this study was to examine whether severity of preoperative pain intensity is related to postoperative pain and morphine consumption. Sixty consecutive patients scheduled for total hip surgery during intrathecal anesthesia were studied. Preoperative visual analog scale (VAS) scores and analgesic intake was assessed 1 day before surgery. Three groups of patients were identified: those with mild pain (n = 12, VAS score 0-4), moderate pain (n = 18, VAS score 4-7), and severe pain (n = 28, VAS score 7-10). Postoperative pain scores were recorded in the first 24 h, as was the amount of morphine delivered by the patient-controlled analgesia pump. There were no differences among the groups in VAS scores at any time. Severe preoperative pain levels correlated with significantly greater postoperative morphine intake. The mean morphine intake during the first 24 h postoperatively was 19.2 mg in the mild pain group, 21.2 mg in the moderate pain group, and 29.5 mg in the severe pain group (P < 0.05 compared with both other groups). We conclude that patients with severe preoperative pain self-medicate to achieve postoperative pain scores equivalent to those of patients with mild and moderate pain and require a greater postoperative morphine intake for adequate analgesia than patients with mild or moderate preoperative pain. IMPLICATIONS: In this study, we showed that severity of preoperative pain intensity relates to postoperative pain levels and morphine consumption. Patients scheduled for total hip surgery with severe preoperative pain require more postoperative morphine in the first 24 h.     

Use of 2% propofol to produce diurnal sedation in critically ill patients

OBJECTIVE: The assessment of propofol to produce diurnal sedation in critically ill patients. DESIGN: Prospective clinical study. SETTING: Intensive Care Unit, University Hospital. PATIENTS AND PARTICIPANTS: Thirty consecutive patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit older than 18 years who were expected to be sedated for more than 50 h. INTERVENTIONS: The patients were randomised into two groups. All received sedation with a constant background infusion of morphine and a variable infusion rate of propofol, which was altered hourly to maintain the intended sedation score. The first group received constant light sedation (CLS) over 50 h aiming for a Ramsay score of 2-3. The second group received CLS between 0600 h and 2200 h and additional night sedation (ANS) with propofol between 2200 h and 0600 h, aiming for a sedation score of 4-5. MEASUREMENTS AND RESULTS: Patients were studied for 50 h from 1800 h on the first day of admission. Recordings of heart rate, blood pressure, sedation scores and propofol and morphine infusion rates were made hourly. An APACHE II score was recorded for each patient. Sedation scores were analysed by blind visual assessment and cosinor analysis, which is used in chronobiology to examine the correlation of data with a cosine curve. Patients in the ANS group had significantly better rhythmicity of sedation levels using cosinor analysis (r = 26% v 8%) p < 0.01. There was no difference between the CLS and ANS groups with respect to age, sex or APACHE II scores. Nine out of 15 patients in the ANS group achieved diurnal sedation. Three patients in the CLS group showed diurnal rhythmicity of sedation, which can be attributed to natural sleep, and had a median APACHE II score of 12. Five patients in the CLS group and three in the ANS group showed a deep constant sedation pattern. They had high APACHE II scores (median 21.5) and an obtunded conscious level on admission due to severe sepsis. CONCLUSION: Propofol can safely provide diurnal sedation in the critically ill when titrated against the Ramsay score. Sedation levels cannot be manipulated in some severely ill patients.