DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study.
SETTING: Operation theater with postoperative inpatient follow-up.
PATIENTS: The medical records of 315 patients who underwent sequential bilateral TKA were reviewed.
INTERVENTIONS: Patients who received intrathecal levobupicavaine 0.5% were compared with patients who received hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% with fentanyl 25 μg for spinal anesthesia.
MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome was the use of rescue analgesia (systemic opioids, conversion to general anesthesia) during surgery for both groups. Secondary outcomes included adverse effects of local anesthetics (hypotension and bradycardia) during surgery and morbidity related to spinal anesthesia (postoperative nausea, vomiting, and bleeding) during hospital stay.
MAIN RESULTS: One hundred fifty patients who received intrathecal levobupivacaine 0.5% (group L) were compared with 90 patients given hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% with fentanyl 25 μg (group B). The mean volume of levobupivacaine administered was 5.8 mL (range, 5.0-6.0 mL), and that of bupivacaine was 3.8 mL (range, 3.5-4.0 mL). Both groups achieved similar maximal sensory level of block (T6). The time to maximal height of sensory block was significantly shorter in group B than group L, 18.2 ± 4.5 vs 23.9 ± 3.8 minutes (P< .001). The time to motor block of Bromage 3 was also shorter in group B (8.7 ± 4.1 minutes) than group L (16.0 ± 4.5 minutes) (P< .001). Patients in group B required more anesthetic supplement than group L (P< .001). Hypotension and postoperative bleeding were significantly less common in group L than group B.
CONCLUSION: Levobupivacaine at a higher dosage provided longer duration of spinal anesthesia with better safety profile in sequential bilateral TKA.
METHODOLOGY: The study was designed as a double-blind, randomized controlled trial involving 94 patients who underwent open thyroidectomy or parathyroidectomy in Hospital Pulau Pinang, Malaysia, from November 2015 to November 2016. The study compared the efficacy of pre-incision wound infiltration of diclofenac (n = 47) versus bupivacaine (n = 47) in post-operative pain relief. Wound infiltration is given prior to skin incision. Mean pain score at designated time interval within the 24-h post-operative period, time to first analgesia, total analgesic usage and total analgesic cost were assessed.
RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were recruited with no dropouts. Mean age was 49.3 (SD = 14.2) with majority being female (74.5%). Ethnic distribution recorded 42.6% Chinese, 38.3% Malay, followed by 19.1% Indian. Mean duration of surgery was 123.8 min (SD = 56.5), and mean length of hospital stay was 4.7 days (SD = 1.8). The characteristics of patient in both groups were generally comparable except that there were more cases of total thyroidectomy in the diclofenac group (n = 31) as compared to the bupivacaine group (n = 16). Mean pain score peaked at immediate post-operative period (post-operative 0.5 h) with a score of 3.5 out of 10 and the level decreased steadily over the next 20 h starting from 4 h post-operatively. Pre-incision wound infiltration using diclofenac had better pain control as compared to bupivacaine at all time interval assessed. In the resting state, the mean post-operative pain score difference was statistically significant at 2 h [2.1 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.8 (SD = 1.8), p = 0.04]. During neck movement, the dynamic pain score difference was statistically significant at post-operative 1 h [2.7 (SD = 1.9) vs. 3.7 (SD = 2.1), p = 0.02]; 2 h [2.7 (SD = 1.6) vs. 3.7 (SD = 2.0), p = 0.01]; 4 h [2.2 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.9 (SD = 1.7), p = 0.04], 6 h [1.9 (SD = 1.4) vs. 2.5 (SD = 1.6), p = 0.04] and 12 h [1.5 (SD = 1.5) vs. 2.2 (SD = 1.4), p = 0.03]. Mean dose of tramadol used as rescue analgesia in 24 h duration was lower in the diclofenac group as compared to bupivacaine group [13.8 mg (SD = 24.9) vs. 36.2 mg (SD = 45.1), p = 0.01]. The total cost of analgesia used was significantly cheaper in diclofenac group as compared to bupivacaine group [RM 3.47 (SD = 1.51) vs. RM 13.43 (SD = 1.68), p
MATERIALS AND METHODS: A randomised control clinical trial was conducted at the Central Surgery Installation and Hasan Sadikin General Hospital Bandung and Dr. Mohammad Husein Hospital Palembang from December 2022 to June 2023. A total of 40 participants were divided into two groups using block randomisation. Group I receives bupivacaine 0.25% and clonidine 2 μg/kg, and group II receives bupivacaine 0.25% and dexamethasone 8 mg. The plasma cortisol levels of the patient will be assessed at (T0, T1 and T2). All the patient were intubated under general anesthaesia and received the drug for scalp block based on the group being randomised. Haemodynamic monitoring was carried out.
RESULTS: There was a significant difference in administering bupivacaine 0.25% and clonidine 2μg/kg compared to administering bupivacaine 0.25% and dexamethasone 8 mg/kg as analgesia for scalp block in tumour craniotomy patients on cortisol levels at 12 hours post-operatively (T1) (p=0.048) and 24 hours post-surgery (T2) (p=0.027), while post-intubation cortisol levels (T0) found no significant difference (p=0.756). There is a significant difference in Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at post-intubation (T0) (p=0.003), 12 hours post-operatively (T1) (p=0.002) and 24 hours post-surgery (T2) (p=0.004), There were no postprocedure scalp block side effects in both groups.
CONCLUSION: The study found that scalp block with 0.25% bupivacaine and 2μg/kg clonidine is more effective in reducing NRS scores and cortisol levels compared bupivacaine 0.25% and dexamethasone 8mg in tumour craniotomy patients.
Methods: Thirty-two patients undergoing elective AH were randomised into Group ITM (ITM 0.2 mg + 2.5 mL 0.5% bupivacaine) (n = 16) and Group EB (0.25% bupivacaine bolus + continuous infusion of 0.1% bupivacaine-fentanyl 2 μg/mL) (n = 16).The procedure was performed before induction, and all patients subsequently received standard general anaesthesia. Both groups were provided patient-controlled analgaesia morphine (PCAM) as a backup. Visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, total morphine consumption, hospital stay duration, early mobilisation time and first PCAM demand time were recorded.
Results: The median VAS score was lower for ITM than for EB after the 1st hour [1.0 (IqR 1.0) versus 3.0 (IqR 3.0), P < 0.001], 8th hour [1.0 (IqR 1.0) versus 2.0 (IqR 1.0), P = 0.018] and 16th hour [1.0 (IqR1.0) versus (1.0 (IqR 1.0), P = 0.006]. The mean VAS score at the 4th hour was also lower for ITM [1.8 (SD 1.2) versus 2.9 (SD 1.4), P = 0.027]. Total morphine consumption [11.3 (SD 6.6) versus 16.5 (SD 4.8) mg, P = 0.016] and early mobilisation time [2.1 (SD 0.3) versus 2.6 (SD 0.9) days, P = 0.025] were also less for ITM. No significant differences were noted for other assessments.
Conclusions: The VAS score was better for ITM than for EB at earlier hours after surgery. However, in terms of acceptable analgaesia (VAS ≤ 3), both techniques were comparable over 24 hours.