Comparison of preventive analgesia techniques in circumcision cases: Dorsal penile nerve block, caudal block, or subcutaneous morphine?

OBJECTIVE: To compare 3 different techniques of preventive analgesia before circumcision operations in male children between 6-12 years of age. Our objective was to investigate the duration and quality of postoperative analgesia in patients, who were subject to caudal block technique, dorsal penile nerve block or who were administered subcutaneous morphine. METHODS: The prospective, randomised, single-blind study was conducted at Ordu University Training and Research Hospital, Ordu, Turkey, from January 1 to June 30, 2015, and comprised boys aged 6-12 years, who were scheduled to undergo circumcision operation. All patients were under general anaesthesia by means of laryngeal masks. The patients were randomised into 3 equal groups. The patients in Group C received caudal block with bupivacaine 0.25% in a total volume of 0.50 ml/kg in lateral position. Those in Group M received injections of 100 mcg/kg of subcutaneous morphine into the deltoid muscle. Patients in Group DP were subjected to dorsal penile nerve block with 1 mg/kg of bupivacaine 0.25%. Intraoperative haemodynamic data, pain and sedation scores, according to Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontorio Pain Scale and Ramsay Sedation Scale, were recorded at postoperative 1st, 6th and 24th hours in all cases. RESULTS: The 60 subjects in the study were divided into 3 groups of 20(33.3%) each. The overall mean age was 7.75±8.12 years. At 1 hour after surgery; 8(40%) cases in Group M, 5(25%) cases in Group DP, and all the 20(100%) cases in Group C had a pain score <6 (p<0.05). When the scores were analysed 12 hours post-operatively, 5(25%) cases in Group M and 10(50%) cases in Group DP had a pain score >6, while the pain scores of all the 20(100%) cases in Group C were <6 (p<0.01). Among the groups, there was no statistically significant difference regarding the sedation scores (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Using the three methods, analgesia lasted until 12 hours postoperatively, being more evident in the caudal block group, minimising postoperative stress in children and parents.

Comparison of the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine on postoperative nausea and vomiting.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study is to compare the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine, used for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: Our study was completed with 98 ASA I-II risk patients undergoing endotracheal intubation under general anesthesia. At the end of the surgery patients were randomly divided into two groups given 2mgkg-1 sugammadex (Group S) or 50µgkg-1 neostigmine plus 0.2mgkg-1 atropine (Group N). Monitoring and recording times were set as 1 hour postoperative and from 1-6, 6-12, and 12-24hours. The anti-emetic amounts administered were recorded. RESULTS: In the first hour postoperative 13 patients in Group N (27%) and 4 in Group S (8%) were observed to have nausea and/or vomiting and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.0016). During the 24 hours of monitoring there was no significant difference in the incidence and severity of PONV (p>0.05), however the number of patients given ondansetron for PONV treatment in Group N was statistically significantly higher than the number in Group S (16 in Group N, 6 in Group S, p<0.011). CONCLUSIONS: At the end of our study comparing neostigmine with sugammadex for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, we found use of sugammadex had lower incidence of PONV in the postoperative 1st hour and less anti-emetic use in 24 hours of monitoring.

[Comparison of the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine on postoperative nausea and vomiting]. / Comparação dos efeitos de sugamadex e neostigmina em náusea e vômito no pós­operatório.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of our study is to compare the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine, used for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: Our study was completed with 98 ASA I-II risk patients undergoing endotracheal intubation under general anesthesia. At the end of the surgery patients were randomly allocated into two groups given 2mgkg-1 sugammadex (Group S) or 50µgkg-1 neostigmine plus 0.2mgkg-1 atropine (Group N). Monitoring and recording times were set as 1 hour postoperative and from 1-6, 6-12, and 12-24hours. The anti-emetic amounts administered were recorded. RESULTS: In the first postoperative hour 13 patients in Group N (27%) and 4 in Group S (8%) were observed to have nausea and/or vomiting and the difference was statistically significant (p=0.0016). During the 24hours of monitoring there was no significant difference in the incidence and severity of PONV (p>0.05), however the number of patients given ondansetron for PONV treatment in Group N was significantly higher than the number in Group S (16 in Group N, 6 in Group S, p<0.011). CONCLUSIONS: At the end of our study comparing neostigmine with sugammadex for neuromuscular blockage antagonism, we found use of sugammadex had lower incidence of PONV in the postoperative 1st hour and less anti-emetic use in 24hours of monitoring.