Total intravenous general anaesthesia vs. spinal anaesthesia for total hip arthroplasty: a randomised, controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The choice of anaesthetic technique for patients undergoing joint arthroplasty is debatable. The hypothesis of this study was that general anaesthesia would generate a more favourable recovery profile than spinal anaesthesia. METHODS: We randomly allocated 120 patients to either intrathecal bupivacaine or general anaesthesia with target-controlled infusion of remifentanil and propofol. Length of hospital stay assessed as meeting discharge criteria was the primary outcome parameter. Other outcome parameters were actual time of discharge, pain, use of rescue pain medication, blood loss, length of stay in the post-operative care unit, dizziness, post-operative nausea, need of urinary catheterisation and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: General anaesthesia resulted in slightly reduced length of hospital stay (26 vs. 30 h, P = 0.004), less nausea (P = 0.043) and dizziness (P < 0.001). General anaesthesia patients had higher pain scores during the first two post-operative hours (P < 0.001) but lower after 6 h compared with the spinal anaesthesia group (P < 0.01 and P < 0.05). General anaesthesia patients had better orthostatic function compared with spinal anaesthesia patients (P = 0.008). Patients in the spinal anaesthesia group fulfilled the discharge criteria from the post-operative care unit earlier compared with the general anaesthesia patients (P = 0.004). General anaesthesia patients requested a change in the method of anaesthesia for a subsequent operation less often than the spinal anaesthesia patients (5 vs. 13, P = 0.022). CONCLUSION: General anaesthesia resulted in a more favourable recovery profile compared with spinal anaesthesia.

Recovery after total intravenous general anaesthesia or spinal anaesthesia for total knee arthroplasty: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: This study was undertaken to compare the effects of general anaesthesia (GA) and spinal anaesthesia (SA) on the need for postoperative hospitalization and early postoperative comfort in patients undergoing fast-track total knee arthroplasty (TKA). METHODS: One hundred and twenty subjects were randomly allocated to receive either intrathecal bupivacaine (SA group) or GA with target controlled infusion of propofol and remifentanil (GA group). Primary outcome was length of hospital stay (LOS) defined as time from end of surgery until the subject met the hospital discharge criteria. Secondary outcome parameters included actual time of discharge, postoperative pain, intraoperative blood loss, length of stay in the Post Anaesthesia Care Unit, dizziness, postoperative nausea and vomiting, need for urinary catheterization and subject satisfaction. RESULTS: GA resulted in shorter LOS (46 vs 52 h, P<0.001), and less nausea and vomiting (4 vs 15, P<0.05) and dizziness (VAS 0 mm vs 20 mm, P<0.05) compared with SA. During the first 2 postoperative hours, GA patients had higher pain scores (P<0.001), but after 6 h the SA group had significantly higher pain scores (P<0.001). Subjects in the GA group used fewer patient-controlled analgesia doses and less morphine (P<0.01), and were able to walk earlier compared with the SA group (P<0.001). Subjects receiving SA would request a change in the method of anaesthesia in the event of a subsequent operation more often than the GA subjects (P<0.05). CONCLUSION: GA had more favourable recovery effects after TKA compared with SA.

Intubating conditions provided by propofol and alfentanil--acceptable, but not ideal.

BACKGROUND: The use of muscle relaxants to facilitate intubation is associated with several side effects regardless of whether depolarizing or non-depolarizing drugs are used. In the present study we compared the intubating conditions, haemodynamic responses and changes in oxygen saturation following induction with alfentanil and propofol or alfentanil, thiopental and suxamethonium. METHODS: Eighty patients (ASA I or II) were in a double-blind manner assigned to receive either of the two induction methods. Intubating conditions were assessed on the basis of jaw relaxation, ease of insertion of the endotracheal tube and coughing on intubation. Heart rate, systolic arterial pressure and oxygen saturation were monitored throughout the procedure. RESULTS: The use of alfentanil and propofol resulted in significantly lower scored intubation points. Systolic arterial pressure decreased and heart rate increased significantly in the alfentanil-thiopental-suxamethonium group as compared to the alfentanil-propofol group. There were no significant changes in oxygen saturation. CONCLUSION: The results show that propofol and alfentanil in combination provides haemodynamic stability and unaltered oxygen saturation but less optimal intubating conditions.

Importance of correct handling of samples for the results of blood gas analysis.

The importance of correct handling of samples for blood gas analysis was studied in 100 patients. Sixty minutes storage in iced water lowered pH by 0.02 pH-units. Storage at room temperature caused considerable changes in PCO2 and PO2 (+0.45 kPa and -1.05 kPa). Air bubbles in the syringes increased PO2 if not expelled within 30 s. Thirty minutes storage with air trapped inside the syringe caused an increase in PO2 of 1.8 kPa and a decrease in PCO2 of 0.16 kPa. The use of plastic syringes induced significant changes in PCO2 and PO2, of which the latter (+1.0 kPa) may be clinically significant. The findings indicate that sample collection and storage must be guarded by strict rules in order to avoid false results.

Intrathecal sufentanil compared with epidural bupivacaine analgesia in labour.

Epidural analgesia for pain relief during labour has certain disadvantages including slow onset. However, intrathecal sufentanil provides rapid onset and well-controlled analgesia lasting 1-4 h. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesia and the side effects of intrathecal sufentanil with epidural bupivacaine during labour. In a randomized, double-blind and controlled trial 58 parturient women requesting analgesia during labour were studied. The patients received either intrathecal sufentanil 10 micrograms and epidural saline, or intrathecal saline and epidural bupivacaine 20 mg. Visual analogue scores (VAS) for pain, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, level of sedation and the incidence of pruritus and nausea were recorded. Pain scores were significantly lower between 5 and 90 min after injection in patients receiving intrathecal sufentanil. Pruritus was significantly more frequent among those receiving intrathecal sufentanil. The rapid onset and effective analgesia of intrathecal sufentanil may in certain situations be advantageous.

Preoperative diclofenac sodium reduces post-laparoscopy pain.

Post-laparoscopy pain can increase recovery time and delay patient discharge. While previous studies have focused on the problems of nausea and vomiting, the purpose of this study was to assess the effect of diclofenac (a non-steroidal antiinflammatory drug) in the treatment of post-laparoscopy pain. Diclofenac (50 mg) or placebo was administered pr randomly and double-blind, prior to induction of anaesthesia, to 46 women. Pain intensity was assessed by the patient using a visual analogue scale 1, 12 and 24 hr after surgery. Postoperative analgesic requirements and side effects were also studied. Diclofenac resulted in better pain relief at 24 hr (1.0 vs 2.5, P < 0.05) and reduced the number of patients who needed additional postoperative analgesics (7 vs 15, P < 0.05). There was no difference in the incidence of side effects. These data suggest that diclofenac reduces post-laparoscopy pain and postoperative analgesic requirements.