Pharmacological therapy of spinal cord injury during the acute phase.

STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: France. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the safety and effect on neurological outcome of nimodipine, methylprednisolone, or both versus no medical treatment in spinal-cord injury during the acute phase. METHOD: One hundred and six patients who had spinal trauma (including 48 with paraplegia and 58 with tetraplegia) were randomly separated into four groups: M=methylprednisolone (30 mg x kg(-1) over 1 h, followed by 5.4 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1) for 23 h), N=nimodipine (0.015 mg x kg(-1) x h(-1) for 2 h followed by 0.03 mg x kg(-1)h(-1) for 7 days), MN (both agents) or P (neither medication). Neurological assessment (ASIA score) was performed by a blinded senior neurologist before treatment and at 1-year follow-up. Early spinal decompression and stabilization was performed as soon as possible after injury. RESULTS: One hundred patients were reassessed at 1 year. Neurological improvement was seen in each group (P<0.0001), however no additional neurological benefit from treatment was observed. Infectious complications occurred more often in patients treated with M. Early surgery (49 patients underwent surgery within 8 h of their accident) did not influence the neurological outcome. The only predictor of the latter was the extent of the spinal injury (complete or incomplete lesion). CONCLUSION: The present study confirms the absence of benefit of pharmacological therapy in this indication. Because of the paucity of clinical studies that demonstrate the efficacy of pharmacological treatment in spinal injury during the acute phase, systematic use of pharmaceutical agents should be reconsidered.

[Medical treatment of spinal cord injury in the acute stage]. / Traitement médicamenteux de la lésion médullaire traumatique au stade aigu.

OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the effect on neurologic outcome and the safety of nimodipine (N), methylprednisolone (M), or both (MN) versus no medical treatment (P) in spinal cord injury at the acute phase. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized clinical trial. PATIENTS: One hundred and six patients with a spinal trauma, including 48 with paraplegia and 58 with tetraplegia. METHOD: After eligibility, patients were randomly allocated in one of the following groups: M = methylprednisolone 30 mg.kg-1 over 1 hour, followed by 5.4 mg.kg-1.h-1 for 23 hours, N = nimodipine 0.015 mg.kg-1.h-1 over 2 hours followed by 0.03 mg.kg-1.h-1 for 7 days, MN or P. Neurologic assessment (ASIA score) was performed by a senior neurologist before treatment and at the 1-year follow-up. Early spinal decompression and stabilization was performed as soon as possible after injury. RESULTS: One hundred patients were reassessed at the 1-year follow-up. Neurologic improvement was seen in each group (P < 0.0001), however no neurologic benefit from treatment was observed. Infectious complications occurred more often in patients treated with M. Early surgery (49 patients), within the first 8 hours did not influence the neurologic outcome. The only predictor of the latter was the extent of the spinal injury (complete or incomplete lesion). CONCLUSION: Currently, no evidence of the benefit of medical treatment in this indication is existing. Because of the lack of clinical studies proving efficacy of pharmacological treatment in this specific pathology, a systematic use of medications cannot be recommended.

The use of 0.25% lidocaine with fentanyl and pancuronium for intravenous regional anesthesia.

The present study was designed to assess the efficacy of fentanyl and pancuronium combined with dilute lidocaine solution for intravenous regional anesthesia of the arm. Forty adult patients undergoing upper limb surgery were randomly allocated to receive either 0.6 mL/kg of 0.5% lidocaine (3 mg/kg) or 0.6 mL/kg of 0.25% lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg) with 1 microg/kg of fentanyl and 0.5 mg of pancuronium. The onset of sensory and motor blocks was significantly shorter in the 0.5% lidocaine group (P < 0.05). However, no differences in analgesia or motor blockade were found between the two groups at 20 min tourniquet time. Regional anesthesia was considered successful in more than 85% of patients. One patient in the 0.25% lidocaine group experienced a transient diplopia after tourniquet release. Postoperative analgesia time was similar in the two groups. We conclude that the addition of fentanyl plus pancuronium to the lidocaine solution reduces the dose of the local anesthetic and possibly systemic toxicity.

[Autotransfusion, with blood drained from a hemothorax, using the ConstaVac device]. / Autotransfusion avec du sang d'hémothorax à l'aide du dispositif ConstaVac.

The technique of autotransfusion with blood drained from a haemothorax has been described nearly 80 years ago. The shed blood is easy to collect and is incoagulable. This technique as two indications: lifesaving autotransfusion in the prehospital phase and blood saving and/or transfusional safety at hospital arrival. This prospective study assessed its value as well as the advantages and disadvantages of the ConstaVac system in 30 patients suffering from haemothorax. This apparatus consists of a 800 mL collecting reservoir on a support equipped with an electric aspirator and a battery. The collected blood is transferred into a reinfusion bag while remaining in a closed circuit. The retransfused volume was 685 +/- 430 mL, representing 80% of the collected volume. The retransfusion took place in less than four hours. The patients with an isolated haemothorax did not receive any homologous blood. Only one technical problem occurred, related to the excessive volume of the haemothorax. The shed blood has decreased content of platelets, fibrinogen, and is incoagulable. Moreover, it is hemolyzed. Its hematocrit is lower than the patient's one. On the other hand, the concentration of 2,3 DPG remains normal. These modifications have no detrimental consequences on the patients as long as the autotransfused volume does not exceed two litres. Infectious problems are rare. Handling requires strict asepsis. The ConstaVac system is marketed for postoperative autotransfusion. It is compact, self-contained and very easy to use. It is the only system able of ensuring blood drainage and retransfusion simultaneously, without requiring any opening of the circuit.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS)