Effects of bupivacaine or levobupivacaine on cerebral oxygenation during spinal anesthesia in elderly patients undergoing orthopedic surgery for hip fracture: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Bupivacaine and levobupivacaine have similar pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics, and are used regularly in spinal anesthesia. Whether potential differences in their hemodynamic and anesthetic profiles could determine a differential risk of complications in elderly subjects, is controversial. The main objective was to compare the effects of intrathecally administered levobupivacaine (LB) versus bupivacaine (B), on regional cerebral O2 saturation during spinal anesthesia, cognitive status and neurological complications in elderly patients undergoing surgery for hip fracture. METHODS: This was a randomized, controlled, single blind study. 58 patients aged 70 or older undergoing surgery for hip fracture with spinal anesthesia were allocated with a 1:1 ratio to receive LB or B, combined with fentanyl 15 µg, by intrathecal route. The primary outcome was the proportion of intraoperative time with regional cerebral desaturation (≥20% reduction in regional cerebral oxygen saturation from baseline), monitored by near -infrared spectroscopy. Secondary endpoints included hemodynamic parameters, level of sensory and motor block, changes in Short Portable Mental Status Questionnaire (SPMSQ), and neurological complications. RESULTS: The mean percentage of intraoperative time with desaturation in the B group was 6.1% (SD: 17.5) and 4.7% (SD: 11.9) in the left and right hemisphere respectively; in the LB group the mean was 4.8% (SD: 11.4) in the left hemisphere and 2.4% (SD: 8.3) in the right one. No statistically significant differences were found between treatment groups. The level of sensory block at the start of surgery was lower for LB than for B (Th10 vs Th8, p:0.047) and motor block at 15 min was lower for LB (2.5 vs 3, p:0.009). No differences in postoperative SPMSQ were observed. Neurological complications such as confusional state, agitation or disorientation were reported in 50% of patients in the B group and 21.4% of patients in the LB group, p = 0.05. CONCLUSIONS: No statistically significant differences in regional cerebral oxygen saturation or hemodynamic parameters were observed between both treatment groups. Bupivacaine and levobupivacaine differed in sensory and motor block achieved. While no differences were observed in cognitive impairment measured by the SPMSQ between treatment groups neurological complications reported by the physician were more frequent with bupivacaine. TRIAL REGISTRATION: European Union Clinical Trials Register ( EudraCT 2013-000846 -20 ) (April 9th, 2013). ClinicalTrials.gov ( NCT01960543 ) (September 23rd, 2013).

Outpatient multimodal intravenous analgesia in patients undergoing day-case surgery: description of a three year experience.

BACKGROUND: The use of elastomeric devices for ambulatory intravenous pain treatment in Major Ambulatory Surgery (MAS) has been described to improve postoperative pain management. The objective of the study was to describe the first 3 years experience of the use of elastomeric devices for ambulatory intravenous pain treatment in MAS implemented at our site since 2010. METHODS: Data were retrieved from the medical records for all patients who, between January 2010 and March 2014, underwent surgical procedures at the ambulatory surgical centre at our hospital and were prescribed a home-based continuous intravenous analgesia. RESULTS: Data were retrieved from the medical records of 1128 patients. The most frequent surgical interventions included orthopedic and proctology surgeries. 80 % of patients were discharged home without pain; during the first 48 h after discharge roughly 40 % of subjects were completely free of pain, 50 % reported mild pain (VAS 1 to 3) and 9 % reported higher pain scores (4 and above). Peripheral nerve block was associated to better pain control in the immediate postoperative period. Vomiting in the first 24 h was 4.6 % before introducing haloperidol into the drug schemes, and 2.6 % thereafter. Complications related with the intravenous route required treatment withdrawal in 1.1 % cases. Only 3.5 % of patients returned to the hospital in the first 72 h, mainly for non-pain related reasons. Overall, 99.5 % of patients were satisfied with the treatment received at home. CONCLUSION: Our initial experience suggest that outpatient multimodal intravenous analgesia in patients undergoing day-case surgery is a feasible alternative in our setting, that allows an effective management of postoperative pain with a small rate of adverse events and complications requiring readmission.