Intravenous Regional Anesthesia: A Historical Overview and Clinical Review.

Intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) is an established, safe and simple technique, being applicable for various surgeries on the upper and lower limbs. In 1908, IVRA was first described by the Berlin surgeon August Bier, hence the name "Bier's Block". Although his technique was effective, it was cumbersome and fell into disuse when neuroaxial and percutaneous plexus blockades gained widespread popularity in the early 20th century. In the 1960s, it became widespread, when the New Zealand anesthesiologist Charles McKinnon Holmes praised its use by means of new available local anesthetics. Today, IVRA is still popular in many countries being used in the emergency room, for outpatients and for high-risk patients with contraindications for general anesthesia. IVRA offers a favorable risk-benefit ratio, cost-effectiveness, sufficient muscle relaxation and a fast on- and offset. New upcoming methods for monitoring, specialized personnel and improved emergency equipment made IVRA even safer. Moreover, IVRA may be applied to treat complex regional pain syndromes. Prilocaine and lidocaine are considered as first-choice local anesthetics for IVRA. Also, various adjuvant drugs have been tested to augment the effect of IVRA, and to reduce post-deflation tourniquet pain. Since major adverse events are rare in IVRA, it is regarded as a very safe technique. Nevertheless, systemic neuro- and cardiotoxic side effects may be linked to an uncontrolled systemic flush-in of local anesthetics and must be avoided. This review gives a historical overview of more than 100 years of experience with IVRA and provides a current view of IVRA with relevant key facts for the daily clinical routine.

The Effect of Dexmedetomidine on Propofol Requirements During Anesthesia Administered by Bispectral Index-Guided Closed-Loop Anesthesia Delivery System: A Randomized Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine, a selective α2-adrenergic agonist currently approved for continuous intensive care unit sedation, is being widely evaluated for its role as a potential anesthetic. The closed-loop anesthesia delivery system (CLADS) is a method to automatically administer propofol total intravenous anesthesia using bi-spectral index (BIS) feedback and attain general anesthesia (GA) steady state with greater consistency. This study assessed whether dexmedetomidine is effective in further lowering the propofol requirements for total intravenous anesthesia facilitated by CLADS. METHODS: After ethics committee approval and written informed consent, 80 patients undergoing elective major laparoscopic/robotic surgery were randomly allocated to receive GA with propofol CLADS with or without the addition of dexmedetomidine. Quantitative reduction of propofol and quality of depth-of-anesthesia (primary objectives), intraoperative hemodynamics, incidence of postoperative adverse events (sedation, analgesia, nausea, and vomiting), and intraoperative awareness recall (secondary objectives) were analyzed. RESULTS: There was a statistically significant lowering of propofol requirement (by 15%) in the dexmedetomidine group for induction of anesthesia (dexmedetomidine group: mean ± standard deviation 0.91 ± 0.26 mg/kg; nondexmedetomidine group: 1.07 ± 0.23 mg/kg, mean difference: 0.163, 95% CI, 0.04-0.28; P = .01) and maintenance of GA (dexmedetomidine group: 3.25 ± 0.97 mg/kg/h; nondexmedetomidine group: 4.57 ± 1.21 mg/kg/h, mean difference: 1.32, 95% CI, 0.78-1.85; P < .001). The median performance error of BIS control, a measure of bias, was significantly lower in dexmedetomidine group (1% [-5.8%, 8%]) versus nondexmedetomidine group (8% [2%, 12%]; P = .002). No difference was found for anesthesia depth consistency parameters, including percentage of time BIS within ±10 of target (dexmedetomidine group: 79.5 [72.5, 85.3]; nondexmedetomidine group: 81 [68, 88]; P = .534), median absolute performance error (dexmedetomidine group: 12% [10%, 14%]; nondexmedetomidine group: 12% [10%, 14%]; P = .777), wobble (dexmedetomidine group: 10% [8%, 10%]; nondexmedetomidine group: 8% [6%, 10%]; P = .080), and global score (dexmedetomidine group: 25.2 [23.1, 35.8]; nondexmedetomidine group: 24.7 [20, 38.1]; P = .387). Similarly, there was no difference between the groups for percentage of time intraoperative heart rate and mean arterial pressure remained within 20% of baseline. However, addition of dexmedetomidine to CLADS propofol increased the incidence of significant bradycardia (dexmedetomidine group: 14 [41.1%]; nondexmedetomidine group: 3 [9.1%]; P = .004), hypotension (dexmedetomidine group: 9 [26.5%]; nondexmedetomidine group: 2 [6.1%]; P = .045), and early postoperative sedation. CONCLUSIONS: The addition of dexmedetomidine to propofol administered by CLADS was associated with a consistent depth of anesthesia along with a significant decrease in propofol requirements, albeit with an incidence of hemodynamic depression and early postoperative sedation.

Equipment failure of intravenous syringe pump detected by increase in Narcotrend stage: A case report.

RATIONALE: Awareness is the recovery of consciousness during general anesthesia. It occurs when patients under general anesthesia receive inadequate anesthetic medications to maintain unconsciousness during surgery. Equipment failure is a common cause of intraoperative awareness. PATIENT CONCERNS: A 16-year-old boy, 85 kg in weight, was admitted to our hospital for thyroglossal cystectomy under general anesthesia. Six minutes after the intubation, we noted that the Narcotrend index indicated a condition of light anesthesia and the patient was observed to be in tears. DIAGNOSIS: Improper positioning of the syringe fixing clamp on the CP700TCI infusion pump caused equipment failure and light anesthesia. INTERVENTIONS: Bolus of 50 mg propofol and 2 mg midazolam were administered manually by syringe, and inhalation of 2% sevoflurane was supplemented. Infusion pump was replaced. OUTCOMES: The Narcotrend index of the patient returned to state of deep anesthesia following manual administration of the anesthetic medications. Following the surgery, the patient had an uneventful recovery, and did not present with evidence of awareness. LESSONS: Users of the CP700TCI syringe pump should pay attention to the position of the syringe fixing clamp. Anesthesiologists should check all the equipment according to a defined checklist prior to anesthesia. Narcotrend monitor could help to detect light anesthesia and prevent potential awareness.

Anomalies in target-controlled infusion: an analysis after 20 years of clinical use.

Although target-controlled infusion has been in use for more than two decades, its benefits are being obscured by anomalies in clinical practice caused by a number of important problems. These include: a variety of pharmacokinetic models available in open target-controlled infusion systems, which often confuse the user; the extrapolation of anthropomorphic data which provokes anomalous adjustments of dosing by such systems; and the uncertainty of regulatory requirements for the application of target-controlled infusion which causes uncontrolled exploitation of drugs and pharmacokinetic models in target-controlled infusion devices. Comparison of performance of pharmacokinetic models is complex and mostly inconclusive. However, a specific behaviour of a model in a target-controlled infusion system that is neither intended nor supported by scientific data can be considered an artefact or anomaly. Several of these anomalies can be identified in the current commercially available target-controlled infusion systems and are discussed in this review.

Improving the anesthetic process by a fuzzy rule based medical decision system.

OBJECTIVE: The main objective of this research is the design and implementation of a new fuzzy logic tool for automatic drug delivery in patients undergoing general anesthesia. The aim is to adjust the drug dose to the real patient needs using heuristic knowledge provided by clinicians. A two-level computer decision system is proposed. The idea is to release the clinician from routine tasks so that he can focus on other variables of the patient. METHODS: The controller uses the Bispectral Index (BIS) to assess the hypnotic state of the patient. Fuzzy controller was included in a closed-loop system to reach the BIS target and reject disturbances. BIS was measured using a BIS VISTA monitor, a device capable of calculating the hypnosis level of the patient through EEG information. An infusion pump with propofol 1% is used to supply the drug to the patient. The inputs to the fuzzy inference system are BIS error and BIS rate. The output is infusion rate increment. The mapping of the input information and the appropriate output is given by a rule-base based on knowledge of clinicians. RESULTS: To evaluate the performance of the fuzzy closed-loop system proposed, an observational study was carried out. Eighty one patients scheduled for ambulatory surgery were randomly distributed in 2 groups: one group using a fuzzy logic based closed-loop system (FCL) to automate the administration of propofol (42 cases); the second group using manual delivering of the drug (39 cases). In both groups, the BIS target was 50. CONCLUSIONS: The FCL, designed with intuitive logic rules based on the clinician experience, performed satisfactorily and outperformed the manual administration in patients in terms of accuracy through the maintenance stage.

Understanding Infusion Pumps.

Infusion systems are complicated electromechanical systems that are used to deliver anesthetic drugs with moderate precision. Four types of systems are described-gravity feed, in-line piston, peristaltic, and syringe. These systems are subject to a number of failure modes-occlusion, disconnection, siphoning, infiltration, and air bubbles. The relative advantages of the various systems and some of the monitoring capabilities are discussed. A brief example of the use of an infusion system during anesthetic induction is presented. With understanding of the functioning of these systems, users may develop greater comfort.

Design and Evaluation of a Closed-Loop Anesthesia System With Robust Control and Safety System.

BACKGROUND: Closed-loop control of anesthesia involves continual adjustment of drug infusion rates according to measured clinical effect. The NeuroSENSE monitor provides an electroencephalographic measure of depth of hypnosis (wavelet-based anesthetic value for central nervous system monitoring [WAVCNS]). It has previously been used as feedback for closed-loop control of propofol, in a system designed using robust control engineering principles, which implements features specifically designed to ensure patient safety. Closed-loop control of a second drug, remifentanil, may be added to improve WAVCNS stability in the presence of variable surgical stimulation. The objective of this study was to design and evaluate the feasibility of a closed-loop system for robust control of propofol and remifentanil infusions using WAVCNS feedback, with an infusion safety system based on the known pharmacological characteristics of these 2 drugs. METHODS: With Health Canada authorization, research ethics board approval, and informed consent, American Society of Anesthesiologists I-III adults, requiring general anesthesia for elective surgery, were enrolled in a 2-phase study. In both phases, infusion of propofol was controlled in closed loop during induction and maintenance of anesthesia, using WAVCNS feedback, but bounded by upper- and lower-estimated effect-site concentration limits. In phase I, remifentanil was administered using an adjustable target-controlled infusion and a controller was designed based on the collected data. In phase II, remifentanil was automatically titrated to counteract rapid increases in WAVCNS. RESULTS: Data were analyzed for 127 patients, of median (range) age 64 (22-86) years, undergoing surgical procedures lasting 105 (9-348) minutes, with 52 participating in phase I and 75 in phase II. The overall control performance indicator, global score, was a median (interquartile range) 18.3 (14.2-27.7) in phase I and 14.6 (11.6-20.7) in phase II (median difference, -3.25; 95% confidence interval, -6.35 to -0.52). The WAVCNS was within ±10 of the setpoint for 84.3% (76.6-90.6) of the maintenance of anesthesia in phase I and 88.2% (83.1-93.4) in phase II (median difference, 3.7; 95% confidence interval, 0.1-6.9). The lower propofol safety bound was activated during 30 of 52 (58%) cases in phase I and 51 of 75 (68%) cases in phase II. CONCLUSIONS: Adding closed-loop control of remifentanil improved overall controller performance. This controller design offers a robust method to optimize the control of 2 drugs using a single sensor. The infusion safety system is an important component of a robust automated anesthesia system, but further research is required to determine the optimal constraints for these safe conditions.

Anaesthetic depth control using closed loop anaesthesia delivery system vs. target controlled infusion in patients with moderate to severe left ventricular systolic dysfunction.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy of anaesthetic depth control using Closed Loop Anaesthesia Delivery System (CLADS) and Target Controlled Infusion (TCI) in patients with moderate to severe left ventricular dysfunction (LVSD). DESIGN: Randomized control trial. PATIENTS: Forty ASA III/IV adult patients with moderate to severe LVSD scheduled for open heart surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Propofol was administered using CLADS or TCI for maintaining BIS of 50. Induction and maintenance doses were controlled automatically in CLADS. Dixon's up and down method was used to estimate the plasma concentration needed for induction in TCI. MEASUREMENT: Percentage of total anaesthesia time ("valid CLADS time") for which BIS remained within ±10 of target (BIS=50). MAIN RESULTS: BIS remained within ±10 of the target for a significantly longer duration of time in CLADS group (p=0.001). Performance parameters like Median Performance Error (MDPE), p=0.024; Median Absolute Performance Error (MDAPE), p=0.0212; and global score p=0.017 were significantly better in CLADS group. Total propofol consumption was significantly less in CLADS group (p=0.014). Mean value (95% CI) of EC50 and EC95 for target plasma propofol concentration for induction was 1.62 (1.45-1.79) µgml-1 and 1.87 (1.73-2.96) µgml-1 respectively using probit analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Closed loop delivery of propofol using CLADS performed significantly better than TCI in this subset of patients. CLINICAL TRIALS REGISTRATION NO.: www.ClinicalTrials.gov-NCT02645994.

Actuación ante un caso de extubación accidental con paciente en posición de decúbito prono / Anesthesia management of accidental extubation in the prone position

No disponible

Anestesia general en paciente con síndrome de Poland / General anesthesia in patients with syndrome of Poland

El aumento del uso de la cirugía, como tratamiento o como alternativa de mejora, hace que nos encontremos en quirófano con un mayor número de pacientes, entre ellos los que adolecen de enfermedades poco comunes. El síndrome de Poland es una enfermedad congénita rara, relacionada con el desarrollo muscular. Estos pacientes pueden presentar un amplio espectro de anomalías, entre las que destacan: anomalías a nivel torácico, que pueden alterar el manejo ventilatorio, a nivel de la vía aérea; la posible aparición de una hipertermia maligna. Esto lleva al anestesiólogo a tomar ciertas medidas preventivas. Narramos el caso de una paciente con síndrome de Poland que se intervenía para colocación de una prótesis mamaria, en el que evitamos los halogenados, y llevamos a cabo una anestesia total intravenosa con propofol. La aparición de espasmos musculares consecuencia del uso del propofol obligó en una segunda anestesia a llevar a cabo una anestesia total intravenosa con midazolam (AU)

The increased use of surgery as a treatment or as an alternative for improvement means that we have a larger number of patients in the operating theatre, including those who suffer from rare diseases. Poland Syndrome is a rare congenital disease associated with muscle development. These patients may have a broad spectrum of abnormalities, which include thoracic anomalies, which can alter the ventilatory management at the level of the airway; the possible onset of malignant hyperthermia. This leads the anaesthetist to take certain preventive measures. We report the case of a patient with Poland syndrome operated for the placement of a breast prosthesis. We avoid halogenated agents, and use a Total Intravenous Anaesthesia with propofol. The appearance of muscle spasms as a result of the use of propofol, forced us into a second anaesthesia to perform total intravenous anaesthesia with Midazolam (AU)

Hypnosis closed loop TCI systems in outpatient surgery. / Sistemas de TCI en circuito cerrado para la hipnosis en cirugía ambulatoria.

OBJECTIVE: Determine the influence of general anaesthesia with closed-loop systems in the results of outpatient varicose vein surgery. PATIENTS AND METHODS: Retrospective observational study including data from 270 outpatients between 2014 and 2015. The patients were divided into 2 groups according to the type of general anaesthesia used. The CL Group included patients who received propofol in closed-loop guided by BIS and remifentanil using TCI, and the C Group received non-closed-loop anaesthesia. Age, sex, surgical time, discharge time and failure of outpatient surgery were recorded. Quantitative data were checked for normal distribution by the method of Kolmogorov-Smirnov-Lilliefors. Differences between groups were analysed by a Student-t-test or Mann-Whitney-Wilcoxon test, depending on their distribution. Categorical data were analysed by a Chi-squared test. We used Kaplan-Meier estimator and the effect size (calculated by Cohen's d) to study the discharge time. Statistical analysis was performed using R 3.2.3 binary for Mac OS X 10.9. RESULTS: There were no significant differences in age, sex and surgical time and failure of outpatient surgery. Discharge time was different in both groups: 200 (100) vs. 180 (82.5) minutes, C Group and CL Group, respectively (data are median and interquartile rank); P=.005. CONCLUSION: The use of closed-loop devices for the hypnotic component of anaesthesia hastens discharge time. However, for this effect to be clinically significant, some improvements still need to be made in our outpatient surgery units.

Closed-Loop Delivery Systems Versus Manually Controlled Administration of Total IV Anesthesia: A Meta-analysis of Randomized Clinical Trials.

Bispectral Index Scale (BIS)-guided closed-loop delivery of anesthetics has been extensively studied. We performed a meta-analysis of all the randomized clinical trials comparing efficacy and performance between BIS-guided closed-loop delivery and manually controlled administration of total IV anesthesia. Scopus, PubMed, EMBASE, and the Cochrane Central Register of clinical trials were searched for pertinent studies. Inclusion criteria were random allocation to treatment and closed-loop delivery systems versus manually controlled administration of total IV anesthesia in any surgical setting. Exclusion criteria were duplicate publications and nonadult studies. Twelve studies were included, randomly allocating 1284 patients. Use of closed-loop anesthetic delivery systems was associated with a significant reduction in the dose of propofol administered for induction of anesthesia (mean difference [MD] = 0.37 [0.17-0.57], P for effect <0.00001, P for heterogeneity = 0.001, I = 74%) and a significant reduction in recovery time (MD = 1.62 [0.60-2.64], P for effect <0.0001, P for heterogeneity = 0.06, I = 47%). The target depth of anesthesia was preserved more frequently with closed-loop anesthetic delivery than with manual control (MD = -15.17 [-23.11 to -7.24], P for effect <0.00001, P for heterogeneity <0.00001, I = 83%). There were no differences in the time required to induce anesthesia and the total propofol dose. Closed-loop anesthetic delivery performed better than manual-control delivery. Both median absolute performance error and wobble index were significantly lower in closed-loop anesthetic delivery systems group (MD = 5.82 [3.17-8.46], P for effect <0.00001, P for heterogeneity <0.00001, I = 90% and MD = 0.92 [0.13-1.72], P for effect = 0.003, P for heterogeneity = 0.07, I = 45%). When compared with manual control, BIS-guided anesthetic delivery of total IV anesthesia reduces propofol requirements during induction, better maintains a target depth of anesthesia, and reduces recovery time.

A novel system for automated propofol sedation: hybrid sedation system (HSS).

Closed-loop systems for propofol have been demonstrated to be safe and reliable for general anesthesia. However, no study has been conducted using a closed-loop system specifically designed for sedation in patients under spinal anesthesia. We developed an automatic anesthesia sedation system that allows for closed-loop delivery of propofol for sedation integrating a decision support system, called the hybrid sedation system (HSS). The objective of this study is to compare this system with standard practice. One hundred fifty patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to two groups: HSS-Group (N = 75), in which propofol was administered using a closed-loop system; Control Group (N = 75), in which propofol was delivered manually. The clinical performance of the propofol sedation control is defined as efficacy to maintain bispectral index (BIS) near 65. The clinical control was called 'Excellent', 'Good', 'Poor' and 'Inadequate' with BIS values within 10 %, from 11 to 20 %, 21 to 30 %, or greater than 30 % of the BIS target of 65, respectively. The controller performance was evaluated using Varvel's parameters. Data are presented as mean ± standard deviation, groups were compared using t test or Chi square test, P < 0.05. Clinical performance of sedation showed 'Excellent' control in the HSS-group for a significantly longer period of time (49 vs. 26 % in the control group, P < 0.0001). 'Poor' and 'Inadequate' sedation was significantly shorter in the HSS Group compared to the Control Group (11 and 10 % vs. 20 and 18 %, respectively, P < 0.0001). The novel, closed-loop system for propofol sedation showed better maintenance of the target BIS value compared to manual administration.

Feasibility of Automated Propofol Sedation for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Implantation: A Pilot Study.

BACKGROUND: Recently, several trials have shown that closed-loop sedation is feasible. No study has used automated sedation in extremely frail patients, such as those scheduled for transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). We developed and tested a novel automated sedation system for this kind of population and surgery. The system integrates a decision support system that detects respiratory and hemodynamic events via smart alarms, which provide pertinent/related clinical suggestions and treatment options. The main objective was the feasibility of closed-loop sedation, defined as successful automated sedation without manual override. Secondary qualitative observations were clinical and controller performance. METHODS: Twenty patients scheduled for elective TAVI were enrolled. Sedation was administered via a closed-loop delivery system designed for propofol. The clinical performance of sedation was the efficacy to maintain a bispectral index (BIS) of 65. To evaluate the sedation performance, BIS values were stratified into 4 categories: excellent, very good, good, and inadequate sedation control, defined as BIS values within 10%, ranging from 11% to 20%, ranging from 21% to 30%, or >30% from the target value, respectively. The controller performance was calculated using Varvel parameters. Critical respiratory and hemodynamic events were documented. The former was defined as peripheral oxygen saturation <92% and/or respiratory rate <8/min, whereas the latter was considered a mean arterial pressure <60 mm Hg and/or heart rate <40 bpm. RESULTS: Automated sedation was successful in 19 patients undergoing TAVI. One patient was excluded from the final analysis because of conversion to general anesthesia. The secondary observations revealed that the clinical performance allowed an excellent to good control during 69% (99% confidence interval, 53%-77%; interquartile range, 59%-79%) of the sedation time. Fifteen patients presented critical respiratory episodes, with a median of 3 events per hour of sedation. Six patients presented critical hemodynamic episodes, with a median of 2 events per hour of procedure. CONCLUSIONS: The automated closed-loop sedation system tested could be used successfully for patients scheduled for a TAVI procedure. The results showed a satisfactory clinical performance of sedation control.

Clinical Performance and Safety of Closed-Loop Systems: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

Automated systems can improve the stability of controlled variables and reduce the workload in clinical practice without increasing the risks to patients. We conducted this review and meta-analysis to assess the clinical performance of closed-loop systems compared with manual control. Our primary outcome was the accuracy of closed-loop systems in comparison with manual control to maintain a given variable in a desired target range. The occurrence of overshoot and undershoot episodes was the secondary outcome. We retrieved randomized controlled trials on accuracy and safety of closed-loop systems versus manual control. Our primary outcome was the percentage of time during which the system was able to maintain a given variable (eg, bispectral index or oxygen saturation) in a desired range or the proportion of the target measurements that was within the required range. Our secondary outcome was the percentage of time or the number of episodes that the controlled variable was above or below the target range. The standardized mean difference and 95% confidence interval (CI) were calculated for continuous outcomes, whereas the odds ratio and 95% CI were estimated for dichotomous outcomes. Thirty-six trials were included. Compared with manual control, automated systems allowed better maintenance of the controlled variable in the anesthesia drug delivery setting (95% CI, 11.7%-23.1%; percentage of time, P < 0.0001, number of studies: n = 15), in patients with diabetes mellitus (95% CI, 11.5%-30.9%; percentage of time, P = 0.001, n = 8), and in patients mechanically ventilated (95% CI, 1.5%-23.1%; percentage of time, P = 0.03, n = 8). Heterogeneity among the studies was high (>75%). We observed a significant reduction of episodes of overshooting and undershooting when closed-loop systems were used. The use of automated systems can result in better control of a given target within a selected range. There was a decrease of overshooting or undershooting of a given target with closed-loop systems.

Simulator evaluation of a prototype device to reduce medication errors in anaesthesia.

We undertook a randomised control led trial to evaluate the effect of a prototype device which attaches to the intravenous drug administration port, and allows injection of intravenous drugs only after the user scans the barcode on the syringe label. This requires two steps: first, that the correct drug label is generated; and second, that the syringe-with-label is scanned before administration. Ten anaesthetists, who were unaware of the primary outcome being measured, administered general anaesthesia for two simulated standardised cases each without and with our prototype (control and intervention, respectively). The primary outcome measured was compliance with a safe drug administration procedure (defined as a two-step procedure where, step one is scanning a drug ampoule to print a label for a syringe and step two is scanning of the labelled syringe before administering it intravenously). A total of 182 intravenous drug administrations occurred in the study (91 in each group). We found that the use of our prototype increased safe drug administration behaviour in experienced anaesthetists; 33 (36.3% [95% CI 26-47%]) vs. 91 (100% [95% CI 96-100%]) in the control and intervention groups, respectively (p = 0.0001).

Ibuprofeno intravenoso: experiencia clínica en el tratamiento del dolor postoperatorio / Intravenous ibuprofen: clinic experience in the treatment of postoperative pain

El dolor postoperatorio de intensidad alta o extrema tiene una incidencia publicada cercana al 30 % de los pacientes quirúrgicos, siendo su principal preocupación, incluso más relevante que los resultados satisfactorios o no que pudiera tener el procedimiento en la resolución de su enfermedad. Los AINE son los fármacos más prescritos en el mundo para el tratamiento del dolor agudo y crónico de diferentes causas. El ibuprofeno es un analgésico ampliamente utilizado en la prevención y tratamiento del dolor. Recientemente, su forma intravenosa ha sido aprobada por la FDA (www.accessdata.fda.gov) para el tratamiento del dolor leve a moderado y moderado a severo complementario a la analgesia opioide. Adicionalmente, ha sido aprobado para la reducción de la fiebre. Dado su potencial como adyuvante en la analgesia multimodal, se realizó una revisión acerca del uso perioperatorio del ibuprofeno intravenoso, analizando la literatura disponible en inglés y español en PubMed y Ovid MEDLINE hasta diciembre 2015. Se incluyeron datos farmacocinéticos y farmacodinámicos provenientes de pacientes de diferentes edades, así como estudios clínicos, incluyendo aquellos en los que se cuantificó el uso de opioides en el periodo postoperatorio, analizando la sinergia entre ambos tipos de analgésicos. El ibuprofeno intravenoso ofrece ventajas sobre la presentación oral, siendo una alternativa a la limitada disponibilidad de AINE endovenosos como parte de la analgesia multimodal perioperatoria (AU)

About 30 % of surgical patients report high or extreme intensity postoperative pain as their main concern, which is even more relevant than satisfactory surgery results. NSAIDs are the most commonly prescribed drugs worldwide for the treatment of acute and chronic pain. Ibuprofen is widely used in prevention and treatment of pain. Recently, intravenous ibuprofen has been approved by the FDA (www.accessdata.fda.gov) for the management of mild-moderate pain and management of moderate-severe pain complementary to opioid analgesia. Additionally, has been approved for fever reduction. Given its potential as adjuvant therapy in multimodal analgesia, a review of the perioperative use of intravenous ibuprofen was conducted by analyzing literature available in English and Spanish in PubMed and Ovid MEDLINE through December 2015. The review included pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic data from patients of different ages as well as clinical studies where the use of opioids was quantified in the postoperative period and the synergy between these two types of drugs was analyzed. Intravenous ibuprofen offers advantages over oral presentation and is an alternative to the limited availability of intravenous NSAIDs as part of multimodal perioperative analgesia (AU)