[Efficacy of intraoperative methadone and clonidine in pain control in the immediate postoperative period after the use of remifentanil]. / Eficácia do emprego da metadona ou da clonidina no intraoperatório para controle da dor pós-operatória imediata após uso de remifentanil.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Due to its pharmacokinetic characteristics, remifentanil does not promote residual analgesia in the immediate postoperative period. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of methadone and clonidine in the control of postoperative pain of videolaparoscopic surgeries under total intravenous anesthesia with target-controlled remifentanil infusion. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-six patients, ages 18 to 65 years, ASA I and II, of both genders, scheduled for laparoscopic surgeries, participated in this randomized, double- blind, placebo-controlled study. After venipuncture, intravenous ketoprofen and dypirone were administered. Target-controlled infusion of remifentanil and propofol was used for induction and maintenance of anesthesia. Before beginning the procedure, an intravenous solution containing 0.1 mg.kg-1 of methadone (methadone group), 2.0 (1/4)g.kg-1 of clonidine (clonidine group), or NS (placebo group) was administered. In the post-anesthetic care unit, postoperative pain was evaluated by the Verbal Numeric Scale (VNS). Absence of pain was defined as a score < 2, and pain as a score of > 3. RESULTS: The incidence of pain in the methadone group was significantly lower than in the clonidine and placebo groups (11, 21, and 23, respectively; p < 0.02). Significant differences in the incidence of pain in the placebo and clonidine groups were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Methadone was more effective than clonidine in the control of postoperative pain in videolaparoscopic surgeries under total intravenous anesthesia with remifentanil; and using clonidine was not better than not using it.

Eficácia do emprego da metadona ou da clonidina no intraoperatório para controle da dor pós-operatória imediata após uso de remifentanil / Eficacia del empleo de la metadona o de la clonidina en el intraoperatorio para control del dolor postoperatorio inmediato después del uso de remifentanil / Efficacy of intraoperative methadone and clonidine in pain control in the immediate postoperative period after the use of remifentanil

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Por suas características farmacocinéticas, o remifentanil não promove efeito analgésico residual no pós-operatório imediato. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a eficácia da metadona e da clonidina no controle da dor pós-operatória de intervenções cirúrgicas videolaparoscópicas sob anestesia venosa total com infusão alvo-controlada de remifentanil. MÉTODO: Participaram deste estudo aleatório, duplamente encoberto e placebo-controlado, 126 pacientes com idade entre 18 e 65 anos, ASA PS 1 e 2 de ambos os sexos, que estavam previamente programados para a realização de intervenções cirúrgicas laparoscópicas. Após venopunção, os pacientes receberam por via venosa cetoprofeno e dipirona. A indução e manutenção da anestesia foram realizadas com infusão alvo-controlada de remifentanil e propofol. Antes do início da operação, os pacientes recebiam por via venosa a solução contendo metadona 0,1 mg.kg-1 (grupo metadona), clonidina 2,0 »g.kg-1 (grupo clonidina) ou solução fisiológica a 0,9 por cento (grupo placebo). Na sala de recuperação pós-anestésica, a dor pós-operatória foi avaliada através da escala numérica verbal (ENV). Foi considerado paciente sem dor quando a ENV < 2 e paciente com dor quando > 3. RESULTADOS: A incidência de dor no grupo metadona foi significativamente menor em relação ao grupo clonidina e grupo placebo (11, 21 e 23, respectivamente; p < 0,02). Não houve diferença significativa na incidência de dor entre pacientes do grupo clonidina e placebo. CONCLUSÕES: Em relação ao controle da dor pós-operatória de intervenções cirúrgicas videolaparoscópicas sob anestesia venosa total com uso de remifentanil, o emprego da metadona foi mais eficaz que a clonidina; e usar clonidina não foi melhor que não usar.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Due to its pharmacokinetic characteristics, remifentanil does not promote residual analgesia in the immediate postoperative period. The objective of this study was to compare the efficacy of methadone and clonidine in the control of postoperative pain of videolaparoscopic surgeries under total intravenous anesthesia with target-controlled remifentanil infusion. METHODS: One hundred and twenty-six patients, ages 18 to 65 years, ASA I and II, of both genders, scheduled for laparoscopic surgeries, participated in this randomized, double- blind, placebo-controlled study. After venipuncture, intravenous ketoprofen and dypirone were administered. Target-controlled infusion of remifentanil and propofol was used for induction and maintenance of anesthesia. Before beginning the procedure, an intravenous solution containing 0.1 mg.kg-1 of methadone (methadone group), 2.0 »g.kg-1 of clonidine (clonidine group), or NS (placebo group) was administered. In the post-anesthetic care unit, postoperative pain was evaluated by the Verbal Numeric Scale (VNS). Absence of pain was defined as a score < 2, and pain as a score of > 3. RESULTS: The incidence of pain in the methadone group was significantly lower than in the clonidine and placebo groups (11, 21, and 23, respectively; p < 0.02). Significant differences in the incidence of pain in the placebo and clonidine groups were not observed. CONCLUSIONS: Methadone was more effective than clonidine in the control of postoperative pain in videolaparoscopic surgeries under total intravenous anesthesia with remifentanil; and using clonidine was not better than not using it.

JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: El remifentanil, por sus características farmacocinéticas, no genera un efecto analgésico residual en el postoperatorio inmediato. El objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la eficacia de la metadona y de la clonidina en el control del dolor postoperatorio de intervenciones quirúrgicas videolaparoscópicas bajo anestesia venosa total con infusión objeto controlada de remifentanil. MÉTODO: Participaron en este estudio aleatorio, doble ciego y placebo-controlado, 126 pacientes con una edad entre los 18 y los 65 años, ASA PS 1 y 2 de ambos sexos, que estaban previamente programados para la realización de las intervenciones quirúrgicas laparoscópicas. Después de la venopunción, los pacientes recibieron por vía venosa cetoprofeno y dipirona. La inducción y el mantenimiento de la anestesia fue realizada con infusión objeto controlada de remifentanil y propofol. Antes del inicio de la operación, los pacientes recibieron por vía venosa la solución conteniendo metadona 0,1 mg.kg-1 (grupo metadona), clonidina 2,0 »g.kg-1 (grupo clonidina) o solución fisiológica a 0,9 por ciento (grupo placebo). En la sala de recuperación postanestésica, el dolor postoperatorio se evaluó a través de la escala numérica verbal (ENV). Se tuvo en cuenta el paciente sin dolor cuando la ENV era < 2 y el paciente con dolor cuando había > 3. RESULTADOS: La incidencia de dolor en el grupo metadona fue significativamente menor con relación al grupo clonidina y al grupo placebo (11, 21 y 23, respectivamente; p < 0,02). No hubo diferencia significativa en la incidencia de dolor entre los pacientes del grupo clonidina y placebo. CONCLUSIONES: Con relación al control del dolor postoperatorio de intervenciones quirúrgicas videolaparoscópicas bajo anestesia venosa total con el uso de remifentanil, el empleo de la metadona fue más eficaz que la clonidina. Y usar clonidina no fue mejor que no usarla.

Remifentanil versus Sufentanil em infusão contínua em intervenções cirúrgicas videolaparoscópicas: estudo comparativo / Continuous infusion of remifentanil versus sufentanil in videolaparoscopic surgeries: a comparative study

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A infusão contínua (IC) de remifentanil na técnica de anestesia venosa total é prática comum. Já o sufentanil em IC para cirurgias de curta/média duração tem sido pouco utilizado. O objetivo desse estudo foi comparar duas técnicas de anestesia venosa total, utilizando remifentanil ou sufentanil em IC, quanto ao comportamento anestésico no intra-operatório e às características da recuperação anestésica em pacientes submetidos à videolaparoscopia. MÉTODO: Participaram desse estudo 60 pacientes divididos em 2 grupos iguais (GR e GS). O GR foi induzido com remifentanil IC e o GS com sufentanil em bolus associado à IC. A IC de remifentanil era desligada ao fim da cirurgia, enquanto a IC de sufentanil, 20 minutos antes. Os pacientes receberam no intra-operatório cetoprofeno e dipirona. Como analgésico de resgate na sala de recuperação pós-anestésica (SRPA) foi utilizado tramadol. Foram analisados as variações da pressão arterial média (PAM) e freqüência cardíaca (FC), o tempo de despertar, o consumo de propofol, as intercorrências na SRPA e o tempo de permanência na SRPA. RESULTADOS: A média da PAM foi maior no GS em relação ao GR (91,9 × 77,6, p < 0,0001). A incidência de dor foi significativamente maior no GR em relação ao GS (22 × 1 paciente, p < 0,0001). A incidência de NVPO foi maior no GR em relação ao GS (10 × 2 pacientes, p = 0,0098). A média do tempo de permanência na SRPA foi maior no GR em relação ao GS (76 × 49 min, p < 0,0001). CONCLUSÕES: O controle hemodinâmico foi satisfatório nos grupos. A IC de sufentanil promoveu melhor controle da dor no pós-operatório com menor consumo de analgésico de resgate; conseqüentemente, houve menor incidência de NVPO e menor tempo de permanência na SRPA.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Continuous infusion (CI) of remifentanil is common in total intravenous anesthesia. On the other hand, CI of sufentanil for short/medium-term surgeries has not been widely used. The objective of this study was to compare two techniques of total intravenous anesthesia, using CI of remifentanil or sufentanil, regarding their intraoperative behavior and characteristics of recovery of patients undergoing videolaparoscopic surgeries. METHODS: Sixty patients, equally divided in 2 groups (RG and SG), participated in this study. Continuous infusion of remifentanil was used for anesthetic induction in RG, while a bolus of sufentanil associated with CI of this drug was used in SG. The CI of remifentanil was discontinued at the end of the surgery, while the CI of sufentanil was discontinued 20 minutes before the end of the surgery. Patients received ketoprofen and dypirone intraoperatively. Tramadol was used for rescue analgesia in the recovery room. Variations of mean arterial pressure (MAP) and hard reate (HR), time for awakening, propofol consumption, intercurrences in the recovery room, and time of stay in the recovery room were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean MAP was greater in SG than in RG (91.9 × 77.6, p < 0.0001). The incidence of pain was significantly greater in RG than on SG (22 × 1 patient, p < 0.0001). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was greater in RG than in SG (10 × 2 patients, p < 0.0098). The mean time of stay in the recovery room was greater in RG than in SG (76 × 49 min, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamic control was satisfactory in both groups. Continuous infusion of sufentanil promoted better postoperative pain control with decreased consumption of rescue analgesic and, consequently, reduced incidence of PONV and reduced time of stay in the recovery room.

JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: La infusión continua (IC) de remifentanil en la técnica de anestesia venosa total es una práctica común. Ya el sufentanil en IC para cirugías de corta/media duración ha sido poco utilizado. El objetivo de este estudio fue el de comparar dos técnicas de anestesia venosa total, utilizando remifentanil o sufentanil en IC, en cuanto al comportamiento anestésico en el intraoperatorio y en cuanto a las características de la recuperación anestésica en pacientes sometidos a la videolaparoscopía. MÉTODO: Participaron en el estudio 60 pacientes divididos en 2 grupos iguales (GR y GS). El GR fue inducido con remifentanil IC y el GS con sufentanil en bolus asociado a IC. La IC de remifentanil se desconectaba al final de la cirugía, mientras que la IC de sufentanil 20 minutos antes. Los pacientes recibieron en el intraoperatorio cetoprofeno y dipirona. Como analgésico de rescate en la sala de recuperación pos anestésica (SRPA) se usó el tramadol. Fueron analizadas las variaciones de la PAM y FC, tiempo de despertar, consumo de propofol, intercurrencias en la SRPA y tiempo de permanencia en la SRPA. RESULTADOS: El promedio de la PAM fue mayor en el GS con relación al GR (91,9 × 77,6, p < 0,0001). La incidencia de dolor fue significativamente mayor en el GR con relación al GS (22 × 1 paciente, p < 0,0001). La incidencia de NVPO fue mayor en el GR con relación al GS (10 × 2 pacientes, p = 0,0098). El promedio del tiempo de permanencia en la SRPA fue mayor en el GR en con relación al GS (76 × 49 min, p < 0,0001). CONCLUSIONES: El control hemodinámico fue satisfactorio en los grupos. La IC de sufentanil generó un mejor control del dolor en el pos operatorio con menor consumo de analgésico de rescate, por lo tanto, se registró una menos incidencia de NVPO y un menor tiempo de permanencia en la SRPA.

Continuous infusion of remifentanil versus sufentanil in videolaparoscopic surgeries. A comparative study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Continuous infusion (CI) of remifentanil is common in total intravenous anesthesia. On the other hand, CI of sufentanil for short/medium-term surgeries has not been widely used. The objective of this study was to compare two techniques of total intravenous anesthesia, using CI of remifentanil or sufentanil, regarding their intraoperative behavior and characteristics of recovery of patients undergoing videolaparoscopic surgeries. METHODS: Sixty patients, equally divided in 2 groups (RG, and SG), participated in this study. Continuous infusion of remifentanil was used for anesthetic induction in RG, while a bolus of sufentanil associated with CI of this drug was used in SG. The CI of remifentanil was discontinued at the end of the surgery, while the CI of sufentanil was discontinued 20 minutes before the end of the surgery. Patients received ketoprofen and dypirone intraoperatively. Tramadol was used for rescue analgesia in the recovery room. Variations of mean arterial pressure (MAP) and hard reate (HR), time for awakening, propofol consumption, intercurrences in the recovery room, and time of stay in the recovery room were analyzed. RESULTS: Mean MAP was greater in SG than in RG (91.9 x 77.6, p < 0.0001). The incidence of pain was significantly greater in RG than on SG (22 x 1 patient, p < 0.0001). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was greater in RG than in SG (10 x 2 patients, p < 0.0098). The mean time of stay in the recovery room was greater in RG than in SG (76 x 49 min, p < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: Hemodynamic control was satisfactory in both groups. Continuous infusion of sufentanil promoted better postoperative pain control with decreased consumption of rescue analgesic and, consequently, reduced incidence of PONV and reduced time of stay in the recovery room.