Han Bum Joe

Intravenous lidocaine pretreatment with venous occlusion for reducing microemulsion propofol induced pain: Comparison of three doses of lidocaine

Objective Pretreatment with intravenous 40 mg or 0.5 mg/kg lidocaine with venous occlusion is recommended to prevent pain following injection of lipid emulsion propofol. This approach is not sufficient to prevent pain from the injection of microemulsion propofol. The present study investigated whether a higher dose of lidocaine pretreatment with venous occlusion would be more effective for reducing pain following injection of microemulsion propofol compared with 40 mg lidocaine. Methods Patients undergoing elective surgery were randomly assigned to one of three groups: pretreatment with 40 mg (group L40), 60 mg (group L60) or 80 mg (group L80) lidocaine intravenously with venous occlusion, followed by injection with microemulsion propofol 1 min later. Pain was assessed on a four-point scale (severe, moderate, mild, none) based on physical responses to the injection. Results A total of 68 patients were included in the final analysis. Pain severity and incidence were significantly lower in patients in group L60 and L80 compared with patients in group L40. There were no statistically significant differences in pain incidence or severity between group L60 and group L80. Conclusions Pretreatment with 60 mg lidocaine intravenously with venous occlusion may be the most effective minimum dose for reducing injection pain following microemulsion propofol administration for induction of anaesthesia.

Adductor canal block versus femoral nerve block combined with sciatic nerve block as an anesthetic technique for hindfoot and ankle surgery: A prospective, randomized noninferiority trial.

Background:A femoral nerve block (FNB) in combination with a sciatic nerve block (SNB) is commonly used for anesthesia and analgesia in patients undergoing hindfoot and ankle surgery. The effects of FNB on motor function, related fall risk, and rehabilitation are controversial. An adductor canal block (ACB) potentially spares motor fibers in the femoral nerve, but the comparative effect on hindfoot and ankle surgeries between the 2 approaches is not yet well defined. We hypothesized that compared to FNB, ACB would cause less weakness in the quadriceps and produce similar pain scores during and after the operation. Methods:Sixty patients scheduled for hindfoot and ankle surgeries (arthroscopy, Achilles tendon surgery, or medial ankle surgery) were stratified randomized for each surgery to receive an FNB (FNB group) or an ACB (ACB group) combined with an SNB. The primary outcome was the visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at each stage. Secondary outcomes included quadriceps strength, time profiles (duration of the block procedure, time to full anesthesia and time to full recovery), patients’ analgesic requirements, satisfaction, and complications related to peripheral nerve blocks such as falls, neurologic symptoms, and local anesthetic systemic toxicity were evaluated. The primary outcome was tested for the noninferiority of ACB to FNB, and the other outcomes were tested for the superiority of each variable between the groups. Results:A total of 31 patients received an ACB and 29 received an FNB. The VAS pain scores of the ACB group were not inferior during and after the operation compared to those of the FNB group. At 30 minutes and 2 hours after anesthesia, patients who received an ACB had significantly higher average dynamometer readings than those who received a FNB (34.2 ± 20.4 and 30.4 ± 23.7 vs 1.7 ± 3.7 and 2.3 ± 7.4, respectively), and the results were similar at 24 and 48 hours after anesthesia. There were no differences between the 2 groups with regard to time profiles and patient satisfaction. No complications were noted. Conclusion:ACB preserved quadriceps muscle strength better than FNB, without a significant difference in postoperative pain. Therefore, ACB may be a good alternative to FNB for reducing the potential fall risk.

Analgesic Effects of Ultrasound-Guided Serratus-Intercostal Plane Block and Ultrasound-Guided Intermediate Cervical Plexus Block After Single-Incision Transaxillary Robotic Thyroidectomy: A Prospective, Randomized, Controlled Trial.

Background and Objectives Single-incision transaxillary robotic thyroidectomy (START) requires substantial tissue disruption, which produces moderate-to-severe pain in the axilla and neck areas during the early postoperative period. This study aimed to investigate the analgesic effects of ultrasound-guided serratus-intercostal plane blocks and intermediate cervical plexus blocks (CPBs) on the early postoperative pain after START. Methods We randomized 22 patients to undergo either ultrasound-guided serratus-intercostal plane and intermediate CPBs (the block group, n = 11) or to not undergo any block (the control group, n = 11). We compared postoperative axillary pain, postoperative neck pain, and analgesic use between the groups during the first 24 hours. The rescue analgesics were intravenous fentanyl (0.5 &mgr;g/kg) in the postanesthesia care unit, and intravenous ketorolac tromethamine (30 mg) in the general ward. Results The block group showed consistently lower pain scores than the control group in the axillary area in the first 24 hours and in the neck area only in the first 3 hours after surgery. The numbers (proportions) of patients who required analgesics were 11 (100%) in the control group and 6 (54.5%) in the block group during the first 24 hours (P = 0.035). No adverse effect was observed related to the peripheral nerve blocks. Conclusions After START, a serratus-intercostal plane block performed at the level of the third rib was an effective analgesic technique for axillary pain; however, the clinical effectiveness of intermediate CPB for neck pain may be limited.

Effect of total intravenous anaesthesia and prophylactic ramosetron on postoperative nausea and vomiting after thyroidectomy: A prospective, randomized controlled study

Objective To investigate the effect of combined prophylactic ramosetron and total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia without prophylactic antiemetics, in female patients undergoing thyroidectomy. Methods Female patients were randomized between the sevoflurane group (anaesthesia maintained with sevoflurane) or TIVA + ramosetron group (TIVAR; 0.3 mg ramosetron just before anaesthesia induction, remifentanil and propofol anaesthesia). Incidence and severity of PONV and use of rescue antiemetics were recorded during the first 24 h after surgery. Results In the early postoperative period (0–6 h), the incidence of PONV, severe emesis and rescue antiemetic use were significantly lower in the TIVAR group (n = 36) than in the sevoflurane group (n = 36). In the late postoperative period (6–24 h), the incidence of severe emesis was significantly lower in the TIVAR group than in the sevoflurane group. Conclusions A combination of TIVA and prophylactic ramosetron decreases early PONV and late postoperative severe emesis compared with sevoflurane anaesthesia.

The effects of prophylactic dolasetron and induction with propofol on postoperative nausea and vomiting after thyroidectomy

BACKGROUND Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common problem in patients undergoing thyroidectomy. In this study we evaluated the effects of prophylactic dolasetron and/or induction with propofol on PONV. METHODS Two hundred three patients scheduled thyroidectomy under general anesthesia with sevoflurane were included and were randomly allocated to one of four groups. In control (group C) and dolasetron groups (group D), the patients received thiopental sodium 4-5 mg/kg intravenously for the induction of anesthesia, and the patients in group D received prophylactic intravenous dolasetron 210 microgram/kg. In propofol (group P) and dolasetron + propofol groups (group D + P), the patients received propofol 2 mg/kg intravenously for the induction of anesthesia, and the patients in group D + P received prophylactic intravenous dolasetron 210 microgram/kg. The incidence and severity of PONV, the need for rescue antiemetics, adverse events were assessed during 0 to 1 hour and 1 to 24 hours postoperatively. RESULTS During the first 24 hours after anesthesia, the incidences of PONV and postoperative vomiting were significantly reduced in group D + P compared with group C (P < 0.05, respectively). There were no significant differences in postoperative nausea, need for rescue antiemetics, severity of PONV, and adverse events of antiemetics among the four groups. CONCLUSIONS In patients with thyroidectomy, combination of prophylactic dolasetron administration and induction with propofol was found to reduce the incidence of PONV during the first 24 hours after anesthesia, compared with that of routine induction with thiopental sodium.

Effect of sex differences in remifentanil requirements for the insertion of a laryngeal mask airway during propofol anesthesia: A prospective randomized trial

Background:Remifentanil can improve insertion of a laryngeal mask airway (LMA) during induction with propofol. Recently, it has been suggested that there is a sex difference in opioid requirements for this procedure. The purposes of this study were to determine the effective effect-site concentration (Ce) of remifentanil for the facilitation of LMA insertion in male and female patients during propofol anesthesia without neuromuscular blockade and to evaluate whether there are sex differences in the Ce of remifentanil required for successful LMA insertion. Methods:Forty-eight patients (24 male, 24 female) with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status 1 or 2, aged 20 to 60 years, scheduled for minor orthopedic surgery under general anesthesia were enrolled. Anesthesia was induced by target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol and remifentanil. The target Ce of propofol was 5 &mgr;g/mL initially and was reduced to 3.5 &mgr;g/mL after loss of consciousness. The Ce of remifentanil given to each patient was determined by the response of the previously tested patient using 0.5 ng/mL as a step size. The 1st patient was tested at a Ce of 3.0 ng/mL of remifentanil. Successful LMA insertion was defined as smooth insertion without patient movement or significant resistance to mouth opening. Results:The effective Ce of remifentanil required for successful LMA insertion on 50% of occasions (effective effect-site concentration for 50% [EC50]) as estimated by Dixon method was significantly lower in women (2.18 ± 0.35 ng/mL) than in men (2.82 ± 0.53 ng/mL) (P = 0.02). Using the isotonic regression method, the effective Ce of remifentanil required for successful LMA insertion on 95% of occasions (EC95) (95% confidence interval [CI]) was significantly lower in women (3.38 [3.0–3.48] ng/mL) than in men (3.94 [3.80–3.98] ng/mL). Conclusion:The Ce of remifentanil required to facilitate successful LMA insertion is higher during propofol induction by TCI in men than in women. When using remifentanil for LMA insertion, patient sex should be taken into account for appropriate dosing.

Correction of target-controlled infusion following wrong selection of emulsion concentrations of propofol.

Background We investigated the correction methods following wrong-settings of emulsion concentrations of propofol as a countermeasure against erroneous target-controlled infusions (TCI). Methods TCIs were started with targeting 4.0 µg/ml of effect-site concentration (Ceff) of propofol, and the emulsion concentrations were selected for 2.0% instead of 1.0% (FALSE1-2, n = 24), or 1.0% instead of 2.0% (FALSE2-1, n = 24). These wrong TCIs were corrected at 3 min after infusion start. During FALSE1-2, the deficit was filled up while injecting after equilibrium (n = 12), or while overriding (n = 12). During FALSE2-1, the overdose was evacuated while targeting Ceff (n = 12) or targeting plasma concentration (Cp) (n = 12). The gravimetrical measurements of TCI reproduced the Cp and Ceff using simulations. The reproduced Ceff at 3 min (Ceff-3min) and the time to be normalized within ± 5% of target Ceff (T±5%), were compared between the correction methods. Results During the wrong TCI, Ceff-3min was 1.98 ± 0.01 µg/ml in FALSE1-2, and 7.99 ± 0.05 µg/ml in FALSE2-1. In FALSE1-2, T±5% was significantly shorter when corrected while overriding (3.9 ± 0.25 min), than corrected after equilibrium (6.9 ± 0.05 min) (P < 0.001). In FALSE2-1, T±5% was significantly shorter during targeting Cp (3.6 ± 0.04 min) than targeting Ceff (6.7 ± 0.15 min) (P < 0.001). Conclusions The correction methods, based on the pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic characteristics, could effectively and rapidly normalize the wrong TCI following erroneously selections of the emulsion concentration of propofol.

Arrangements of the intravenous parallel infusions with anti-reflux valves decreasing occlusion alarm delay

Background The methods of arrangement of combined intravenous parallel infusions using anti-reflux valve (ARV), with and without anti-syphon valve (ASV) that could decrease occlusion alarm delay were investigated. Methods Occlusion challenge tests were mainly performed as bench experiments of four kinds of multiple parallel infusions (10 ml/h and 50 ml/h infusions), which were connected at the proximal or distal portion of ARV, with or without ASV. Alarm threshold was set to 1000 mmHg. Occlusion alarm delays and the compliances of the infusion systems were compared among groups. Results Without ASV, compared to 10 ml/h infusion alone distal to anti-reflux valve, 50 ml/h infusion distal to anti-reflux valve reduced the mean alarm delay from 416 ± 7 s to 81 ± 3 s (P < 0.001). Compared to 50 ml/h infusion alone, combined 10 ml/h and 50 ml/h infusion distal to ARV prolonged the alarm delay from 81 ± 3 s to 133 ± 6 s (P < 0.001). However, combined infusions distal to ARV with ASV significantly reduced the alarm delay from 133 ± 6 s to 74 ± 5 s (P < 0.001), and also reduced the compliance of the infusion system from 2.31 ± 0.12 to 1.20 ± 0.08 µl/mmHg (P < 0.001). Conclusions The infusion setup of faster infusion rate, lower compliant system using ASV could effectively decrease occlusion alarm delay during multiple intravenous parallel infusions using ARV.

Effect of tracheal lidocaine on intubating conditions during propofol-remifentanil target-controlled infusion without neuromuscular blockade in day-case anesthesia.

Background Lidocaine is a useful intravenous and topical adjunct to facilitate tracheal intubation. We evaluated the effect of tracheal lidocaine on tracheal intubating conditions without neuromuscular blocking agent and hemodynamics during anesthesia induction with propofol and remifentanil target-controlled infusion (TCI). Methods Fifty patients, aged 18-60 years, scheduled for closed reduction of fractured nasal bone were randomly assigned to the control group (n = 25) or lidocaine group (n = 25). Anesthesia was induced with propofol-remifentanil TCI with the effect-site concentration of 5 µg/ml and 5 ng/ml. Four minutes after the start of propofol-remifentanil TCI, 4% lidocaine or saline 3 ml was instilled to larynx and trachea, and intubation was performed 1 min later. Acceptable intubation was defined as excellent or good intubating conditions. Hemodynamic data, induction and recovery profiles were recorded. Results Intubating condition was clinically acceptable in 13 out of 25 (52%) patients in the control group and in 22 out of 25 (88%) in the lidocaine group, and there was a significant difference between the two groups in regard to acceptable intubating conditions (P = 0.005). Mean arterial pressure change over time was significantly different between the two groups. There were no significant differences in the heart rate between the two groups. Conclusions This study demonstrated that laryngotracheal administration of 4% lidocaine could increase the percentage of acceptable conditions for tracheal intubation during propofol and remifentanil anesthesia without neuromuscular blockade.

Accuracy of cardiac output measurements during off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: according to the vessel anastomosis sites

Background During beating heart surgery, the accuracy of cardiac output (CO) measurement techniques may be influenced by several factors. This study was conducted to analyze the clinical agreement among stat CO mode (SCO), continuous CO mode (CCO), arterial pressure waveform-based CO estimation (APCO), and transesophageal Doppler ultrasound technique (UCCO) according to the vessel anastomosis sites. Methods This study was prospectively performed in 25 patients who would be undergoing elective OPCAB. Hemodynamic variables were recorded at the following time points: during left anterior descending (LAD) anastomosis at 1 min and 5 min; during obtuse marginal (OM) anastomosis at 1 min and 5 min: and during right coronary artery (RCA) anastomosis at 1 min and 5 min. The variables measured including the SCO, CCO, APCO, and UCCO. Results CO measurement techniques showed different correlations according to vessel anastomosis site. However, the percent error observed was higher than the value of 30% postulated by the criteria of Critchley and Critchley during all study periods for all CO measurement techniques. Conclusions In the beating heart procedure, SCO, CCO and APCO showed different correlations according to the vessel anastomosis sites and did not agree with UCCO. CO values from the various measurement techniques should be interpreted with caution during OPCAB.