Marcel Vercauteren

Prevention of hypotension by a single 5-mg dose of ephedrine during small-dose spinal anesthesia in prehydrated cesarean delivery patients

To evaluate the effectiveness of prophylactic ephedrine for the prevention of hypotension associated with spinal anesthesia, 50 parturients undergoing cesarean delivery received either ephedrine 5 mg or saline IV in a double-blinded fashion immediately after the induction of spinal anesthesia. Spinal anesthesia was performed with hyperbaric bupivacaine 6.6 mg combined with sufentanil 3.3 &mgr;g as part of a combined spinal-epidural technique. All patients received 1000 mL of lactated Ringer’s solution and 500 mL of hydroxyethylstarch 6% before the spinal injection. Additional ephedrine boluses (5 mg) were administered IV when the systolic blood pressure or heart rate decreased by more than 30% from baseline values, when systolic blood pressure became <100 mm Hg, or when patients complained of nausea or feeling faint. The height of the block was equal in the groups; however, more patients in the placebo group were found to develop hypotension (58% vs 25%, P < 0.05). Only 2 (8%) patients in the ephedrine group developed hypotension with systolic blood pressure values <90 mm Hg, whereas 10 patients (42%) in the saline group experienced hypotension of this severity (P < 0.05). In addition, there was a higher incidence of nausea in the placebo-treated patients. The total amount of ephedrine administered did not differ between groups. These findings suggest that the incidence and severity of hypotension are significantly reduced by the IV administration of a prophylactic dose of 5 mg ephedrine in patients receiving small-dose spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Implications Ephedrine is the drug most often used to correct hypotension during spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery in healthy patients. A single IV dose of 5 mg decreases the occurrence and limits the severity of hypotension in prehydrated subjects receiving a small-dose spinal local anesthetic-opioid combination.

Small-dose hyperbaric versus plain bupivacaine during spinal anesthesia for cesarean section.

In a double-blind, randomized trial, 98 parturients undergoing cesarean section received either hyperbaric or plain bupivacaine 6.6 mg combined with sufentanil 3.3 [micro sign]g as part of a combined spinal-epidural procedure. To prevent hypotension, 1000 mL of lactated Ringers solution, 500 mL of hydroxyethyl starch 6%, and ephedrine 5 mg were administered IV. The height of the block was equal in both groups, but more patients in the plain group had blocks that were either too high or too low (P < 0.01). The number of patients requiring epidural supplementation was equal in both groups. Strict criteria were used to treat hypotension. The overall incidence of systolic blood pressure (<90 mm Hg) was 13%, whereas it was more pronounced in the plain group (21% vs 6% in the hyperbaric group, P < 0.05), which required more ephedrine (P < 0.05) and in which a greater incidence of nausea was noticed (P < 0.05). We conclude that the use of a small dose of intrathecal bupivacaine combined with sufentanil plus our described preloading regimen resulted in a lower incidence of hypotension. Further, we conclude that the use of hyperbaric bupivacaine in this manner provides a more reliable block and a lower incidence of hypotension than plain bupivacaine. Implications: A small dose of hyperbaric bupivacaine 0.5% combined with sufentanil used intrathecally during cesarean section offered a more reliable cephalad spread of the spinal block than the glucose-free combination, which was reflected in a lower incidence of hypotension and nausea. (Anesth Analg 1998;86:989-93)

Levobupivacaine combined with sufentanil and epinephrine for intrathecal labor analgesia: a comparison with racemic bupivacaine.

We performed a randomized, double-blinded study to compare levobupivacaine with racemic bupivacaine for labor analgesia. Eighty term parturients received either levobupivacaine 0.125% or racemic bupivacaine 0.125%, to which was added sufentanil 0.75 &mgr;g/mL and epinephrine 1.25 &mgr;g/mL. As part of a combined spinal-epidural procedure, 2 mL of this mixture was initially injected intrathecally, and the same solutions were subsequently administered epidurally. For both combinations, onset until the first painless contraction was 4 to 5 min. Most patients were pain free during the second contraction. The duration of initial spinal analgesia was 93.5 ± 20 min and 94.7 ± 31 min for levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine, respectively. The duration of analgesia for the first epidural top-up dose was also similar in the two groups. Total local anesthetic requirements during labor were not different. The only major difference observed was the absence of motor impairment in levobupivacaine-treated parturients as compared with the Racemic Bupivacaine group, in which the incidence of a Bromage-1 motor block was 34%. Other side effects and obstetric or neonatal outcomes were not different between groups. Intrathecal levobupivacaine has a similar clinical profile as racemic bupivacaine, but at equal doses it produced less motor block.

Epidural Sufentanil for Postoperative Patient-Controlled Analgesia (PCA) With or Without Background Infusion: A Double-Blind Comparison

To evaluate the usefulness of a concurrent infusion in patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA), 40 patients scheduled for elective cesarean section under a combined spinal-epidural technique were assigned randomly in a double-blind fashion to receive sufentanil by PCEA with a concomitant infusion of either sufentanil or saline. The sufentanil 24-h consumption was significantly (P < 0.001) higher in those patients receiving the opioid-containing infusion (212.7 +/- 9.5 vs 128.4 +/- 10.8 micro gram, SEM). The number of additional demands and the quality of sleep did not differ between the two groups. The degree of sedation was significantly less pronounced in patients treated with incremental sufentanil doses only. The visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores at rest were identical in both groups except at 6 h (2.5 +/- 0.4 vs 3.7 +/- 0.3, in favor of the patients treated with the sufentanil background infusion). We conclude that, except for a lower pain score during the initial hours, a background infusion in PCEA with sufentanil does not offer major advantages in terms of sleep quality or sufentanil consumption. Side effects may be more pronounced owing to increased drug administration. (Anesth Analg 1995;80:76-80)

The sitting versus right lateral position during combined spinal-epidural anesthesia for cesarean delivery: block characteristics and severity of hypotension

In the present study we evaluated whether the sitting position during initiation of small-dose combined spinal-epidural anesthesia (CSE) would induce less hypotension as compared with the lateral position. Sixty women undergoing elective cesarean delivery were randomly assigned to receive a spinal injection consisting of 6.6 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine with sufentanil 3.3 &mgr;g in either the lateral or the sitting position. After securing the epidural catheter, patients were turned to a 15° left lateral supine position. Ephedrine 5 mg IV was administered prophylactically and subsequently in case of nausea/vomiting and/or hypotension, defined as a systolic blood pressure less than 95 mm Hg or a 25% decrease from baseline values. Although the incidence of ephedrine supplementation was not different, females in the sitting group required less ephedrine (P = 0.012) and there were fewer problems with identifying the epidural space (P = 0.01). However, more patients in this group required epidural supplementation (35% versus 3%; P = 0.007). In the lateral group, blocks extended more cephalad than with the sitting position (P = 0.014). Apgar scores did not differ, but umbilical artery pH values were significantly higher in patients of the sitting group (7.31 ± 0.04 versus 7.26 ± 0.03; P = 0.02). We conclude that performing a CSE technique for cesarean delivery in the sitting position was technically easier and induced less severe hypotension.

Management of neuropathic pain after surgical and non-surgical trauma with lidocaine 5% patches: study of 40 consecutive cases.

Abstract Objective: To determine the efficacy of lidocaine 5% patches *Versatis, commercialised by Grünenthal GmbH, Aachen, Germany. in patients with PNCCP. Background: This study focuses on chronic pain states of a neuropathic nature, located at the scar or over a larger area of the skin around the scar. This post-operative/post-traumatic neuropathic chronic cutaneous pain (PNCCP) may be a side-effect of any incision of the skin in the context of a surgical procedure or a traumatic event. Research design and methods: A single-centre, open, non-randomised, prospective study was performed in a university hospital referral centre for patients with chronic neuropathic pain after surgical or non-surgical trauma. Forty consecutive patients with chronic PNCCP, a VAS score ≥5, a LANSS score ≥12, and a stable consumption of pain medication were prospectively evaluated. All patients were given lidocaine 5% patches, following a 12 h on/off schedule. Main outcome measures: Visual analogue scale (VAS) and the Leeds Assessment of Neuropathic Symptoms and Signs (LANSS) scorings were performed pretreatment (day 0), on the 28th day (4 weeks), and after 84 days (12 weeks). Results: The mean pretreatment VAS score (VAS0) was 7.225 ± 1.209, and the mean pretreatment LANSS score (LANSS0) was 18.60 ± 2.610. The number of patients with a VAS score <5 at the latest follow-up (VAS84) was 21 (52.5%). Mean VAS84 was 4.625 ± 1.675. Seventeen patients (42.5%) had a LANSS score <12 at the latest follow-up. Overall mean LANSS84 was 12.85 ± 3.093. Conclusion: Lidocaine 5% patches seem to be an effective treatment of post-surgical and post-traumatic pain. These results should be supported with randomised and placebo-controlled studies with larger sample sizes and longer follow-ups.

Anaesthesiological considerations on tocolytic and uterotonic therapy in obstetrics.

Aim: Significant side effects of tocolytic and uterotonic substances may be of concern to the anaesthesiologist. Recently, new drugs have been introduced having less side effects for both the mother and the neonate.

Sublingual piroxicam for postoperative analgesia: preoperative versus postoperative administration: a randomized, double-blind study.

Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs have been used to obtain preemptive analgesia. We investigated, in this randomized, double-blind study, whether sublingual (s.l.) piroxicam given before was more effective than that given after surgery. Fifty-two patients scheduled for laparoscopic bilateral inguinal hernia repair under general anesthesia were enrolled. Group PRE (25 patients) received 40 mg of piroxicam s.l. 2 h before surgery and a placebo 10 min after surgery. Group POST (27 patients) were treated with a placebo 2 h before surgery and received 40 mg of piroxicam s.l. 10 min after surgery. After an initial dose of 100 mg tramadol IV, patient-controlled analgesia with tramadol was started and recorded. Visual analog scores were assessed in the recovery and at 6, 20, and 30 h postoperatively. Significantly lower visual analog scores were found in group PRE at 6 and 20 h. Significantly smaller cumulative tramadol consumption was observed after 30 h in group PRE. In summary, our findings suggest that preoperative s.l. piroxicam is more effective than the postoperative administration. Because of the low pain scores in both groups, the clinical relevance of these findings is not clear from this study.

Intrathecal labor analgesia with bupivacaine and sufentanil: The effect of adding 2.25 μg epinephrine

Background and Objectives Epinephrine, 25 μg and 200 μg, has been found to prolong the duration of intrathecal labor analgesia when added to an opioid. In our hospital we use the standard epidural mixture, prepared by the pharmacist, containing epinephrine 1:800,000; i.e., 1.25 μg/mL for both spinal and epidural labor analgesia. We wanted to evaluate whether such a low dose, depending on its effect on duration or quality of analgesia, should be maintained or deleted in future mixtures. Methods Forty-five term parturients were randomly assigned to receive 1.8 mL intrathecally of a mixture containing bupivacaine 0.125% and sufentanil 0.75 μg/mL with or without epinephrine 1.25 μg/mL. The quality and duration of analgesia, side effects, and obstetric/neonatal outcome were compared. Results For both combinations, the onset until the first painless contraction was between 5 and 6 minutes. Most patients were pain free during the second uterine contraction. The duration of complete analgesia was 93.2 ± 24.2 minutes in the epinephrine group and 79.3 ± 18.1 minutes for patients not receiving epinephrine (P = .014). The quality of the block, bupivacaine consumption, side effects, and obstetric/neonatal outcome were not different between groups. Conclusions It was concluded that epinephrine in a dose as low as 2.25 μg significantly prolonged the duration of intrathecal analgesia of bupivacaine-sufentanil by 15 minutes. No other differences were noticed. Diluting the commercially available bupivacaine 0.5% with epinephrine 1:200,000 may avoid the need of freshly prepared epinephrine solutions.

Levobupivacaine-sufentanil with or without epinephrine during epidural labor analgesia.

In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study, we investigated whether epinephrine increased the efficacy of levobupivacaine and sufentanil during epidural labor analgesia. Seventy term parturients received an epidural injection of levobupivacaine 0.125% and sufentanil 0.75 &mgr;g/mL with or without 1:800,000 epinephrine. After an initial dose of 10 mL, a patient-controlled analgesia pump was started. Total and hourly drug consumption, pain scores using the visual analog scale, sensory and motor block, duration of labor, vital variables, maternal and neonatal outcome, and side effects were compared. If the parturients experienced insufficient pain relief during the study, even after a rescue dose of 10 mL, they were excluded from further study and received 10 mL of bupivacaine 0.125% and sufentanil 0.75 &mgr;g/mL with 1:800,000 epinephrine. Hourly drug consumption, rescue dosing, and pain scores at 15 min and 20 min were lower in the epinephrine group. The incidence of motor block and duration of the second stage of labor tended to be higher in the epinephrine group and were associated with lower Apgar scores at 1 and 5 min. These findings suggest that the addition of epinephrine intensifies the effects of epidural levobupivacaine and sufentanil but may cause more motor block.