Search

Randomised assessment of new laparoscopic surgical techniques is difficult. Surgeons need time to become experienced with the methods and tend, when they have experience, to favour one or other approach. We have carried out a prospective randomised comparison of laparoscopic and conventional appendicectomy done by surgeons of comparable experience in patients with suspected acute appendicitis. Postoperative management decisions were made by surgeons other than the operating surgeon. 140 patients were randomly assigned to open (OA) or laparoscopic (LA) appendicectomy (70 each). The age, sex ratio, duration of symptoms, and proportion of patients with histologically confirmed appendicitis was similar in the two groups. Operating time was longer for LA than for OA (mean 70.3 [SD 21.9] vs 46.5 [25.9] min; p < 0.001). There were no major intraoperative complications in either group. 14 (20%) patients in the LA group required conversion to an open operation. No significant differences between the groups were found postoperatively for pain score, analgesic requirement, time to reintroduction of diet, or hospital stay. 46 LA patients and 42 OA patients attended follow-up 3 weeks after surgery. Similar proportions had returned to work (36 [79%] vs 31 [74%]). The frequency of wound complications and wound pain after leaving hospital was lower after LA but not significantly so. We conclude that the postoperative course after LA and conventional OA does not differ significantly.

Patients with burns often suffer severe pain, especially during dressing of wounds, but there are no established alternatives to potent opiate analgesics, with their various side-effects. Intravenous lignocaine infusion strikingly reduced self-assessed pain scores in 7 patients during the first 3 days after second-degree burns, without need for supplementary opiate analgesia.

The intermittent intravenous administration of narcotic analgesics had advantages over intramuscular administration, but is often impracticable. The design of a prototype apparatus is described, from which analgesic, pethidine, can be self-administered intravenously during labour. The apparatus consists of a syringe pump and control system from which the patient can demand an increment of analgesic. The minimum interval between increments and the dose of the increment are preset. A demand for analgesia is only successful when the patient passes a reaction-time test, subsequently modified. The apparatus has been used by forty-two mothers in labour. The mean total dose self-administered (2.2 mg/kg) was well within the prescribed limits, suggesting that mothers regulated their demand. The apparatus appears acceptable and safe in labour. The apparatus will probably be of value in comparative studies of analgesics.

The concomitant administration of pethidine (meperidine) and phenobarbitone results in enhanced sedation in a patient previously tolerant of pethidine. A complete analysis of pethidine kinetics and metabolism was performed in this patient, in four additional patients undergoing similar treatment but not receiving phenobarbitone, and in a volunteer after placebo and phentobarbitone pretreatment. The results indicate that phentobarbitone enhances the production of the toxic metabolite norpethidine by increasing N-demethylation.

The analgesic efficacy and side-effects of a single parenteral dose of metkephamid acetate 70 mg were compared with those of pethidine (meperidine) hydrochloride 100 mg and placebo in a double-blind, randomised, controlled clinical trial. 30 out of 32 postoperative patients completed the study--10 in the metkephamid group, 11 in the pethidine group, and 9 in the placebo group. The time-effect curves of summated pain measures and analyses of derived measures all indicated that the analgesic activity of metkephamid 70 mg was significantly greater than that of placebo and not less than that of pethidine 100 mg. The metkephamid group had a greater incidence of side-effects than the other two treatment groups. Some side-effects, such as sensations of heaviness of the extremities and nasal congestion, were peculiar to metkephamid but not distressing.