Search

Introduction: Multimodal analgesia is an effective way to control pain and limit opioid use after surgery. The quadratus lumborum block and paravertebral block are two regional anesthesia techniques that leverage multimodal analgesia to improve postoperative pain control. We sought to compare the efficacy of these blocks for pain management following radical cystectomy., Materials and Methods: We performed a retrospective review of radical cystectomy patients who received bilateral continuous paravertebral blocks (n = 125) or bilateral single shot quadratus lumborum blocks (n = 50) between 2014-2016. The primary outcome was postoperative opiate consumption on day 0. Secondary outcomes included self-reported pain scores and hospital length of stay., Results: Quadratus lumborum block patients had similar opioid use on postoperative day 0 compared with paravertebral block patients (29 mg versus 30 mg, p = 0.90). Pain scores on postoperative day 0 were similar between quadratus lumborum block and paravertebral block groups (4.0 versus 3.8, p = 0.72); however, the paravertebral block group had lower pain scores on days 1-3 compared with the quadratus lumborum block group (all p < 0.05). Hospital length of stay was similar between groups (6.6 days versus 6.2 days, p = 0.41)., Conclusions: There were no differences in opioid consumption among patients receiving bilateral single shot quadratus lumborum blocks and bilateral continuous paravertebral blocks after radical cystectomy. These data suggest that the quadratus lumborum block is a viable alternative for delivering multimodal analgesia in cystectomy patients.

Unlabelled: Minidose lidocaine-fentanyl spinal anesthesia (SAB(MLF)) is a safe, effective, and efficient anesthetic for ambulatory surgery. Unfortunately, it has a frequent incidence of pruritus and a substantial incidence of nausea and vomiting. Nalbuphine is effective in treating or preventing pruritus after intrathecal or epidural morphine but may or may not have a beneficial effect on nausea and vomiting. Droperidol has demonstrated antiemetic efficacy with neuraxial opiates. In this study, we examined the prophylactic use of nalbuphine alone compared with nalbuphine with droperidol after SAB(MLF). One-hundred-twenty-four patients having outpatient knee arthroscopy under SAB(MLF) with 20 mg of lidocaine 0.5% and 20 micro g of fentanyl were randomized to receive IV at the end of surgery either 4 mg of nalbuphine (Group N) or droperidol 0.625 mg plus nalbuphine 4 mg (Group ND). The incidences of early (before discharge) and late onset nausea were, respectively, 18% versus 5% and 32% versus 13%. The postoperative incidences of pruritus were 61% versus 40%, whereas 19% of patients in Group N compared with 2% of patients in Group ND requested treatment for this. Group ND had lower pain scores and had a longer delay until first use of analgesic. There were no differences in average times to discharge. The only side effect of the medications was an increased drowsiness in Group ND. In conclusion, as prophylactic medication for use in conjunction with SAB(MLF), the addition of droperidol 0.625 mg to nalbuphine 4 mg was superior to nalbuphine alone. The combination provided for reduced postoperative nausea, pruritus, and pain-benefits that persisted after discharge home. The combination also avoided isolated cases of extreme delay in discharge., Implications: Droperidol in combination with nalbuphine enhances analgesia and is more effective than nalbuphine alone in preventing pruritus, nausea, and vomiting after minidose lidocaine-fentanyl spinal anesthesia.

Unlabelled: Traditional methods of spinal anesthesia have proven problematic in the outpatient setting. Minidose lidocaine-fentanyl spinal anesthesia (SAB(MLF)) may be the adaptation necessary to reestablish spinal anesthesia in this venue. One hundred patients scheduled for outpatient knee arthroscopy were randomized to receive either local anesthesia plus a titrated IV propofol infusion (LA/PI) or SAB(MLF) using 20 mg lidocaine 0.5% + 20 microg fentanyl. Patients received midazolam 0.02-0.03 mg/kg IV and fentanyl 0.75-1.0 microg/kg IV upon arrival in the operating room before lumbar puncture or propofol infusion. The propofol infusion was begun at 50-75 microg. kg(-)(1). min(-)(1) and titrated to maintain patient comfort. Boluses (200-400 microg/kg) were given as needed. Local anesthesia included 30 mL lidocaine 1% with epinephrine 1:200,000 intraarticularly plus 10 mL at the portal sites. Three patients (6%) in the LA/PI group versus none in the SAB(MLF) group required general anesthesia. Airway support was required in 54% of the LA/PI patients and in none of the SAB(MLF) patients. Total operating room time (43 vs 45 min), time to home readiness (43 vs 45 min), actual discharge times (73.5 min in both groups), and the incidence of discharge >90 min (22% vs 24%) were the same for both LA/PI and SAB(MLF) groups. LA/PI and SAB(MLF) groups differed in terms of postoperative pruritus (8% vs 68%), pain (44% vs 20%), nausea (8% vs 22%), and ability to void before discharge (56% vs 32%). One patient in each group had mild difficulty initiating voiding at home, but neither required medical attention. In both groups, 90% of patients were either "satisfied" or "very satisfied" with their anesthetic. The two techniques provided comparable patient satisfaction and efficiencies both intraoperatively and in postoperative recovery and discharge. The efficiencies of these techniques were not dependent on special provisions of the physical plant or the practice model., Implications: Both local anesthesia supplemented by a titrated IV propofol infusion and minidose lidocaine-fentanyl spinal anesthesia for outpatient knee arthroscopy provide high patient satisfaction with equally rapid recovery and discharge.

The syndrome of transient neurologic symptoms (TNS) after spinal lidocaine has been presumed to be a manifestation of local anesthetic neurotoxicity. Although TNS is not associated with either lidocaine concentration or dose, its incidence has never been examined with very small doses of spinal lidocaine. One hundred ten adult ASA physical status I and II patients presenting for arthroscopic surgery of the knee were randomly assigned to receive spinal anesthesia with either 1% hypobaric lidocaine 50 mg (Group L50) or 1% hypobaric lidocaine 20 mg + 25 microg fentanyl (Group L20/F25). Hemodynamic data, block height and regression, and time to first micturition and discharge were recorded. Follow-up phone calls were made by a blinded researcher at 48-72 h using a standardized questionnaire. Both groups had a median peak cephalad block level of T10. Lidocaine 50 mg was associated with a greater decrease in systolic blood pressure and a greater need for ephedrine. Time until block regression to the S2 dermatome (80 vs. 110 min) and outpatient time to void (130 vs 162 min) and discharge (145 vs. 180 min) were faster in the L20/F25 group. Complaints of TNS were found in 32.7% of the patients in the L50 group and in 3.6% of the patients in the L20/F25 group. We conclude that spinal anesthesia with lidocaine 20 mg + fentanyl 25 microg provided adequate anesthesia with greater hemodynamic stability and faster recovery than spinal anesthesia with lidocaine 50 mg. The incidence of TNS after spinal lidocaine 20 mg + fentanyl 25 microg was significantly less than that after spinal lidocaine 50 mg.

Study Objective: To examine the influence of spinal anesthesia on postoperative pain and postoperative opioid requirements., Design: Prospective randomized study., Setting: Bnai-Zion Medical Center, Haifa, Israel-a government hospital., Measurements and Main Results: 30 ASA physical status I and II unpremedicated women undergoing elective total abdominal hysterectomy were randomly allocated into two groups of 15 patients each using a sealed envelope technique. Patients in Group 1 were given a subarachnoid injection of 12 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine and after 10 minutes general anesthesia was induced. Patients in Group 2 received only general anesthesia. Anesthesia was induced with midazolam and maintained with oxygen, N2O, isoflurane, and pancuronium. No opioids were given intraoperatively. Postoperatively patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine was initiated in both groups (1 mg x mL(-1), bolus dose 1 mg, lockout interval 10 minutes, and background infusion 1 mg x mL(-1)) at patient first request for analgesic. Pain was assessed over 24 hours by cumulative morphine dose and visual analog score (VAS). Postoperative PCA morphine consumption at 2, 6, and 24 hours following patient first request for analgesic for Groups 1 and 2 were: 3.1 +/- 1 mg versus 7.2 +/- 3 mg (p = 0.04), 13.4 +/- 2 mg versus 17.2 +/- 4 mg (p = 0.03) and 35.9 +/- 8 mg versus 47.7 +/- 8 mg in Group 2 (p = 0.04). VAS scores at 4, 6, 12, and 24 hours postoperatively were not significantly different between the two groups., Conclusions: Preoperative neural blockade may reduce postoperative analgesic requirements.

Background and Objectives: The hypotension following spinal anesthesia remains commonplace in cesarean delivery. Intrathecal opioids are synergistic with local anesthetics and intensify sensory block without increasing sympathetic block. The combination makes it possible to achieve spinal anesthesia with otherwise inadequate doses of local anesthetic. We hypothesized that this phenomenon could be used to provide spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery while incurring less frequent hypotension., Methods: Thirty-two women scheduled for cesarean delivery were divided into 2 groups of patients who received a spinal injection of either 10 mg of isobaric (plain) bupivacaine 0.5% or 5 mg of isobaric bupivacaine with 25 microg fentanyl added. Each measurement of a systolic blood pressure less than 95 mm Hg or a decrease in systolic pressure of greater than 25% from baseline was considered as hypotension and treated with a bolus of 5 to 10 mg of intravenous ephedrine., Results: Spinal block provided surgical anesthesia in all patients. Peak sensory level was higher (T3 v T4. 5) and motor block more intense in the plain bupivacaine group. The plain bupivacaine patients were more likely to require treatment for hypotension (94% v 31%) and had more persistent hypotension (4.8 v 0.6 hypotensive measurements per patient) than patients in the minidose bupivacaine-fentanyl group. Mean ephedrine requirements were 23.8 mg and 2.8 mg, respectively, for the 2 groups. Patients in the plain bupivacaine group also complained of nausea more frequently than patients in the minidose bupivacaine-fentanyl group (69% v 31%)., Conclusions: Bupivacaine 5 mg + fentanyl 25 microg provided spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery with less hypotension, vasopressor requirements, and nausea than spinal anesthesia with 10 mg bupivacaine.

Background: Spinal anesthesia for surgical repair of hip fracture in the elderly is associated with a high incidence of hypotension. The synergism between intrathecal opioids and local anesthetics may make it possible to achieve reliable spinal anesthesia with minimal hypotension using a minidose of local anesthetic., Methods: Twenty patients aged > or = 70 yr undergoing surgical repair of hip fracture were randomized into two groups of 10 patients each. Group A received a spinal anesthetic of bupivacaine 4 mg plus fentanyl 20 microg, and group B received 10 mg bupivacaine. Hypotension was defined as a systolic pressure of < 90 mmHg or a 25% decrease in mean arterial pressure from baseline. Hypotension was treated with intravenous ephedrine boluses 5-10 mg up to a maximum 50 mg, and thereafter by phenylephrine boluses of 100-200 microg., Results: All patients had satisfactory anesthesia. One of 10 patients in group A required ephedrine, a single dose of 5 mg. Nine of 10 patients in group B required vasopressor support of blood pressure. Group B patients required an average of 35 mg ephedrine, and two patients required phenylephrine. The lowest recorded systolic, diastolic, and mean blood pressures as fractions of the baseline pressures were, respectively, 81%, 84%, and 85% versus 64%, 69%, and 64% for group A versus group B., Conclusions: A "minidose" of 4 mg bupivacaine in combination with 20 microg fentanyl provides spinal anesthesia for surgical repair of hip fracture in the elderly. The minidose combination caused dramatically less hypotension than 10 mg bupivacaine and nearly eliminated the need for vasopressor support of blood pressure.

Unlabelled: Recent concern regarding lidocaine neurotoxicity has prompted efforts to find alternatives to lidocaine spinal anesthesia. Small-dose dilute bupivacaine spinal anesthesia yields a comparably rapid recovery profile but may provide insufficient anesthesia. By exploiting the synergism between intrathecal opioids and local anesthetics, it may be possible to augment the spinal anesthesia without prolonging recovery. Fifty patients undergoing ambulatory surgical arthroscopy were randomized into two groups receiving spinal anesthesia with 3 ml 0.17% bupivacaine in 2.66% dextrose without (Group I) or with (Group II) the addition of 10 microg fentanyl. Median block levels reached T7 and T8, respectively (P = not significant [NS]). Mean times to two-segment regression, S2 regression, time out of bed, time to urination, and time to discharge were 53 vs 67 min (P < 0.01), 120 vs 146 min (P < 0.05), 146 vs 163 min (P = NS), 169 vs 177 min (P = NS), and 187 vs 195 min (P = NS) respectively. Motor blockade was similar between groups, but sensory blockade was significantly more intense in Group II (P < 0.01). Six of 25 blocks failed in Group I, whereas none failed in Group II. The addition of 10 microg fentanyl to spinal anesthesia with dilute small-dose bupivacaine intensifies and increases the duration of sensory blockade without increasing the intensity of motor blockade or prolonging recovery to micturition or street fitness., Implications: Concerns about the neurotoxicity of lidocaine have prompted efforts to find alternatives to lidocaine spinal anesthesia. We studied 50 patients undergoing ambulatory surgical arthroscopy and found that although small-dose bupivacaine alone is inadequate for this procedure, the addition of fentanyl makes it reliable.

The safety of lidocaine spinal anesthesia has recently been called into question by reports of both permanent and transient neurologic toxicity. This study explored the possibility of adapting the longer acting spinal bupivacaine to ambulatory surgery. Sixty patients presenting for ambulatory arthroscopy were randomized to four groups receiving the following spinal anesthetics: Group I (15 mg bupivacaine), 3 mL of 0.5% spinal bupivacaine in 8% dextrose; Group II (10 mg bupivacaine), 2 mL of the 0.5% spinal bupivacaine+1 mL saline; Group III (7.5 mg bupivacaine), 1.5 mL of the 0.5% spinal bupivacaine%1.5 mL saline; Group IV (5 mg bupivacaine), 1 mL of the 0.5% spinal bupivacaine+2 mL saline. Maximum block height was T-5 in Group I versus T-8 in the other groups. Onset times to peak block were similar in all groups and averaged 14 min. Time to two-segment regression, complete regression, micturition, and discharge were significantly reduced from Group I to Group II and from Group II to Group III. Reductions in times between Groups III and IV did not achieve statistical significance. Times from placement of the spinal block until discharge were 471 +/- 35, 260 +/- 15,202 +/- 14, and 181 +/- 8 min, respectively, for the four groups. The intensity of motor block decreased significantly from group to group, such that 13 of the 15 patients in Group IV failed to achieve Bromage level 2 or 3. The intensity of sensory block also decreased from group to group with four patients in Group IV having pain intraoperatively that required further treatment. Therefore, Group III provided the optimum combination of adequate depth of anesthesia and rapid recovery. The results of this study indicate that spinal anesthesia with 7.5 mg of 0.5% bupivacaine in 8% dextrose diluted with an equal volume of saline provides an acceptable spinal anesthetic for ambulatory arthroscopy with a recovery profile appropriate to the ambulatory setting.

We tested whether a high spinal anesthesia may alter the susceptibility to the soporific effects of sedatives. Twenty ASA grade I and II women undergoing elective abdominal hysterectomy were randomly allocated into two groups. Patients in Group I were given a subarachnoid injection of 12 mg hyperbaric tetracaine and those patients who after 10 min had a sensory level of T4-6 (10 patients) were included in the study. Ten additional patients (Group II) received no spinal injection. Induction of anesthesia was performed on all patients by injecting 1 mg of midazolam intravenously every 30 s until the patient failed to respond to three repeated commands to squeeze the anesthetist's hand. This was considered the induction dose or end-point for the purposes of the study. Patients were then given a neuromuscular blocker, ventilated with oxygen, nitrous oxide, and a volatile anesthetic, tracheally intubated, and maintained under general anesthesia for the remainder of the operation. The dose of midazolam administered to the point of patient failure to respond to command was 7.6 +/- 0.72 mg SEM for Group I and 14.7 +/- 1.16 mg SEM for Group II, (P < 0.0001). These results support the conclusion that patients having a high spinal anesthetic are more sensitive to the sedative effects of midazolam.