Search

BACKGROUND: There is still controversy regarding the optimal strategy for managing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in high-risk surgical populations. Although acustimulation at the P6 acupoint has been demonstrated to be effective in preventing PONV, the effect of this nonpharmacologic therapy on the patient’s recovery with respect to resumption of normal activities of daily living has not been previously assessed when it is used as part of a multimodal antiemetic regimen. Therefore, we designed this randomized, sham-controlled, and double-blind study to assess the efficacy of a disposable acupressure device (Pressure Right�; Pressure Point Inc., Grand Rapids, MI) on the incidence of emetic episodes and quality of recovery when used in combination with ondansetron and dexamethasone for antiemetic prophylaxis. METHODS: One hundred ASA physical status I and II patients undergoing major laparoscopic procedures were randomly assigned to either a control group (n 50) receiving a “sham” acustimulation device or an acupressure group (n 50) receiving a disposable Pressure Right device placed bilaterally at the P6 point 30 to 60 minutes before induction of anesthesia. All patients received a standardized general anesthetic. A combination of ondansetron, 4 mg IV, and dexamethasone, 4 mg IV, was administered during surgery for antiemetic prophylaxis in both study groups. The incidence of nausea and vomiting and the need for “rescue” antiemetic therapy were assessed at specific time intervals for up to 72 hours after surgery. The recovery profiles and quality of recovery questionnaires were evaluated at 48 hours and 72 hours after surgery. Patient satisfaction with the management of their PONV was assessed at the end of the 72-hour study period. RESULTS: The 2 study groups did not differ in their demographic characteristics or risk factors for PONV. The incidence of vomiting at 24 hours was significantly decreased in the acupressure group (10% vs 26%, P 0.04, 95% confidence interval for absolute risk reduction 1%–31%). The overall incidence of vomiting from 0 to 72 hours after surgery was also significantly decreased from 30% to 12% in the acupressure group (P 0.03, 95% confidence interval 2%–33%). Furthermore, adjunctive use of the acupressure device seemed to enhance patient satisfaction with their PONV management and quality of recovery at 48 hours after surgery. However, the recovery times to hospital discharge, resumption of normal physical activities, and return to work did not differ significantly between the 2 study groups. CONCLUSION: Use of the Pressure Right acupressure device in combination with antiemetic drugs provided a reduction in the incidence of vomiting from 0 to 72 hours after surgery with an associated improvement in patient satisfaction with their PONV management. However, recovery and outcome variables failed to demonstrate any improvement with the addition of the acupressure device. (Anesth Analg 2012;X:●●●–●●●)

BACKGROUND: Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs have become increasingly popular as part of multimodal analgesic regimens for pain management in the ambulatory setting. We designed this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effect of postoperative administration of either a nonselective nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drug (ibuprofen) or the cyclooxygenase-2 selective inhibitor (celecoxib when administered as part of a multimodal analgesic regimen) on the severity of pain, the need for rescue analgesics, and clinically relevant patient outcomes after ambulatory surgery. The primary end point was the time to resumption of normal activities of daily living. METHODS: One hundred eighty patients undergoing outpatient surgery were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: group 1 (control) received either 2 placebo capsules (matching celecoxib) or 1 placebo tablet (matching ibuprofen) in the recovery room and 1 placebo tablet at bedtime on the day of surgery, followed by 1 placebo capsule or tablet 3 times a day for 3 days after discharge; group 2 (celecoxib) received celecoxib 400 mg (2 capsules) orally in the recovery room and 1 placebo capsule and tablet at bedtime on the day of surgery, followed by celecoxib 200 mg (1 capsule) twice a day + placebo capsule every day at bedtime for 3 days after surgery; or group 3 (ibuprofen) received ibuprofen 400 mg (1 tablet) orally in the recovery room and 400 mg orally at bedtime on the day of surgery, followed by 400 mg orally 3 times a day for 3 days after surgery. Recovery times, postoperative pain scores, and the need for rescue analgesics were recorded before discharge. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 24 hours, 48 hours, 72 hours, 7 days, and 30 days after surgery to assess postdischarge pain, analgesic requirements, resumption of normal activities, opioid-related side effects, as well as quality of recovery and patient satisfaction with their postoperative pain management using a 5-point verbal rating scale. RESULTS: The 3 groups did not differ with respect to their demographic characteristics. Compared with the placebo treatment, both celecoxib and ibuprofen significantly decreased the need for rescue analgesic medication after discharge (P < 0.05). The effect sizes (celecoxib and ibuprofen versus control group) were 0.73 to 1 and 0.3 to 0.8, respectively. Quality of recovery scores and patient satisfaction with their postoperative pain management were also improved in the celecoxib and ibuprofen groups compared with the control group (P < 0.05, effect size [vs control group] = 0.67). The incidence of postoperative constipation was significantly higher in the control group (28%) compared with the celecoxib (5%) and ibuprofen (7%) groups, respectively (P < 0.05). Both active treatments were well tolerated in the postdischarge period. However, the time to resumption of normal activities of daily living was similar among the 3 groups. CONCLUSIONS: Both ibuprofen (1200 mg/d) and celecoxib (400 mg/d) significantly decreased the need for rescue analgesic medication in the early postdischarge period, leading to an improvement in the quality of recovery and patient satisfaction with their pain management after outpatient surgery.

UNLABELLED Non-opioid analgesics have become increasingly popular as part of a multimodal regimen for pain management in the ambulatory setting. We designed this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study to evaluate the effect of perioperative administration of the cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor rofecoxib on patient outcome after inguinal herniorrhaphy procedures. Sixty consenting outpatients undergoing elective hernia repair surgery were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: control (vitamin C, 500 mg) or rofecoxib (rofecoxib, 50 mg). The first oral dose of the study medication was administered 30-40 min before entering the operating room, and a second dose of the same medication was given on the morning of the first postoperative day. Recovery times, postoperative pain scores, the need for "rescue" analgesics, and side effects were recorded at 1- to 10-min intervals before discharge from the recovery room. Follow-up evaluations were performed at 36 h, 7 days, and 14 days after surgery to assess postdischarge pain, analgesic requirements, resumption of normal activities, as well as patient satisfaction with their postoperative pain management. Rofecoxib significantly decreased the early recovery times, leading to an earlier discharge home after surgery (88 +/- 30 vs 126 +/- 44 min, P < 0.05). When compared with the control group, the patients' median [range] quality of recovery score was also significantly higher in the rofecoxib group (18 [14-18] vs 16 [13-18], P < 0.05). In the predischarge period, a significantly larger percentage of patients required rescue pain medications in the control group (67% vs 37% in the rofecoxib group, P < 0.05). At the 36-h follow-up assessment, rofecoxib-treated patients reported significantly reduced oral analgesic requirements (0 [0-20] vs 9 [1-33] pills, P < 0.05) and lower maximal pain scores, resulting in improved patient satisfaction with their postoperative pain management (3 [1-4] vs 2 [0-3], P < 0.05). However, there were no differences in the times required to resume their activities of daily living. In conclusion, perioperative rofecoxib, 50 mg per os, significantly decreased postoperative pain and the need for analgesic rescue medication, leading to a faster and improved quality of recovery after outpatient hernia surgery. However, perioperative use of rofecoxib failed to improve recovery end points in the postdischarge period. IMPLICATIONS Rofecoxib (50 mg per os), given before and after surgery, was effective in improving postoperative pain management, as well as the speed and quality of recovery after outpatient inguinal herniorrhaphy. However, it failed to accelerate the postdischarge resumption of normal activities of daily living.

There is controversy regarding the optimal technique for maintaining hemodynamic stability during anesthesia. We designed this prospective, randomized, double-blinded study to test the hypothesis that the technique used for maintaining hemodynamic stability during general anesthesia can influence recovery after ambulatory surgery. Forty-five healthy consenting women undergoing gynecologic laparoscopy procedures were randomly assigned to 1 of 3 treatment groups: Group 1 (control, n = 15) received normal saline 5 mL and 1 mL, followed by a saline infusion at a rate of 0.005 mL x kg(-1) x min(-1); Group 2 (n = 15) received esmolol 50 mg and saline 1 mL, followed by an esmolol infusion 5 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1); and Group 3 (n = 15) received esmolol 50 mg and nicardipine 1 mg, followed by an esmolol infusion 5 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1). The study drugs were administered after the induction of anesthesia with fentanyl 1.5 microg/kg, and propofol 2 mg/kg I.V. Tracheal intubation was facilitated with vecuronium 0.12 mg/kg I.V. Anesthesia was initially maintained with desflurane 2% end-tidal and N(2)O 67% in oxygen in all 3 groups. During surgery, the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) was maintained within +/-15% of the baseline value by varying the study drug infusion rate and the inspired concentration of desflurane. In addition to MAP and heart rate values, electroencephalogram bispectral index values were recorded throughout the perioperative period. Recovery times and postoperative side effects were assessed. Compared with the control group, adjunctive use of esmolol and nicardipine attenuated the increase in heart rate (in Group 2) and MAP (in Group 3) after tracheal intubation. Furthermore, the use of an esmolol infusion as an adjunct to desflurane to control the acute autonomic responses during the maintenance period significantly decreased emergence times (4 +/- 2 versus 7 +/- 4 min), decreased the need for postoperative opioid analgesics (43% versus 80%), and reduced the time to discharge (209 +/- 89 versus 269 +/- 100 min). We conclude that the adjunctive use of esmolol alone or in combination with nicardipine during the induction of anesthesia reduced the hemodynamic response to tracheal intubation. Furthermore, use of an esmolol infusion as an adjuvant to desflurane-N(2)O anesthesia for controlling the acute hemodynamic responses during the maintenance period improved the recovery profile after outpatient laparoscopic surgery.The adjunctive use of the beta-adrenergic blocker esmolol to control the acute sympathetic responses during desflurane-based anesthesia provided a more rapid awakening from anesthesia, reduced the postoperative opioid analgesic requirement, and decreased the time to discharge home after ambulatory laparoscopic surgery.

Background Office-based surgery has become increasingly popular because of its cost-saving potential. However, the occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) can delay patient discharge. Prophylaxis using a combination of antiemetic drugs has been suggested as an effective strategy for minimizing PONV. The authors designed this randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled study to assess the efficacy of ondansetron and dolasetron when administered in combination with droperidol and dexamethasone for routine antiemetic prophylaxis against PONV in the office-based surgery setting. Methods Following institutional review board approval, 135 consenting outpatients with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-III who were undergoing superficial surgical procedures lasting 20-40 min were randomly assigned to one of three antiemetic treatment groups. Propofol was administered for induction of anesthesia, followed by 2-4% desflurane with 67% nitrous oxide in oxygen. Desflurane was subsequently adjusted to maintain a clinically adequate depth of anesthesia with an electroencephalographic Bispectral Index value between 50 and 60. All patients received 0.625 mg intravenous droperidol and 4 mg intravenous dexamethasone after induction of anesthesia. The study medication, containing normal saline (control), 12.5 mg intravenous dolasetron, or 4 mg intravenous ondansetron, was administered prior to the end of surgery. All patients received local anesthetics at the incisional site and 30 mg intravenous ketolorac to minimize postoperative pain. Recovery profiles, incidence of PONV, requirement for rescue antiemetic drugs, complete response rates, and patient satisfaction were assessed. Results The recovery times to patient orientation, oral intake, ambulation, and actual discharge did not differ among the three groups. The incidence of PONV, nausea scores, and requirement for rescue antiemetics were also similar in all three groups during the 24-h study period. In addition, the complete response rates to the prophylactic antiemetics (96-98%) and percentages of very satisfied patients (93-98%) were equally high in all three groups. However, the antiemetic drug acquisition costs were US $2.50, $15.50, and $18.50 in the control, dolasetron, and ondansetron groups, respectively. Conclusion The addition of dolasetron (12.5 mg) or ondansetron (4 mg) failed to improve the antiemetic efficacy of droperidol (0.625 mg intravenous) and dexamethasone (4 mg intravenous) when they were used for routine prophylaxis in the office-based surgery setting.

Background The analgesic efficacy and side effect profile of intravenous parecoxib, a novel cyclooxygenase type-2 (COX-2) inhibitor, was assessed in a double-blinded, placebo-controlled study involving patients undergoing major gynecologic surgical procedures. Methods After Institutional Review Board approval, 60 consenting women, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I-III, undergoing lower abdominal surgery with a standardized general anesthetic technique were randomly assigned to receive one of three study medications: group 1 (control) received normal saline; group 2 received intravenous parecoxib, 20 mg; and group 3 received intravenous parecoxib, 40 mg. The initial dose of study medication was administered when the patient first requested pain medication after surgery. All patients had access to patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with intravenous morphine, 1 or 2 mg, with a 6-min lockout period. Subsequent doses of the same study medication were administered at 12-h and 24-h intervals after the initial dose. The postoperative opioid analgesic requirement (PCA morphine usage), pain scores, pain relief scores, side effects, and need for supplemental medications (e.g., antiemetics, antipruritics, laxatives) were recorded. Results Compared with saline, intravenous parecoxib, 20 mg and 40 mg every 12 h, significantly decreased the PCA morphine usage during the first 6 h postoperatively (group 1, 25 +/- 13 mg; group 2, 16 +/- 11 mg; group 3, 17 +/- 10 mg) and at 12 h (group 1, 34 +/- 18 mg; group 2, 24 +/- 14 mg; group 3, 23 +/- 13 mg) and 24 h (group 1, 51 +/- 27 mg; group 2, 34 +/- 20 mg; group 3, 33 +/- 21 mg) after surgery. However, there were no significant differences in the patients' global evaluation of the study medications at 12 h and 24 h between those who received intravenous parecoxib (20 or 40 mg) and saline. Moreover, the postoperative pain scores and side effect profiles were similar in the three treatment groups. Conclusion Intravenous parecoxib (20 or 40 mg) was effective in decreasing the PCA opioid requirement after lower abdominal surgical procedures. However, it failed to improve pain management or reduce opioid-related side effects in the early postoperative period.

We evaluated the cognitive recovery profiles in elderly patients after general anesthesia with desflurane or sevoflurane. After IRB approval, 70 ASA physical status I-III consenting elderly patients (or =65 yr old) undergoing total knee or hip replacement procedures were randomly assigned to one of two general anesthetic groups. Propofol and fentanyl were administered for induction of anesthesia, followed by either desflurane 2%-4% or sevoflurane 1%-1.5% with nitrous oxide 65% in oxygen. The desflurane (2.5 +/- 0.6 MAC. h) and sevoflurane (2.7 +/- 0.5 MAC. h) concentrations were adjusted to maintain comparable depths of hypnosis using the electroencephalogram bispectral index monitor. The Mini-Mental State (MMS) test was used to assess cognitive function preoperatively and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 24-h intervals. The use of desflurane was associated with a more rapid emergence from anesthesia (6.3 +/- 2.4 min versus 8.0 +/- 2.8 min) and a shorter length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (213 +/- 66 min versus 241 +/- 87 min). However, there were no significant differences between the Desflurane and the Sevoflurane groups when the MMS scores were compared preoperatively, and postoperatively at 1, 3, 6, and 24 h. Compared with the preoperative (baseline) MMS scores, the values were significantly decreased at 1 h postoperatively (27.8 +/- 1.7 versus 29.5 +/- 0.5 in the Desflurane group, and 27.4 +/- 1.7 versus 29.2 +/- 1.0 in the Sevoflurane group, respectively). However, the MMS scores returned to preoperative baseline levels within 6 h after surgery. At 1 h and 3 h after surgery, 51% and 11% (versus 57% and 9%) of patients in the Desflurane (versus Sevoflurane) Group experienced cognitive impairment. In conclusion, desflurane is associated with a faster early recovery than sevoflurane after general anesthesia in elderly patients. However, recovery of cognitive function was similar after desflurane and sevoflurane-based anesthesia.Desflurane was associated with a faster early recovery than sevoflurane after general anesthesia in elderly patients. However, recovery of cognitive function was similar with both volatile anesthetics.

UNLABELLED Dolasetron (12.5 mg IV) is effective in both preventing and treating postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after ambulatory surgery. However, the optimal timing of dolasetron administration and its effect on the patient's quality of life after discharge have not been established. One-hundred-five healthy, consenting women undergoing gynecologic laparoscopic procedures with a standardized general anesthetic technique were enrolled in this randomized, double-blinded study. Group 1 received dolasetron 12.5 mg IV 10-15 min before the induction of anesthesia; Group 2 received dolasetron 12.5 mg IV at the end of the laparoscopy (79 +/- 48 min later than Group 1); and Group 3 received dolasetron 12.5 mg IV at the end of anesthesia (93 +/- 52 min later than Group 1). The incidence of PONV, complete responses (defined as no emetic episodes and no rescue medication within the 24-h period after anesthesia), recovery profiles, and patient satisfaction were recorded. In the postanesthesia care unit and during the 24-h follow-up period, the incidence of nausea and vomiting, as well as the need for rescue antiemetics, did not differ significantly among the three groups. The percentages of patients with complete responses to the study drug within the first postoperative 24 h were also similar in all three groups (55%, 59%, and 52% for Groups 1, 2, and 3, respectively). The early and intermediate recovery profiles, including resumption of a normal diet and patient satisfaction with the control of PONV, were not different among the three study groups. Dolasetron 12.5 mg IV administered before the induction of anesthesia is as effective as dolasetron given at the end of laparoscopy or at the end of anesthesia in preventing PONV after outpatient laparoscopy. IMPLICATIONS The timing of dolasetron administration appears to have little effect on its efficacy when administered as a prophylactic antiemetic in the ambulatory setting.

IMPLICATIONS Compared to propofol, maintenance of anesthesia with desflurane provided significantly better intraoperative conditions during office-based surgery. In addition, desflurane with routine antiemetic prophylaxis was associated with a faster early recovery and similar incidence of postoperative side effects.

Background Office-based surgery is becoming increasingly popular because of its cost-saving potential Both propofol and sevoflurane are commonly used in the ambulatory setting because of their favorable recovery profiles. This clinical investigation was designed to compare the clinical effects, recovery characteristics, and cost-effectiveness of propofol and sevoflurane when used alone or in combination for office-based anesthesia. Methods One hundred four outpatients undergoing superficial surgical procedures at an office-based surgical center were randomly assigned to one of three general anesthetic groups. In groups I and II, propofol 2 mg/kg was administered for induction followed by propofol 75-150 microg x kg(-1) x min(-1) (group I) or sevoflurane 1-2% (group II) with N2O 67% in oxygen for maintenance of anesthesia In group m, anesthesia was induced and maintained with sevoflurane in combination with N2O 67% in oxygen. Local anesthetics were injected at the incision site before skin incision and during the surgical procedure. The recovery profiles, costs of drugs, and resources used, as well as patient satisfaction, were compared among the three treatment groups. Results Although early recovery variables (e.g., eye opening, response to commands, and sitting up) were similar in all three groups, the times to standing up and to be "home ready" were significantly prolonged when sevoflurane-N2O was used for both induction and maintenance of anesthesia. The time to tolerating fluids, recovery room stay, and discharge times were significantly decreased when propofol was used for both induction and maintenance of anesthesia. Similarly, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetics were also significantly reduced after propofol anesthesia. Finally, the total costs and patient satisfaction were more favorable when propofol was used for induction and maintenance of office-based anesthesia Conclusion Compared with sevoflurane-N2O, use of propofol-N2O for office-based anesthesia was associated with an improved recovery profile, greater patient satisfaction, and lower costs. There were significantly more patients who were dissatisfied with the sevoflurane anesthetic technique.

Study Objective: To evaluate the effect of nitrous oxide (N 2 O) on the recovery profile and the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after office-based surgery performed under propofol anesthesia. Design: Prospective, randomized, single-blind study. Setting: Office-based surgical center. Patients: 69 ASA physical status I, II, and III healthy, consenting outpatients undergoing superficial surgical procedures lasting 15 to 45 minutes. Interventions: After a standard propofol induction (1.5 mg · kg −1 IV), anesthesia was initially maintained with propofol, 100 μg · kg −1 · min −1 IV, in combination with either air or N 2 O 65% in oxygen. The propofol infusion rate was subsequently varied to maintain an adequate depth of anesthesia. All patients received local anesthetic infiltration prior to the surgical incision, as well as during the operation. No prophylactic antiemetics were administered. Measurements and Main Results: Recovery times and the incidences of PONV were recorded during the first 24 hours after surgery. Early and late recovery variables were similar in the two treatment groups; however, 65% N 2 O produced a 19% decrease in the propofol maintenance dosage requirement. One patient (3%) experienced nausea prior to discharge in the propofol-N 2 O group, and two patients (6%) experienced nausea at home in the propofol alone group. None of the patients vomited or received antiemetic medication during the 24 hours postdischarge period. Ninety-seven percent of patients receiving propofol alone and all of the patients in the propofol-N 2 O group were "very satisfied" with their anesthetic experience. Conclusions: In outpatients undergoing office-based surgical procedures with propofol anesthesia, administration of 65% N 2 O decreased the anesthetic requirement without increasing PONV. Therefore, use of a propofol-N 2 O combination may be a cost-effective alternative to propofol alone for office-based anesthesia.

Transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation (TENS) has been used as a complementary (supplemental) therapy to opioid analgesics for pain relief after surgery. Simultaneous stimulation at a classical Chinese acupoint site and periincisional dermatomes significantly decreases the postoperative analgesic requirement. This sham-controlled study was designed to assess the relative effectiveness of acupoint versus nonacupoint stimulation on the postoperative hydromorphone (HM) requirement, the incidence of opioid-related side effects, and the overall recovery profile. One hundred women undergoing total abdominal hysterectomy or myomectomy procedures with a standardized general anesthesia were randomly assigned to one of four postoperative analgesic treatment regimens (n = 25 each): Group I = sham-TENS (no electrical current) at the Zusanli (ST36) acupoints, Group II = nonacupoint-TENS at the shoulders, Group III = dermatomal-TENS at the level of the surgical incision, and Group IV = acupoint-TENS at the Zusanli acupoints. The frequency of TENS was set in the standard dense-and-disperse mode of 2/100 Hz. The intensity of stimulation was set at 0 mA for patients in Group I and at 9-12 mA for patients in Groups II, III, and IV. A patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device programmed to deliver bolus doses of HM 0.2-0.4 mg IV on demand with a minimal lockout interval of 10 min was used to quantify the postoperative opioid analgesic requirement. Standard 100-mm visual analog scales were used to assess pain, as well as sedation, fatigue, and nausea, at specific intervals after surgery. The numbers of PCA demands and delivered bolus doses, requirements for supplemental medication, and any opioid-related side effects were recorded. In the first 24 h postoperatively, the opioid requirements in Groups III and IV were decreased by 37% and 39%, respectively, compared with the control (sham) group and 35% and 38%, respectively, compared with Group II. The duration of PCA usage and the incidences of nausea and dizziness were also significantly decreased in Groups III and IV compared with Groups I and II. We conclude that periincisional dermatomal and Zusanli acupoint stimulation were equally effective in decreasing the postoperative opioid analgesic requirement and in reducing opioid-related side effects. Both of these positions were more effective than the nonacupoint (shoulder) location.The location of the stimulating electrodes seems to be an important determinant of the efficacy of transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation in decreasing the need for opioid analgesics in the postoperative period. This study demonstrates that transcutaneous electrical nerve stimulation applied at the dermatomal level of the skin incision is as effective as Zusanli acupoint stimulation, and both were more effective than stimulation at a nonacupoint (shoulder) location.

Objectives To describe the clinical and radiographic manifestations of spontaneous intracranial hypotension, a rarely diagnosed cause of headache in children. Study design This study included patients 19 years of age or younger evaluated between January 1, 2001, and June 30, 2012, for spontaneous intracranial hypotension. Results We evaluated 24 children (18 girls and 6 boys) with spontaneous intracranial hypotension (age at onset of symptoms: 2-19 years, mean 14.3 years). Twenty-three patients presented with orthostatic headaches and 1 presented with a nonpositional headache. A generalized connective tissue disorder was diagnosed in 54% of patients. Magnetic resonance imaging showed the typical changes of spontaneous intracranial hypotension in most patients (79%). Spinal imaging demonstrated a cerebrospinal fluid (CSF) leak with or without an associated meningeal diverticulum in 12 patients (50%) and with dural ectasia or meningeal diverticula in 10 patients (42%), and it was normal in 2 patients (8%). Twenty-three patients initially underwent epidural blood patching, but 8 patients also were treated with percutaneous injections of fibrin glue and 11 patients eventually required surgical correction of the underlying CSF leak. There was no morbidity or mortality associated with any of the treatments, but 5 patients required acetazolamide for rebound high intracranial pressure headache. Overall, outcome was good in 22 patients (92%) and poor in 2 patients (8%). Conclusions Spontaneous intracranial hypotension in childhood is rare. Most patients can be treated effectively using a combination of epidural blood patching and percutaneous injections of fibrin glue or surgical CSF leak repair in refractory cases.

Given the controversy regarding the use of droperidol and the high cost of the 5-HT3 antagonists, a cost-effective alternative for routine use as a prophylactic antiemetic would be desirable. We designed two parallel, randomized, double-blind sham and placebo-controlled studies to compare the early and late antiemetic efficacy and adverse event profile of transdermal scopolamine (TDS) 1.5 mg, to ondansetron 4 mg IV, and droperidol 1.25 mg IV for antiemetic prophylaxis as part of a multimodal regimen in "at risk" surgical populations.A total of 150 patients undergoing major laparoscopic (n = 80) or plastic (n = 70) surgery procedures received either an active TDS patch (containing scopolamine 1.5 mg) or a similar appearing sham patch 60 min before entering the operating room. All patients received a standardized general anesthetic technique. A second study medication was administered in a 2-mL numbered syringe containing either saline (for the two active TDS groups), droperidol, 1.25 mg, or ondansetron, 4 mg (for the sham patch groups), and was administered IV near the end of the procedure. The occurrence of postoperative nausea and vomiting/retching, need for rescue antiemetics, and the complete response rates (i.e., absence of protracted nausea or repeated episodes of emesis requiring antiemetic rescue medication) was reported. In addition, complaints of visual disturbances, dry mouth, drowsiness, and restlessness were noted up to 72 h after surgery.There were no significant differences in any of the emetic outcomes or need for rescue antiemetics among the TDS, droperidol, and ondansetron groups in the first 72 h after surgery. The complete response rates varied from 41% to 51%, and did not significantly differ among the treatment groups. The overall incidence of dry mouth was significantly more frequent in the TDS groups than in the droperidol and ondansetron groups (21% vs 3%).Premedication with TDS was as effective as droperidol (1.25 mg) or ondansetron (4 mg) in preventing nausea and vomiting in the early and late postoperative periods. However, the use of a TDS patch is more likely to produce a dry mouth.

Based on comparative studies in patients receiving emetogenic chemotherapy, it has been suggested that granisetron would be more effective than ondansetron for the prevention of postdischarge nausea and vomiting (PDNV). However, there have been no direct comparisons of these two popular 5-HT3 antagonists with respect to PDNV and quality of recovery. We designed this randomized, double-blind study to compare the antiemetic efficacy of oral granisetron (1 mg) to a standard IV dose of ondansetron (4 mg) when administered for antiemetic prophylaxis as part of a multimodal regimen in a laparoscopic surgical population. A total of 220 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery with a standardized general anesthetic technique were enrolled in this prospective study at two major medical centers. Patients were randomly assigned to one of two prophylactic treatment groups: the control (ondansetron) group received an oral placebo 1 h before surgery and ondansetron, 4 mg IV, at the end of the surgery, and the granisetron group received granisetron, 1 mg per os, 1 h before surgery, and normal saline, 2 mL IV, at the end of the surgery. The early recovery profiles, requirement for rescue antiemetics, incidence of PDNV, and the side effects were recorded over the 48 h study period. In addition, nausea scores were assessed using an 11-point verbal rating scale at specific intervals in the postoperative period. The quality of recovery and patient satisfaction scores were recorded at 48 h after surgery. The demographic characteristics were similar in the two prophylaxis treatment groups, as well as the recovery times to patient orientation, oral intake, and hospital discharge. The incidences of PDNV, requirements for rescue antiemetics, and quality of recovery did not differ between the two study groups. The antiemetic drug acquisition costs to achieve comparable patient satisfaction with ondansetron and granisetron were US 25.65 dollars and 47.05 dollars, respectively. Therefore, ondansetron (4 mg IV) was more cost-effective than granisetron (1 mg per os) for routine antiemetic prophylaxis as part of a multimodal regimen in patients undergoing either outpatient or inpatient laparoscopic surgery.

A female neonate with diffuse hemangiomatosis and hepatic hemangiomas had cardiac insufficiency develop and had failure to thrive. Her disease was unresponsive to prednisone. She received two courses of cyclophosphamide 10 days apart and a final course 2.5 weeks later. Twelve days after the second course of cyclophosphamide, her liver was significantly smaller. She is now 6-years-old, well-developed, and has no signs of hepatomegaly, malnourishment, or heart failure. Cyclophosphamide appears to be a safe, effective, and rapid treatment of life-threatening hemangiomas of infancy.

Given the inherent side effects associated with both opioid and nonopioid analgesic drugs, a nonpharmacologic therapy that could decrease the need for analgesic medication would be valuable. We designed a sham-controlled study to assess the effect of the intensity of transcutaneous acupoint electrical stimulation (TAES) on postoperative patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) requirement for hydromorphone (HM), the incidence of opioid-related side effects, and the recovery profile after lower abdominal surgery. One hundred one healthy consenting women undergoing lower abdominal procedures with a standardized general anesthetic technique were randomly assigned to one of four postoperative analgesic treatment regimens: Group I (n = 26) PCA only; Group II (n = 25), PCA + sham-TAES (no electrical stimulation); Group III (n = 25), PCA + low-TAES (4-5 mA of electrical stimulation); Group IV (n = 25), PCA + high-TAES (9-12 mA of electrical stimulation). The PCA device was programmed to deliver HM, 0.2-0.4 mg intravenously boluses "on demand," with a minimum lockout interval of 10 min. The TAES skin electrodes were placed at the Hegu acupoint on the nondominant hand and on both sides of the surgical incision. The TAES frequency was set in the dense-and-disperse mode, alternating at 2 Hz and 100 Hz every 3 s, with stimulation of the hand and incision alternated every 6 s. The patients in Groups II-IV were instructed to use TAES every 2 h for 30 min while awake. After discontinuation of PCA, oral pain medications were administered on demand. The postoperative PCA-HM requirement, pain scores, opioid-related side effects, and requirements for antiemetic and antipruritic medication were recorded. High-TAES decreased the HM requirement by 65% and reduced the duration of PCA therapy, as well as the incidence of nausea, dizziness, and pruritus. Low-TAES produced a 34% decrease in the HM requirement compared with only 23% in the "sham" TAES group. We conclude that high-TAES produced a significant decrease in the PCA opioid requirement and opioid-related side effects after low intraabdominal surgery.

Study objectiveTo compare three different video laryngoscope devices (VL) to standard direct laryngoscopy (DL) for tracheal intubation of obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Hypothesis: VL (vs DL) would reduce the time required to achieve successful tracheal intubation and improve the glottic view.DesignProspective, randomized and controlled.SettingPreoperative/operating rooms and postanesthesia care unit.PatientsOne hundred twenty-one obese patients (ASA physical status I-III), aged 18 to 80 years, body mass index (BMI) >30 kg/m2 undergoing elective bariatric surgery.InterventionPatients were prospectively randomized assigned to one of 4 different airway devices for tracheal intubation: standard Macintosh (Mac) blade (DL); Video-Mac VL; Glide Scope VL; or McGrath VL.MeasurementsAfter performing a preoperative airway evaluation, patients underwent a standardized induction sequence. The glottic view was graded using the Cormack Lehane and percentage of glottic opening (POGO) scoring systems at the time of tracheal intubation. Times from the blade entering the patient’s mouth to obtaining a glottic view, placement of the tracheal tube, and confirmation of an end-tidal CO2 waveform were recorded. In addition, intubation attempts, adjuvant airway devices, hemodynamic changes, adverse events, and any airway-related trauma were recorded.Main resultsAll three VL devices provided improved glottic views compared to standard DL (p < 0.05). Video-Mac VL and McGrath also significantly reduced the time required to obtain the glottic view. Video-Mac VL significantly reduced the time required for successful placement of the tracheal tube (vs DL and the others VL device groups). The Video-Mac and GlideScope required fewer intubation attempts (P< .05) and less frequent use of ancillary intubating devices compared to DL and the McGrath VL.ConclusionVideo-Mac and GlideScope required fewer intubation attempts than standard DL and the McGrath device. The Video-Mac also significantly reduced the time needed to secure the airway and improved the glottic view compared to standard DL.

A newborn infant is described with a highly vascular hepatic mesenchymal hamartoma causing hydrops fetalis, congestive heart failure, and consumption coagulapathy. There was a remarkable response of this life-threatening condition to cyclophosphamide therapy. A review of the various alternative therapeutic modalities is presented.