Sevoflurane analgesia in obstetrics: a pilot study

Using the nociception level index to compare the intraoperative antinociceptive effect of propofol and sevoflurane during clinical and experimental noxious stimulus in patients under general anesthesia

STUDY

Propofol and sevoflurane are two anesthetic agents widely used to induce and maintain general anesthesia (GA). Their intrinsic antinociceptive properties remain unclear and are still debated.

OBJECTIVE

To determine whether propofol presents stronger antinociceptive properties than sevoflurane using intraoperative clinical and experimental noxious stimulations and evaluating postoperative pain outcomes.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized monocentric trial.

SETTING

Perioperative care.

PATIENTS

60 adult patients with ASA status I to III who underwent elective abdominal laparoscopic surgery under GA were randomized either in propofol or sevoflurane group to induce and maintain GA.

INTERVENTIONS

We used clinical and experimental noxious stimulations (intubation, tetanic stimulation) to assess the antinociceptive properties of propofol and sevoflurane in patients under GA and monitored using the NOL index, BIS index, heart rate, and mean arterial blood pressure.

MEASUREMENTS

We measured the difference in the NOL index alterations after intubation and tetanic stimulation during either intravenous anesthesia (propofol) or inhaled anesthesia (sevoflurane). We also intraoperatively measured the NOL index and remifentanil consumption and recorded postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption in the post-anesthesia care unit. Intraoperative management was standardized by targeting similar values of depth of anesthesia (BIS index), hemodynamic (HR and MAP), NOL index values (below the threshold of 20), same multimodal analgesia and type of surgery.

MAIN RESULTS

We found the antinociceptive properties of propofol and sevoflurane similar. The only minor difference was after tetanic stimulation: the delta NOL was higher in the sevoflurane group (39 ± 13 for the propofol group versus 47 ± 15 for sevoflurane; P = 0.04). Intraoperative and postoperative pain outcomes and opioid consumption were similar between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Despite a precise intraoperative experimental and clinical protocol using the NOL index, propofol does not provide a higher level of antinociception during anesthesia or analgesia after surgery when compared to sevoflurane. Anesthesiologists may prefer propofol over sevoflurane to reduce PONV or anesthesia-related pollution, but not for superior antinociceptive properties.

The Optimum Level of Sevoflurane in Pediatric Echocardiography

Sevoflurane is shown to be safe and effective in pediatric echocardiography. This study explores the optimum level in pediatric echocardiography. One hundred and twenty children, with an age range of 35 days-3 years, were included in this study. The children with severe cyanotic congenital heart disease or severe pneumonia, which was Grade I or II according to the American College of Physicians Guideline Grading, were excluded. All children received the anesthesia with sevoflurane. The inhalation anesthesia level decreased from 2.5 to 1.0 %, with a decrement of 0.5 %. The induction time (T0), echocardiography time (T1), and time to awakening (T2) in each child were recorded, and the changes in the blood pressure, heart rate, breath, and oxygen saturation in each child were also monitored. The Ramsay scale scoring during anesthesia and the case number of failure in echocardiography in each group were also recorded. When the level of sevoflurane inhalation was maintained at 1.0 %, the childrens' scores were low, including 8 incompliant children, and p < 0.05 in comparison with other groups. The scores increased as the sevoflurane inhalation level increased. When the sevoflurane inhalation increased to 1.5 %, the children could sleep with stable blood pressure, and no dysphoria occurred during the echocardiography. When the sevoflurane inhalation level increased to 2.5 %, the Ramsay scores did not increase. However, the T2 significantly increased (p < 0.05). The blood pressure and heart rate in each group did not change significantly. With the premise of safety and efficacy in children, the optimum level of sevoflurane in pediatric echocardiography was 1.5-2.0 %.

Effects of Propofol, Sevoflurane, Remifentanil, and (S)-Ketamine in Subanesthetic Concentrations on Visceral and Somatosensory Pain–evoked Potentials

Background:

Although electroencephalographic parameters and auditory evoked potentials (AEP) reflect the hypnotic component of anesthesia, there is currently no specific and mechanism-based monitoring tool for anesthesia-induced blockade of nociceptive inputs. The aim of this study was to assess visceral pain–evoked potentials (VPEP) and contact heat–evoked potentials (CHEP) as electroencephalographic indicators of drug-induced changes of visceral and somatosensory pain. Additionally, AEP and electroencephalographic permutation entropy were used to evaluate sedative components of the applied drugs.

Methods:

In a study enrolling 60 volunteers, VPEP, CHEP (amplitude N2-P1), and AEP (latency Nb, amplitude Pa-Nb) were recorded without drug application and at two subanesthetic concentration levels of propofol, sevoflurane, remifentanil, or (s)-ketamine. Drug-induced changes of evoked potentials were analyzed. VPEP were generated by electric stimuli using bipolar electrodes positioned in the distal esophagus. For CHEP, heat pulses were given to the medial aspect of the right forearm using a CHEP stimulator. In addition to AEP, electroencephalographic permutation entropy was used to indicate level of sedation.

Results:

With increasing concentrations of propofol, sevoflurane, remifentanil, and (s)-ketamine, VPEP and CHEP N2-P1 amplitudes decreased. AEP and electroencephalographic permutation entropy showed neither clinically relevant nor statistically significant suppression of cortical activity during drug application.

Conclusions:

Decreasing VPEP and CHEP amplitudes under subanesthetic concentrations of propofol, sevoflurane, remifentanil, and (s)-ketamine indicate suppressive drug effects. These effects seem to be specific for analgesia.

Sevoflurane to alleviate pain on propofol injection

PURPOSE

Since the introduction of propofol, several drugs and methods have been used to alleviate the pain on its injection. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of adding sevoflurane 3% during preoxygenation in alleviation of pain on propofol injection.

METHODS

In this randomized single-blinded study, 100 patients were randomly allocated equally into five groups: sevoflurane-lidocaine-tourniquet (SLT), sevoflurane-lidocaine (SL), lidocaine-tourniquet (LT), lidocaine (L), and sevoflurane (S). Approximately 10 min before the induction of anesthesia, midazolam 1-2 mg was administered intravenously to all patients. All patients received fentanyl 1 µg/kg as pretreatment and a full induction dose of propofol. A blinded anesthesia nurse assessed pain and hand movements throughout the injection of propofol.

RESULTS

In the SLT group, all patients (100%) were pain free and had no hand movements. There was no significant difference in pain grade or in hand movements between the L and the S groups, or between the SLT and the SL groups. However, significant differences were observed in pain grade between the SLT and the L groups as well as between the SLT and the S groups. In addition, a significant difference in hand movement was observed only between the SLT and the S groups.

CONCLUSION

The addition of 3% sevoflurane at the time of preoxygenation for 1 min along with routine use of lidocaine-tourniquet completely prevented pain upon propofol injection, whereas sevoflurane by itself provided similar analgesia to premixed lidocaine with propofol.

The management of breakthrough pain during labour

There is a long history of attempts to alleviate the pain of childbirth, particularly in Asian and Middle Eastern civilisations. In the UK, it was the administration of chloroform to Queen Victoria by John Snow in 1853 that is widely credited with popularizing the idea that labour pain should and could be treated. Medical analgesia is now well established around the globe with a wealth of research evidence describing methods, efficacy and complications. In this article, we define 'primary breakthrough pain' as the moment when a woman first requests analgesia during labour. The management of this can include simple emotional support, inhaled analgesics, parenteral opioids and epidural analgesia. 'Secondary breakthrough pain' can be defined as the moment when previously used analgesia becomes ineffective. We concentrate our discussion of this phenomenon on the situation when epidural analgesia begins to fail. Only epidural analgesia offers the potential for complete analgesia, so when this effect is lost the recipient can experience significant distress and dissatisfaction. The best strategy to avert this problem is prevention by using the best techniques for epidural catheterisation and the most effective drug combinations. Even then, epidurals can lose their efficacy for a variety of reasons, and management is hampered by the fact that each rescue manoeuvre takes about 30 minutes to be effective. If the rescue protocol is too cautious, analgesia may not be successfully restored before delivery, leading to patient dissatisfaction. We therefore propose an aggressive response to epidural breakthrough pain using appropriate drug supplementation and, if necessary, the placement of a new epidural catheter. Combined spinal epidural techniques offer several advantages in this situation. The goal is to re-establish analgesia within 1 hour. The primary aim of pain management during labour and delivery is to provide the level of comfort determined as acceptable to each individual woman. Some require little or no analgesia, while others demand complete abolition of pain. Whatever the individual's personal point of breakthrough pain is, supporting clinicians should respond logically and rapidly to re-establish analgesia using locally agreed protocols. This approach will maximize patient satisfaction and hopefully increase the pleasure and satisfaction of childbirth.

Analgesia with sevoflurane during labour: I. Determination of the optimum concentration † ‡

BACKGROUND

Sevoflurane has favourable physical qualities for inhaled analgesia during labour pain. The aim of this preliminary study was to identify its optimum concentration.

METHODS

In this open-labelled escalating-dose study, 22 parturients in labour self-administered sevoflurane at 10 contractions using an Oxford Miniature Vaporiser. The inspired concentration was increased by 0.2% after each contraction from 0% to 1.4% or decreased if sedation occurred. Visual analogue scores (0-100 mm) for pain intensity, pain relief, sedation, mood and coping were measured after each contraction.

RESULTS

The median (IQR [range]) pain relief and sedation scores increased from 44 (43-56 [4-93]) mm and 55 (43-56 [0-98]) mm at 0.2% sevoflurane, to 74 (72-78 [50-80]) mm and 71 (71-73 [33-97]) mm at 1.2% sevoflurane, respectively. Pain relief scores did not show any significant increase above 0.8% whilst sedation continued to increase, with excessive sedation occurring at 1.2% sevoflurane. No significant changes in other scores were measured.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that the optimal sevoflurane concentration in labour was 0.8%. This concentration allows a safety margin and balances the risk of sedation with the benefit of pain relief in labour.

Analgesia with sevoflurane during labour: II. Sevoflurane compared with Entonox for labour analgesia † ‡

BACKGROUND

We determined the optimal inspired sevoflurane concentration for use during labour as 0.8% in our previous study. This study compared sevoflurane at a concentration of 0.8% and Entonox((R)) (nitrous oxide 50%: oxygen 50%) for analgesia during labour in 32 healthy parturients.

METHODS

Each mother underwent two open-label, three-part sequences in random order, Entonox-sevoflurane-Entonox or sevoflurane-Entonox-sevoflurane. In each part the agent was self-administered during 10 contractions. A 100 mm visual analogue scores for pain relief and sedation was completed immediately after each contraction.

RESULTS

Two patients withdrew during administration of sevoflurane (because of its odour) and five during Entonox (requesting epidural analgesia). Of the remaining women, data were available for analysis from 29 participants: median (IQR [range]) pain relief scores were significantly higher for sevoflurane 67 (55-74 [33-100]) mm than for Entonox 51 (40-69.5 [13-100]) mm (P<0.037). Nausea and vomiting were more common in the Entonox group [relative risk 2.7 (95% CI 1.3-5.7); P=0.004]. No other adverse effects were observed in the mothers or babies. There was significantly more sedation with sevoflurane than with Entonox {74 (66.5-81 [32.5-100]) and 51 (41-69.5 [13-100]) mm, respectively; P<0.001}. Twenty-nine patients preferred sevoflurane to Entonox and found its sedative effects helpful.

CONCLUSIONS

We conclude that self-administered sevoflurane at subanaesthetic concentration (0.8%) can provide useful pain relief during the first stage of labour, and to a greater extent than Entonox. Although greater sedative effects were experienced with sevoflurane, it was preferred to Entonox.

Alternatives à l'analgésie péridurale au cours du travail

Many systemic techniques, so-called "alternatives" to labor epidural analgesia, have been described: they are all poorly effective and some are associated with significant maternal and neonatal side effects. Nonetheless, these techniques can provide good maternal satisfaction. Accordingly, they are indicated when epidural analgesia is contraindicated or unavailable. Administration of systemic opioids mandates maternal respiratory supervision, oxygen supplementation and/or pulse oxymetry. Systemic opioids may also decrease fetal heart rate variability and produce neonatal respiratory depression; naloxone administration to the neonate is therefore widely indicated. Pethidine should be abandoned because it can produce prolonged neonatal respiratory depression. Nalbuphine produces less nausea/vomiting and less long lasting neonatal respiratory depression. Intravenous PCA fentanyl or sufentanil is presently the method of choice during early labor. Alfentanil seems less effective and may produce more neonatal side effects. Intravenous PCA remifentanil is the most effective technique, but safe administration may be problematic during intermittent supervision usually implemented in labour ward. Nitrous oxide 50% provides little pain relief. Nonetheless, it is associated with few side effects, quite good maternal satisfaction and can be quickly implemented during advanced painful labor. It is not recommended to add it to systemic opioid (except under continuous supervision by the anaesthetic team), because of an increased incidence of maternal desaturation. The use of a subanaesthetic concentration of sevoflurane has been described recently; it is more effective than nitrous oxide. However, guidelines for safe implementation in labor ward remain to be determined.

What’s new and novel in obstetric anesthesia? Contributions from the 2003 scientific literature

THE PREGNANT PATIENT: Age; maternal disease; prophylactic antibiotics; gastroesophageal reflux; obesity; starvation; genotyping; coagulopathy; infection; substance abuse; altered drug responses in pregnancy; physiological changes of pregnancy. THE FETUS: Fetal monitoring; intrauterine surgery. THE NEWBORN: Breastfeeding; maternal infection, fever, and neonatal sepsis evaluation. OBSTETRIC COMPLICATIONS: Embolic phenomena; hemorrhage; preeclampsia; preterm delivery. OBSTETRIC MANAGEMENT: External cephalic version and cervical cerclage; elective cesarean delivery; fetal malpresentation; vaginal birth after cesarean delivery; termination of pregnancy. OBSTETRIC ANESTHESIA: Analgesia for labor and delivery; anesthesia for cesarean delivery; anesthesia for short obstetric operations; complications of anesthesia. MISCELLANEOUS: Consent; ethics; history; labor support; websites/books/leaflets/journal announcements.

Douleur et analgésie obstétricales

GOAL AND METHODS

Labor pain is of major concern since most parturients experience significant pain of extremely severe intensity for many. The purpose of this review was to provide an overview of the mechanisms and pathways of labor pain (including new insights on integration of the nociceptive signal) and to emphasize the need of effective labor pain relief.

RESULTS

Labor pain can have deleterious effects on the mother, on the fetus and on labor outcome itself. Among the current methods of obstetric analgesia, regional analgesia (the most widespread technique being epidural analgesia) offers the best effectiveness/safety ratio thanks to pharmacological innovations. Systemic analgesia (parenteral opioids, nonopioid painkillers and inhaled anesthetic agents) provides an alternative to regional analgesia but remains less effective and more hazardous. Non-drug approaches (namely psychoprophylaxis and physical methods) may be effective when used with epidural analgesia but are often not potent enough when used alone.

CONCLUSION

Despite its complex pathophysiology, labor pain can be efficiently managed. Thanks to multidisciplinary care, obstetric analgesia (mainly epidural analgesia) prevents deleterious effects of labor pain on the mother and fetus.