Caudal additives do not improve the analgesia afforded by levobupivacaine after hypospadias repair

Clonidine as an Additive to Local Anesthetics in Caudal Block for Postoperative Analgesia in Pediatric Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

Background: Clonidine is an anesthetic with favorable efficacy and safety profiles for caudal epidural block, but comparisons with other adjuvants need to be confirmed in pediatric patients. Aim: To investigate the effects of clonidine as an adjuvant in caudal epidural block to improve the intraoperative and postoperative analgesia in pediatric surgery. Methods: PubMed, Embase, and the Cochrane Library were searched for available papers published up to February 2021. The outcomes were pain score, duration of analgesia, complications, and number of analgesic requirements. The meta-analysis was performed using random-effects models. Results: Fifteen randomized controlled trials (RCTs) were included. There were no differences between clonidine and the control drug regarding the duration of analgesia (SMD = -0.71, 95%CI: -1.64, 0.23; I ² = 95.5%, P_{heterogeneity} < 0.001), pain score (SMD = 0.35, 95%CI: -0.28, 0.98; I ² = 80.8%, P_{heterogeneity} < 0.001), and requirement for additional analgesia (OR = 8.77, 95%CI: 0.70, 110.58, I ² = 81.9%, P_{heterogeneity} = 0.004), but using clonidine resulted in fewer complications than the control drugs (OR = 0.33, 95%CI: 0.20, 0.54, I ² = 21.8%, P_{heterogeneity} = 0.217). The sensitivity analysis showed that the results were robust. A publication bias was observed. Conclusion: Clonidine has the same efficacy as the other adjuvants for caudal epidural block for pediatric surgery but fewer complications. These results support clonidine as an adjuvant to local anesthetic, but additional studies should be conducted.

Evaluation of Adding Dexmedetomidine to Ropivacaine in Pediatric Caudal Epidural Block: A Randomized, Double-blinded Clinical Trial

Background

Caudal block is one of the methods of pain management performed following lower abdominal surgery, though having its own limitations.

Objectives

In the present study, the effects and side effects of adding dexmedetomidine to ropivacaine in the caudal epidural block were investigated in children after lower abdominal surgery.

Methods

In this randomized, double-blinded clinical trial, 46 children aged three to six years were divided into two groups to perform a caudal block following lower abdominal surgery under general anesthesia. The injectable solution contained ropivacaine in the R group (1 mL/kg ropivacaine 0.2%), as the control group, and dexmedetomidine (2 µg/kg) and ropivacaine 0.2% (1 mL/kg) in the DR group. The pain score (modified CHEOPS score), duration of analgesia, amount of analgesia consumed (i.v. paracetamol), hemodynamic changes, and possible adverse effects were assessed at one, two, and six hours in both groups.

Results

The pain score at one and two hours showed no significant difference between the two study groups (P > 0.05). In the DR group, however, the pain score at the sixth hour was significantly lower, and the duration of analgesia was longer (P = 0.001). The amount of analgesic consumption was also lower in the DR group (P = 0.001). However, there was no significant difference in systolic blood pressure and heart rate (P < 0.05), in the case of diastolic blood pressure, a significant difference (P < 0.05) was seen (DR group lower than the R group). There was no statistically significant difference between the study groups in the duration of surgery, recovery time, and side effects (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

In the present study, the addition of dexmedetomidine to ropivacaine in the caudal epidural blockade improved postoperative analgesia without significant adverse effects in pediatric patients.

The Analgesic Efficacy of Intrathecal Bupivacaine and Fentanyl with Added Neostigmine or Magnesium Sulphate

Background

An appropriate anesthesia duration with minimal side effects and prolonged postoperative analgesia are the ideal characteristics of an intrathecal drug used during spinal anesthesia. Neostigmine and magnesium sulphate have been used as spinal anesthetic additives with narcotics and local anesthetics.

Objectives

This study aimed to assess the analgesic properties of intrathecal neostigmine and magnesium sulphate by adding them to intrathecal bupivacaine-fentanyl.

Methods

: In total, 210 patients undergoing tibial fracture surgery were enrolled in a double-blinded clinical trial study. Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups: group F received 10 mg of bupivacaine and 25 µg of fentanyl as intrathecal drug for spinal anesthesia, group N received 150 µg of neostigmine added to 10 mg of bupivacaine and 25 µg of fentanyl, and group M received 50 mg of magnesium sulphate added to 10 mg of bupivacaine and 25 µg of fentanyl. Analgesia duration, motor blockade scores, postoperative pain scores 6 and 12 hours after surgery, postoperative voiding time, and the incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, respiratory depression, and nausea and vomiting were recorded.

Results

Group M showed significantly longer analgesia duration (330.76 ± 80.98 minutes) than group F (280.98 ± 60.33 minutes). The pain scores in group M 6 hours (NRS: 2.44 ± 0.98) and 12 hours (NRS: 4.10 ± 0.88) after surgery were significantly lower than those of the other two groups. Before discharge from recovery, motor blockade scores and voiding time were not significantly different between the three groups. Hypotension (40%), bradycardia (25%), and nausea and vomiting (70%) were more obvious among group N patients. Respiratory depression did not occur in any patients.

Conclusions

The addition of 50 mg of magnesium sulfate to a bupivacaine–fentanyl solution for intrathecal anesthesia improved the efficacy and duration of the analgesia without any significant side effects. The addition of 150 µg of neostigmine increased the incidence of hypotension, bradycardia, and nausea and vomiting. Moreover, neostigmine failed to prolong analgesia duration.

Analgesic Efficacy of Diclofenac and Paracetamol vs. Meperidine in Cesarean Section

Background:

One of the most important complications in cesarean surgery is postoperative pain, and different ways have been proposed to control it.

Objectives:

The purpose of this study was to determine the efficacy of Diclofenac and Paracetamol combination in comparison with Meperidine on postoperative pain after cesarean surgery.

Patients and Methods:

One hundred and twenty women candidates for elective cesarean section under spinal anesthesia categorized as ASA class I were selected and randomly assigned to receive either Diclofenac suppository at the end of the operation and thereafter 1 gram infused bolus of Paracetamol (group A), or 20 mg bolus of Meperidine after transition to recovery room (group B) to control postoperative pain.

Results:

Postoperative pain was present in recovery in 38.3% and 23.3% in groups B and A, respectively (P = 0.009). Postoperative pain was seen after six hours of operation in 38.7% and 16.7% in groups B and A, respectively (P = 0.010). Postoperative pain was present after 12 hours of operation in 38.3% and 15% in groups B and A, respectively (P = 0.002). The additive Meperidine use was the same between the two groups in recovery (P > 0.05). The additive Meperidine use was seen after six hours of operation in 26.7% and 6.7% in groups B and A, respectively (P = 0.013). The additive Meperidine use was seen after 12 hours of operation in 16.7% and none of the patients in groups B and A, respectively (P = 0.004). The frequency of drug adverse effects was the same between the two groups (P > 0.05).

Conclusions:

Totally, according to the obtained results it may be concluded that Paracetamol and Diclofenac combination would have a better efficacy in postoperative pain control and need reduction to additive analgesia compared to Meperidine.

Unusually prolonged motor and sensory block following single injection ultrasound-guided infraclavicular block with bupivacaine and dexamethasone

We present a case of unexpectedly prolonged motor and sensory block following a successful single injection ultrasound - guided infraclavicular block with bupivacaine (0.25%) and dexamethasone (8 mg). ultrasound guidance and safety measurement such as injection of the local anaesthetic at a slow rate and verifying that usual resistance was felt throughout the injection, has been applied. It took 42 hours for the block to go away. Although there was no evidence of neurologic injury but we should always be prepared to consider the possibility of nerve injury and take appropriate measures.

The Effect of Epidural Bupivacaine on BIS Levels in the Awake Phase and on the Maintenance Doses of Propofol and Fentanyl During General Anesthesia

BACKGROUND

Simultaneous administration of epidural local anesthetic agents (LA) and general anesthetics (intravenous or inhaled) is a common procedure in patients undergoing major operations. The effects of epidural anesthesia during combined general-epidural anesthesia on the alertness level (CGEA) in the awake phase and the doses of anesthetics have been reported.

OBJECTIVES

The present study was designed to determine the effects of epidural bupivacaine on the alertness level measured by bispectral index (BIS) in the awake phase and the maintenance doses of propofol and fentanyl during general anesthesia for vascular operation on the lower limb.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

A double-blinded randomized clinical trial was conducted on patients awaiting vascular surgery on lower extremities in a teaching hospital from October 2007 to October 2008. During the epidural anesthesia, the control group received 0.9% NS while 0.125% bupivacaine was injected in the case group via the epidural route. No sedative drug was utilized for epidural catheter placement. The BIS measurement was performed in both groups during the awake phase, before performing epidural anesthesia, and 10 minutes after epidural injection at 1-min intervals for 15 min. After induction of general anesthesia in both groups, anesthesia maintenance was established using the infusion of propofol with the aim of keeping the BIS level between 40 and 50 throughout the anesthesia. At the end of the study period, maintenance dose requirements of propofol and fentanyl were measured.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were enrolled in the study. There was no difference in BIS levels of the two groups in the awake phase. There was a significant difference between the propofol and fentanyl requirements of the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Performing CGEA using bupivacaine was reported to reduce propofol and fentanyl doses required to maintain BIS levels between 40 and 50 considerably.