Studies On Coagulation Physiology In Perioperative Thromboembolism Prophylaxis In Surgery

1981 ◽  
Author(s):  
K Koppenhagen ◽  
A Häring ◽  
H Zühlke ◽  
A Wiechmann ◽  
M Matthes ◽  
...  

In a prospective and randomized double-blind study in 630 general surgery patients with different thromboembolism prophylaxis (130 patients with 5000 and 122 with 2500 I.U. of heparin, 128 with a fixed combination of 2500 I.U. of heparin and 0.5 mg dihydroergotamine ((2500-heparin-DHE)), 124 with 0.5 mg DHE and 126 with a placebo, 3 × daily) the influence of the medication on blood coagulation was examined by repeated pre-and post-operative determinations of blood-and coagulation parameters (activated partial thromboplastin time, heparin-plasma level, AT III, thromboplastin time, fibrinogen, thrombin time, thrombocyte aggregation test, β-thromboglobulin, Hb, erythrocytes, hematocrit, thrombocytes and differential blood picture). The frequency of postoperative thromboses and pulmonary embolisms was investigated by means of the radiofibrinogen test and lung scintigraphy. The results show that the lowest thromboembolism rate occurs in that patient collective in which there is in addition to the heparin application a simultaneous hemostatic effect of DHE. Side effects of the prophylaxis and influences on blood coagulation are dependent on the amount of heparin administered both in the single-drug low-dose treatment and in the combination therapy. The lowest rate of side effects was found in the group receiving 3×2500 I.U. of heparin and in the combination group 2500-heparin-DHE, but the combination treatment additionally affords the same thromboembolism protection as the routinely applied 3×5000 I.E. of low dose heparin.

1979 ◽  
Vol 41 (02) ◽  
pp. 337-345 ◽  
Author(s):  
Per Olov Hedlund ◽  
Margareta Blombäck

SummaryHeparin was administered subcutaneously 5.000 IU twice daily using a double blind method to ten of twenty-one patients undergoing transvesical prostatectomy.Platelet count, APTT, thrombin time, Reptilase time, Normotest, fibrinogen, Factor- VIII, ethanol gelation test, antithrombin III, fibrinolytic degradation products, α1-antitrypsin and α2-macroglobulin were studied pre- and postoperatively up to the 10th postoperative day. Statistical analysis of parameters of blood coagulation and fibrinolysis showed no significant difference between the two groups. The mechanism by which low dose heparin exerts its thromboprophylactic effect could not be elucidated from the study of the investigated parameters. The laboratory data gave no indication to a possible increased risk of postoperative hemorrhage.


2010 ◽  
Vol 1 (3) ◽  
pp. 122-141 ◽  
Author(s):  
Harald Breivik ◽  
Tone Marte Ljosaa ◽  
Kristian Stengaard-Pedersen ◽  
Jan Persson ◽  
Hannu Aro ◽  
...  

AbstractObjectivePatients with osteoarthritis (OA) pain often have insufficient pain relief from non-opioid analgesics. The aim of this trial was to study efficacy and tolerability of a low dose 7-day buprenorphine transdermal delivery system, added to a NSAID or coxib regimen, in opioid-naïve patients with moderate to severe OA pain.MethodsA 6 months randomised, double-blind, parallel-group study at 19 centres in Denmark, Finland, Norway, and Sweden, in which OA patients (>40 years) with at least moderate radiographic OA changes and at least moderate pain in a hip and/or knee while on a NSAID or a coxib were randomised to a 7-day buprenorphine patch (n = 100) or an identical placebo patch (n = 99). The initial patch delivered buprenorphine 5 μg/h. This was titrated to 10 or 20 μg/h, as needed. Rescue analgesic was paracetamol 0.5–4 g daily. Statistical analysis of outcome data was mainly with a general linear model, with treatment as factor, the primary joint of osteoarthritis, baseline scores, and season as covariates.ResultsMost patients had OA-radiographic grade II (moderate) or grade III (severe), only 8 in each group had very severe OA (grade IV). The median buprenorphine dose was 10 μg/h. 31 buprenorphine-treated patients and 2 placebo-treated patients withdrew because of side effects. Lack of effect caused 12 placebo-treated and 7 buprenorphine-treated patients to withdraw. The differences in effects between treatments: Daytime pain on movement, recorded every evening on a 0–10 numeric rating scale decreased significantly more (P = 0.029) in the buprenorphine group. Patients’ Global Impression of Change at the end of the double blind period was significantly improved in the buprenorphine group (P = 0.017). The chosen primary effect outcome measure, the Western Ontario and McMaster Universities (WOMAC) OA Index for Pain (P = 0.061), and secondary outcome measures, the WOMAC OA score for functional abilities (P = 0.055), and the WOMAC total score (P = 0.059) indicated more effects from buprenorphine than placebo, but these differences were not statistically significant. In a post-hoc, subgroup analysis with the 16 patients with radiographic grad IV (very severe) excluded, WOMAC OA Index for Pain was significantly (P = 0.039) reduced by buprenorphine, compared with placebo. WOMAC OA score for stiffness and the amount of rescue medication taken did not differ. Sleep disturbance, quality of sleep, and quality of life improved in both groups. Side effects: Typical opioid side effects caused withdrawal at a median of 11 days before completing the 168 days double blind trial in 1/3 of the buprenorphine group. Mostly mild local skin reactions occurred equally often (1/3) in both groups.ConclusionsAlthough the 24 hours WOMAC OsteoArthritis Index of pain was not statistically significantly superior to placebo, day-time movement-related pain and patients’ global impression of improvement at the end of the 6-months double blind treatment period were significantly better in patients treated with buprenorphine compared with placebo. Opioid side effects caused 1/3 of the buprenorphine-patients to withdraw before the end of the 6-months double blind study period.ImplicationsA low dose 7-days buprenorphine patch at 5–20 μg/h is a possible means of pain relief in about 2/3 of elderly osteoarthritis patients, in whom pain is opioid-sensitive, surgery is not possible, NSAIDs and coxibs are not recommended, and paracetamol in tolerable doses is not effective enough. Vigilant focus on and management of opioid side effects are essential.


1979 ◽  
Author(s):  
K. Koppenhagen ◽  
R. Häring ◽  
H.-V. Zühlke ◽  
A. Wiechmann ◽  
H.G. Weing

Between 1975 and 1978, the frequency of both postoperative thromboses and pulmonary embolisms and of side effects (hemorrhages,hematomas) was examined in 1434 general surgery patients with varying prophylaxis by the radiofibrinogen test and pulmonary perfusion scintigraphy (double nuclide tests). Patients were selected at random and divided into 5 groups 150 patients without prophylaxis; low-dose heparin: 212 patients 3 x and 491 patients 2 x 5000 IU daily; combination prophylaxis of heparin and hemostasis-influencing dihydroergotamine=DHE (2 x daily):2500 IU heparin + 0.5 mg DHE were given to 351 patients, 5000 IU heparin + 0.5 mg DHE to 330 patients. The results of the prospective study show that the lowest thromboembolism rate occurs when heparin application is combined simultaneously with the hemostasis-influencing effect of DHE. The radiofibrinogen test indicated the most effective prophylaxis in petients receiving the combination of heparin and DHE (5000 IU heparin + 0.5 mg DHE, 2 x daily). The postoperative thrombosis rate decreased from 16.1% to 7.7% compared to the group treated only with heparin. The embolism-induced perfusion disorders amounted to 2.6% under the combination compared to 4.7% with 3 x 5000 IU heparin. Side effects of the prophylaxis are dependent on the amount of heparin both in the singledrug, low-dose treatment and the combination therapy. The combination of 2500 IU heparin + 0.5 mg DHE (2 x daily) yielded both the lowest rate of side effects and the thromboembolism prophylaxis of the standard law-dose heparin . The total result documents the efficiency of the combined thromboembolism prophylaxis with hepar in and DHE.


2020 ◽  
pp. 014556132097486
Author(s):  
Irem Ates ◽  
Muhammed Enes Aydin ◽  
Erkan Cem Celik ◽  
Mustafa Sitki Gozeler ◽  
Ali Ahiskalioglu

Objectives: Studies investigating the effects of intravenous (IV) ketamine in pain management after septorhinoplasty is limited. This study aims to evaluate the efficacy of low-dose IV infusion of ketamine on pain scores. Methods: This randomized, prospective, double-blind study was conducted with 48 patients who underwent septorhinoplasty. Intravenous ketamine bolus (0.5 mg/kg) was administered to the ketamine group (group K, n = 24) at anesthesia induction, and ketamine infusion was continued (0.25 mg/kg/h) during the surgery. In the control group (group C, n = 24), the same protocol was administered using saline instead of ketamine. Furthermore, 50-mg dexketoprofen trometamol was administered to both groups 30 minutes before the end of the surgery. Then it was repeated at the 12th and 24th hours postoperatively. Pain scores were evaluated with the visual analogue scale. Consumptions intraoperative of opioid and sevoflurane, rescue opioid requirement, patient satisfaction, and side effects were recorded. Results: Pain scores were significantly lower in group K at all postoperative periods ( P < .05). There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of intraoperative sevoflurane and remifentanil consumptions ( P > .05). Rescue opioid analgesic requirements were significantly lower in group K than group C (0/24 vs 6/24, respectively; P  = .022). Side effects were similar between the groups ( P > .05). Conclusion: We recommend the administration of low-dose ketamine infusion during septorhinoplasty surgery because it reduces the requirement for rescue opioid analgesia and postoperative pain scores.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document