scholarly journals The Effect of Dexmedetomidine in Combination with Bupivacaine on Sensory and Motor Block Time and Pain Score in Supraclavicular Block

2021 ◽  
Vol 2021 ◽  
pp. 1-8
Author(s):  
Shahryar Sane ◽  
Shahram Shokouhi ◽  
Parang Golabi ◽  
Mona Rezaeian ◽  
Behzad Kazemi Haki
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Motor Block ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Old Patients ◽  
Arterial Blood ◽  
Supraclavicular Block

Background. Brachial plexus block is frequently recommended for upper limb surgeries. Many drugs have been used as adjuvants to prolong the duration of the block. This study aimed to assess the effect of dexmedetomidine with bupivacaine combination and only bupivacaine on sensory and motor block duration time, pain score, and hemodynamic variations in the supraclavicular block in upper extremity orthopedic surgery. Methods. This prospective, double-blind clinical trial study was conducted on 60 patients, 20 to 60 years old. Patients were candidates for upper extremity orthopedic surgeries. The sensory and motor block were evaluated by using the pinprick method and the modified Bromage scale. The postoperative pain was assessed by utilizing a visual analog scale. Results. The mean onset time of sensory and motor block in patients receiving only bupivacaine was, respectively, 31.03 ± 9.65 min and 24.66 ± 9.2 min, and in the dexmedetomidine receiving group, it was about 21.36 ± 8.34 min and 15.93 ± 6.36 minutes. The changes in heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure were similar in both groups. The duration of sensory and motor block and the time of the first analgesia request in the intervention group were longer. Postoperative pain was lower in the intervention group for 24 hours ( P  = 0.001). Conclusion. Dexmedetomidine plus bupivacaine reduced the onset time of sense and motor blocks and increased numbness and immobility duration. Also, dexmedetomidine reduced postoperative pain significantly with the use of bupivacaine for supraclavicular blocks. Trial Registration. IRCT, IRCT20160430027677N15. Registered 05/28/2019, https://www.irct.ir/trial/39463.

scholarly journals The effect of dexmedetomidine with bupivacaine combination and only bupivacaine on sensory and motor block time and pain score in supraclavicular block

2020 ◽  
Author(s):  
Shahryar Sane ◽  
Shahram Shokouhi ◽  
Parang Golabi ◽  
Mona Rezaeian ◽  
Behzad Kazemi Haki
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Upper Extremity ◽  
Motor Block ◽  
Intervention Group ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Arterial Blood ◽  
Block Time ◽  
Supraclavicular Block

Abstract Background: This study was designed to assess the effect of dexmedetomidine on the effect of dexmedetomidine with bupivacaine combination and only bupivacaine on sensory and motor block time, pain score, and hemodynamic variations in supraclavicular block in upper extremity orthopedic surgery.Methods: This prospective double-blind study was performed on 60 patients aged 20-60 years who were candidates for upper extremity orthopedic surgeries. The sensory block was evaluated using the pinprick method and motor block by the modified Bromage scale method. The post-operative pain was assessed by a visual analog scale. Results: The mean onset time of sensory and motor block in patients receiving bupivacaine alone was respectively 31.03± 9.65 min and 24.66 ± 9.2 min and in the dexmedetomidine receiving group was about 21.36±8.34 min and 15.93 ± 6.36 minutes. The changes in heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure was similar in both groups. The duration of sensory and motor block and the time of the first analgesia request in the intervention group were longer. Postoperative pain was lower in the intervention group for 24 hours (P = 0.001).Conclusion: The use of dexmedetomidine plus bupivacaine, without side effects, reduced the onset time of sense and motor blocks and increased the duration of numbness and immobility. Also, dexmedetomidine reduced postoperative pain significantly in use with bupivacaine for supraclavicular blocks.Trial registration: IRCT, IRCT20160430027677N15. Registered 05/28/2019, http:// https://www.irct.ir/trial/39463

scholarly journals Comparison of Three Different Doses of Nalbuphine as Adjuvant to Intrathecal Hyperbaric Bupivacaine in Knee Joint Surgeries

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 (15) ◽  
pp. 950-955
Author(s):  
Amit Pradhan ◽  
Ranjitha Kusumanchi ◽  
Pulak Priyadarshi Padhi ◽  
Saswati Das
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Adverse Effects ◽  
Knee Joint ◽  
Spinal Anaesthesia ◽  
Motor Block ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Sensory Block ◽  
Hyperbaric Bupivacaine ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Different Doses

BACKGROUND Postoperative pain is the most challenging task in patients undergoing knee joint surgeries under spinal anaesthesia. Spinal anaesthesia with bupivacaine provides adequate intraoperative conditions but falls short in providing prolonged postoperative pain relief. Intrathecal opioids are synergistic with local anaesthetics and intensify the sensory block without affecting the sympathetic block. This study intends to compare three different doses of intrathecal nalbuphine as an adjuvant to 0.5 % hyperbaric bupivacaine and determine the optimal dose in knee joint surgeries. METHODS A double-blind comparative study was conducted in one hundred and twenty American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) I and II patients undergoing knee joint surgeries in a randomised prospective way. The patients were randomly allocated to A, B, and C groups who received 0.4, 0.8 and 1.2 mg nalbuphine respectively added to 12.5 mg of 0.5 % hyperbaric bupivacaine. The onset, duration of block, duration of effective analgesia, Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) score, and the incidence of adverse effects were studied and compared between the groups. RESULTS The mean onset time of sensory and motor block of group B and C was significantly faster as compared to the onset in group A. The duration of sensory, motor blockade and duration of analgesia were highest with 1.2 mg of nalbuphine followed by 0.8 and 0.4 mg (P < 0.05). VAS readings were comparable in all the groups. Hemodynamic variability among the three groups was comparable. Incidence of adverse effects was highest in group C when compared with others, although it was statistically insignificant (P > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS Nalbuphine in a dose of 0.8 mg when added to 0.5 % hyperbaric bupivacaine for subarachnoid block in patients undergoing knee joint surgeries provides excellent analgesia, prolonged duration of sensory block and motor block, with minimal adverse effects. KEYWORDS Local Anaesthesia, Opioid, Postoperative Pain, Orthopaedic Surgeries

scholarly journals Comparison of 0.5% Ropivacaine and 0.5% Bupivacaine in Lumbar Epidural Anaesthesia for Lower Limb Orthopaedic Surgery

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (3) ◽  
pp. 262-266 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. P. McGlade ◽  
M. V. Kalpokas ◽  
P. H. Mooney ◽  
M. R. Buckland ◽  
S. K. Vallipuram ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Lower Limb ◽  
Orthopaedic Surgery ◽  
Motor Block ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Sensory Block ◽  
Pressure Profile ◽  
Technical Failure ◽  
Time Duration ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Multi Centre Study

The purpose of this study was to compare the epidural use of 0.5% ropivacaine and 0.5% bupivacaine in patients undergoing lower limb orthopaedic surgery. In a double-blind, randomized, multi-centre study involving 67 patients, thirty-two patients received 20 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine and 35 patients received 20 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine at the L2,3 or L3,4 interspace. Parameters measured were the onset time, duration and spread of sensory block, the onset time, duration and degree of motor block, the quality of anaesthesia and the heart rate and blood pressure profile during block onset. Four patients (3 ropivacaine, 1 bupivacaine) were excluded from the study due to technical failure of the block. The onset and duration of analgesia at the T10 dermatome (median, interquartile range) was 10 (5-15) minutes and 3.5 (2.7-4.3) hours respectively for ropivacaine, and was 10 (6-15) minutes and 3.4 (2.5-3.8) hours respectively for bupivacaine. Maximum block height (median, range) was T6 (T2-T12) for ropivacaine and T6 (C7-T10) for bupivacaine. Nine patients receiving ropivacaine and eight patients receiving bupivacaine developed no apparent motor block. The incidence of complete motor block (Bromage grade 3) was low in both groups, being 4/27 for ropivacaine and 6/34 for bupivacaine. In the ropivacaine group, motor and sensory block were judged to be satisfactory in 78% of patients. In the bupivacaine group, motor and sensory block were judged to be satisfactory in 71% and 62% of patients respectively. Cardiovascular changes were similar in both groups. No statistical differences were found between the two groups regarding any of the study parameters.

scholarly journals A Comparison of 0.5% Ropivacaine and 0.5% Bupivacaine for Axillary Brachial Plexus Anaesthesia

1998 ◽  
Vol 26 (5) ◽  
pp. 515-520 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. P. McGlade ◽  
M. V. Kalpokas ◽  
P. H. Mooney ◽  
D. Chamley ◽  
A. H. Mark ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Brachial Plexus ◽  
Median Duration ◽  
Motor Block ◽  
Brachial Plexus Block ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Local Anaesthetics ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Peripheral Nerve Stimulator ◽  
Upper Limb Surgery ◽  
Plexus Block

The purpose of this study was to compare the use of 0.5% ropivacaine with 0.5% bupivacaine for axillary brachial plexus anaesthesia. Sixty-six patients undergoing upper limb surgery were enrolled in a double-blind, randomized, multicentre trial. Five patients were subsequently excluded for various reasons. Of the remaining patients, 30 received 40 ml of 0.5%) ropivacaine and 31 received 40 ml of 0.5% bupivacaine. Brachial plexus block was performed by the axillary approach using a standardized technique with a peripheral nerve stimulator. Parameters investigated included the frequency, onset and duration of sensory and motor block, the quality of anaesthesia and the occurrence of any adverse events. The six principal nerves of the brachial plexus were studied individually. The frequency for achieving anaesthesia per nerve ranged from 70 to 90% in the ropivacaine group and 81 to 87% in the bupivacaine group. The median onset time for anaesthesia was 10 to 20 minutes with ropivacaine and 10 to 30 minutes with bupivacaine, and the median duration was 5.3 to 8.7h with ropivacaine and 6.9 to 20.3h with bupivacaine. Motor block was evaluated at the elbow, wrist and hand, and was completely achieved at a rate of 60 to 73% in the ropivacaine group and 55 to 71% in the bupivacaine group. The median duration of motor block was 6.5 to 7.5h with ropivacaine and 6.0 to 9.0h with bupivacaine. These parameters were not statistically different. The duration of partial motor block at the wrist (6.8 v 16.4h) and hand (6.7 v 12.3h) was significantly longer with bupivacaine. Ropivacaine 0.5% and bupivacaine 0.5%) appeared equally efficacious as long-acting local anaesthetics for axillary brachial plexus block.

scholarly journals Comparative study between the effect of dexmedetomidine and lidocaine infusion in lumbar fixation on hemodynamics, fentanyl requirements, and postoperative analgesia

2020 ◽  
Vol 12 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Nayera S. Mohammed ◽  
Mariam K. Habib ◽  
Essam A. Abbas ◽  
Sahar M. Mahmoud ◽  
Ibraheem A. Ramadan
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Comparative Study ◽  
Postoperative Analgesia ◽  
Rating Scale ◽  
Hospital Costs ◽  
Treatment Modalities ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Alternative Mode ◽  
Arterial Blood ◽  
Group D

Abstract Background Spinal surgery is associated with high incidence of severe postoperative pain difficult to easy control. Appropriate treatment modalities decreased the postoperative morbidity, increased patient satisfaction, allowed early mobility, and decreased hospital costs. Lidocaine was used as intravenous additives to control intraoperative pain and decrease postoperative pain. As lidocaine, dexmedetomidine infusion associated with lower postoperative pain scores decreased the opioid consumption and its related adverse events. The aim of this double blind randomized prospective comparative study was to compare the efficacy of intraoperative dexmedetomidine versus lidocaine infusion on hemodynamics, fentanyl requirements, and postoperative analgesia among 66 patients subjected to lumbar fixation surgery and randomized into group D which received dexmedetomidine 1 μg/kg infusion over 10 min as a loading dose then 0.3–0.5 μg/kg/h after induction of anesthesia as maintenance dose and group X which received lidocaine 0.3–0.5 mg/kg/h after induction of anesthesia. Results At 10, 15, 30, and 60 min, the mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate significantly decreased in group D compared to group X, and there was significantly higher total dose of intraoperative analgesic for fentanyl in group X than group D. There was significantly higher numeric rating scale in group X compared to group D at 2, 4, 6, 9, 12, 18, and 24 h postoperative with significant early request of the first analgesia, higher incidence of analgesic needs, and higher dose of postoperative analgesia paracetamol, voltaren, or pethidine in group X compared to group D. Conclusions The intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine IV infusion was an alternative mode to decrease the demands of analgesia following spine surgery.

scholarly journals The Antinociceptive Effect of Epidural Lignocaine and Fentanyl during Lithotripsy

1997 ◽  
Vol 25 (1) ◽  
pp. 11-14 ◽  
Author(s):  
B. Fredman ◽  
D. Olsfanger ◽  
H. Blubstein ◽  
R. Jedeikin
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Antinociceptive Effect ◽  
Painful Stimulus ◽  
Epidural Fentanyl ◽  
Double Blind Study ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Treatment Groups ◽  
Arterial Blood ◽  
Blood Pressures ◽  
Intraoperative Pain

To determine the antinociceptive effect of combining epidural fentanyl with lignocaine during non-immersion lithotripsy, 56 healthy patients were enrolled into a prospective, randomized, double-blind study. Epidural anaesthesia was induced with either lignocaine 300 mg alone, or lignocaine 300 mg, or 200 mg in combination with fentanyl 100 μg. Throughout the procedure analgesia was assessed by comparing the incidence of (a) spontaneous complaints of pain, (b) patients’ attempts to withdraw from the painful stimulus, (c) supplemental epidural lignocaine requirements, (d) the haemodynamic response to lithotripsy and (e) the time to first postoperative pain. The patients who received the fentanyl-lignocaine 300 mg combination required no supplemental lignocaine, experienced marginally less intraoperative pain and recorded lower mean arterial blood pressures when compared with lignocaine 300 mg alone. However, when the combination of lignocaine 200 mg and fentanyl 100 μg was administered, patients experienced significantly more pain, withdrew from the painful stimulus more often and received more supplemental lignocaine when compared with the other two treatment groups. No difference was found in the time to the first complaint of postoperative pain. Similarly, discharge times were unaffected by treatment modality. We conclude that despite the addition of fentanyl, adequate analgesia during lithotripsy is dependent upon the dose of local anaesthetic administered.

scholarly journals Comparison of Postoperative Analgesic Effect of Dexamethasone and Fentanyl Added to Lidocaine through Axillary Block in Forearm Fracture

2013 ◽  
Vol 2013 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Siamak Yaghoobi ◽  
Mahyar Seddighi ◽  
Zohreh Yazdi ◽  
Razieh Ghafouri ◽  
Marzieh Beigom Khezri
Keyword(s):  
Analgesic Effect ◽  
Motor Block ◽  
Forearm Fracture ◽  
Onset Time ◽  
Analgesic Efficacy ◽  
Controlled Study ◽  
Axillary Block ◽  
Regional Analgesia ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Hemodynamic Variables

Aim. Regional analgesia has been introduced as better analgesic technique compared to using systemic analgesic agents, and it may decrease the adverse effects of them and increase the degree of satisfaction. Several additives have been suggested to enhance analgesic effect of local anesthetic agents such as opioids and steroids. We designed this randomized double-blind controlled study to compare the analgesic efficacy of the dexamethasone and fentanyl added to lidocaine using axillary block in patients undergoing operation of forearm fracture. Materials and Methods. Seventy-eight patients 20–60 years old were recruited in a prospective, double-blinded, randomized way. Axillary block was performed in the three groups by using 40 mL lidocaine and 2 mL distilled water (L group), 40 mL lidocaine and 2 mL dexamethasone (LD group), and 40 mL lidocaine and 2 mL fentanyl (LF group). The onset time of sensory and motor block, duration of sensory and motor block, the total analgesic dose administered during 6 hours after the surgery, and hemodynamic variables were recorded. Results. The duration of sensory and motor block was significantly longer in LD group compared to other groups (P<0.001). Similarly, the total analgesic consumption in LD group was smaller compared to other groups (P<0.001). Comparison of hemodynamic consequences of axillary block and surgery failed to reveal any statistically significant differences between all groups. Conclusion. Addition of dexamethasone to lidocaine significantly prolonged the duration of analgesia compared with fentanyl/lidocaine mixture or lidocaine alone using axillary block in patients undergoing forearm fracture surgery. This trial is registered with IRCT2012120711687N1.

The Effect of Perianal Tramadol Infiltration on Postoperative Pain Following Hemorrhoidectomy

2020 ◽  
pp. 000313482098168
Author(s):  
Maryam Hatami ◽  
Mohammad Talebi ◽  
Naimeh Heiranizadeh ◽  
Sedighe Vaziribozorg
Keyword(s):  
Postoperative Pain ◽  
Pain Score ◽  
Postoperative Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Nausea And Vomiting ◽  
Topical Anesthetic ◽  
Double Blind ◽  
Double Blind Clinical Trial ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Duration Of Surgery ◽  
Grade 3

Introduction The present study was attempted to evaluate the effect of perianal infiltration of tramadol on postoperative pain in patients undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. Method This double-blind clinical trial study was carried out on 90 patients with grade 3 and 4 hemorrhoids undergoing hemorrhoidectomy. Patients were randomly assigned into 3 groups of control or bupivacaine or tramadol. Before the surgery, perianal infiltration of .25% bupivacaine or tramadol or normal saline was prescribed to each group, respectively. Data on pain severity (based on the visual analog scale (VAS), the duration of surgery, sedation score, pain at the first defecation, first request time for additional analgesia, nausea and vomiting, and analgesic intakes) were evaluated and analyzed. Results Duration of surgery was almost similar in all 3 groups ( P = .974). The results showed a significant difference in pain score between 3 groups ( P ≤.05) at all times after the surgery. In addition, the means of sedation scores ( P = .03), pain score at the first defecation ( P = .001), the time to first analgesic request ( P = .001), and ketorolac administration times ( P = .01) were significantly different between 3 groups. Finally, no complication was reported regarding postoperative nausea and vomiting. Conclusion Given the notable efficacy of tramadol in reducing pain after hemorrhoidectomy and its minor side effects, this medication is suggested as an effective topical anesthetic to decrease pain after hemorrhoidectomy.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document