Acta anaesthesiologica Scandinavica · 2000
Preoperative ropivacaine infiltration in breast surgery.
Клиническое исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Johansson A, Axelson J, Ingvar C, Luttropp H-H, Lundberg J
Аннотация
PURPOSE: The aim of the study was to investigate whether preoperative infiltration with ropivacaine in conjunction with breast surgery improves postoperative pain management and attenuates postoperative nausea and vomiting.
METHOD: Prospective, randomised, double-blind study, including 60 healthy women (ASA 1-2) allocated to one of two groups. Thirty patients were given 0.3 ml/kg saline in the operating field before surgery. Another 30 patients received a similar volume of ropivacaine 3.75 mg/ml. A visual analogue scale (0-100 mm) was used for evaluation of postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting. If the score was more than 30 mm at rest, the patients were given ketobemidone i.v. as treatment for postoperative pain, and dixyrazine i.v. against nausea and vomiting. The intra-and postoperative analgesic requirements and postoperative nausea and vomiting were registered.
RESULTS: The intraoperative fentanyl consumption was similar in the saline group 81 +/- 22 microg vs 76 +/- 28 microg; (ns) in the ropivacaine group. The postoperative 24-h ketobemidone consumption was also similar to those treated with ropivacaine (4.2 +/- 2.6 mg vs 4.2 +/- 4.3 mg; ns). Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurred with similar frequencies in both groups. The 24-h dixyrazine consumption was the same in the two groups (2.1 +/- 2.7 mg in the saline group compared to 2.4 +/- 2.8 mg in the ropivacaine group; ns). After 6 h recovery, 41% of all patients had experienced nausea and 20% vomiting.
CONCLUSION: We found no differences in postoperative pain management between 3.75 mg/ml ropivacaine and saline wound infiltration before breast surgery. The data show similar postoperative needs of analgesics and antiemetics with a similar frequency of PONV.
METHOD: Prospective, randomised, double-blind study, including 60 healthy women (ASA 1-2) allocated to one of two groups. Thirty patients were given 0.3 ml/kg saline in the operating field before surgery. Another 30 patients received a similar volume of ropivacaine 3.75 mg/ml. A visual analogue scale (0-100 mm) was used for evaluation of postoperative pain, nausea and vomiting. If the score was more than 30 mm at rest, the patients were given ketobemidone i.v. as treatment for postoperative pain, and dixyrazine i.v. against nausea and vomiting. The intra-and postoperative analgesic requirements and postoperative nausea and vomiting were registered.
RESULTS: The intraoperative fentanyl consumption was similar in the saline group 81 +/- 22 microg vs 76 +/- 28 microg; (ns) in the ropivacaine group. The postoperative 24-h ketobemidone consumption was also similar to those treated with ropivacaine (4.2 +/- 2.6 mg vs 4.2 +/- 4.3 mg; ns). Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurred with similar frequencies in both groups. The 24-h dixyrazine consumption was the same in the two groups (2.1 +/- 2.7 mg in the saline group compared to 2.4 +/- 2.8 mg in the ropivacaine group; ns). After 6 h recovery, 41% of all patients had experienced nausea and 20% vomiting.
CONCLUSION: We found no differences in postoperative pain management between 3.75 mg/ml ropivacaine and saline wound infiltration before breast surgery. The data show similar postoperative needs of analgesics and antiemetics with a similar frequency of PONV.