British journal of anaesthesia · 2006
The effect of epidural sufentanil in ropivacaine on urinary retention in patients undergoing gastrectomy.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяРандомизированное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Kim J Y, Lee S J, Koo B N, Noh S H, Kil H K, Kim H S, Ban S Y
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Although epidural opioids have excellent analgesic property, their side-effects limit its use in patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA). This study was designed to compare side-effects of epidural sufentanil in ropivacaine with that of morphine in ropivacaine focusing on lower urinary tract function after major abdominal surgery.
METHODS: In total 60 patients undergoing gastrectomy were randomly allocated to receive either sufentanil in ropivacaine (Group S, n=30) or morphine in ropivacaine (Group M, n=30) for their PCEA. Epidural catheter was inserted between the 7th and 8th thoracic spine. Visual analogue pain score and side-effects such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus, hypotension and urinary retention were evaluated during postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 2 in the postanaesthetic care unit.
RESULTS: The incidence of serious to major micturition problem in Group S was lower than that in Group M (P<0.001). The incidence of pruritus, nausea and vomiting was also lower in Group S than in Group M on POD 1.
CONCLUSIONS: The lower incidence of major/serious micturition problem in patients receiving sufentanil in ropivacaine thoracic epidural analgesia suggests that continuation of urinary drainage may not be necessary from POD 1 onwards.
METHODS: In total 60 patients undergoing gastrectomy were randomly allocated to receive either sufentanil in ropivacaine (Group S, n=30) or morphine in ropivacaine (Group M, n=30) for their PCEA. Epidural catheter was inserted between the 7th and 8th thoracic spine. Visual analogue pain score and side-effects such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus, hypotension and urinary retention were evaluated during postoperative days (PODs) 1 and 2 in the postanaesthetic care unit.
RESULTS: The incidence of serious to major micturition problem in Group S was lower than that in Group M (P<0.001). The incidence of pruritus, nausea and vomiting was also lower in Group S than in Group M on POD 1.
CONCLUSIONS: The lower incidence of major/serious micturition problem in patients receiving sufentanil in ropivacaine thoracic epidural analgesia suggests that continuation of urinary drainage may not be necessary from POD 1 onwards.