17
views
0
recommends
+1 Recommend
1 collections
    0
    shares
      • Record: found
      • Abstract: found
      • Article: found
      Is Open Access

      Estudo comparativo entre fentanil por vias peridural e venosa para analgesia de operações ortopédicas Translated title: Comparative study of epidural and intravenous fentanyl for postoperative analgesia of orthopedic surgeries Translated title: Estudio comparativo entre fentanil por vías peridural y venosa para analgesia de operaciones ortopédicas

      research-article

      Read this article at

      Bookmark
          There is no author summary for this article yet. Authors can add summaries to their articles on ScienceOpen to make them more accessible to a non-specialist audience.

          Abstract

          JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Existem controvérsias sobre o local de ação de opióides lipofílicos após injeção peridural, e alguns autores acreditam que esses fármacos agem no nível supra-espinhal, enquanto outros acham que ocorre ação espinhal. Para tentar esclarecer essa dúvida foi feito estudo comparativo da aplicação de fentanil por vias peridural e venosa após operações ortopédicas de membro inferior. MÉTODO: O estudo foi aleatório e duplamente encoberto. Quando apresentavam dor pós-operatória, os pacientes do G1 (n = 14) receberam 5 ml de solução (100 µg de fentanil em solução fisiológica a 0,9%) por via peridural e 2 ml de solução fisiológica a 0,9% por via venosa, os do G2 (n = 15) receberam 5 ml de solução fisiológica a 0,9%, por via peridural e 2 ml de fentanil (100 µg) por via venosa. Foi avaliada a necessidade de complementação analgésica com tenoxicam (40 mg) por via venosa e com bupivacaína a 0,25% (5 ml) por via peridural (quando não havia alívio com tenoxicam). A intensidade da dor foi avaliada pelas escalas numérica e verbal nos momentos M30, M120 e M240 minutos. RESULTADOS: O número de pacientes que necessitaram de complementação analgésica, tanto com o tenoxicam (G1 = 10 e G2 = 15 pacientes) quanto com a bupivacaína (G1 = 2 e G2 = 8 pacientes) foi maior no G2. Não houve diferença estatística na intensidade da dor entre os grupos nos tempos avaliados. CONCLUSÕES: Nas condições deste estudo o efeito analgésico do fentanil peridural é melhor que por via venosa.

          Translated abstract

          BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: There are controversies about the action site of lipophylic opioids after epidural injection. Some authors believe that these drugs act at supraspinal level, while others propose a spinal action. This comparative study aimed at answering this question by comparing epidural and intravenous fentanyl for postoperative analgesia of lower limb orthopedic procedures. METHODS: This was a randomized double-blind study. At postoperative pain complaint, G1 patients (n = 14) received 5 mL epidural solution (100 µg fentanyl in 0.9% saline) and 2 mL of intravenous 0.9% saline; G2 patients (n = 15) received 5 mL epidural 0.9% saline and 2 mL intravenous fentanyl (100 µg). Analgesic complementation with intravenous tenoxicam (40 mg) and epidural 0.25% bupivacaine (5 mL) (when there was no relief with tenoxicam) has been evaluated. Pain intensity was evaluated by numeric and verbal scales in moments M30, M120 and M240 minutes. RESULTS: Number of patients needing analgesic complementation both with tenoxicam (G1 = 10 and G2 = 15 patients) and bupivacaine (G1 = 2 and G2 = 8 patients) has been higher in G2. There have been no statistical differences in pain intensity between groups in all studied moments. CONCLUSIONS: In the conditions of our study, effects of epidural fentanyl were better as compared to intravenous fentanyl.

          Translated abstract

          JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: Existen controversias sobre el local de acción de opioides lipofílicos después de inyección peridural, y algunos autores acreditan que eses fármacos actúan en el nivel supra-espinal, en cuanto otros suponen que ocurre acción espinal. Para tentar esclarecer esa duda fue hecho estudio comparativo de la aplicación de fentanil por vías peridural y venosa después de operaciones ortopédicas de miembro inferior. MÉTODO: El estudio fue aleatorio y duplamente encubierto. Cuando presentaban dolor pos-operatorio, los pacientes del G1 (n = 14) recibieron 5 ml de solución (100 µg de fentanil en solución fisiológica a 0,9%) por vía peridural y 2 ml de solución fisiológica a 0,9% por vía venosa, los del G2 (n = 15) recibieron 5 ml de solución fisiológica a 0,9%, por vía peridural y 2 ml de fentanil (100 µg) por vía venosa. Fue evaluada la necesidad de complementación analgésica con tenoxicam (40 mg) por vía venosa y con bupivacaína a 0,25% (5 ml) por vía peridural (cuando no había alivio con tenoxicam). La intensidad del dolor fue evaluada por las escalas numérica y verbal en los momentos M30, M120 y M240 minutos. RESULTADOS: El número de pacientes que necesitaron de complementación analgésica, tanto con el tenoxicam (G1 = 10 y G2 = 15 pacientes) cuanto con la bupivacaína (G1 = 2 y G2 = 8 pacientes) fue mayor en el G2. No hubo diferencia estadística en la intensidad del dolor entre los grupos en los tiempos evaluados. CONCLUSIONES: En las condiciones de este estudio el efecto analgésico del fentanil peridural es mejor que por vía venosa.

          Related collections

          Most cited references25

          • Record: found
          • Abstract: found
          • Article: not found

          Interaction of intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine and lidocaine in the rat.

          The interaction in the rat between intrathecal morphine and local anesthetics (bupivacaine and lidocaine) on nociception (52.5 degrees C hot plate and paw pressure), motor function, and autonomic function (blood pressure [BP] and heart rate [HR]) was examined over a range of doses for both morphine and the local anesthetics. High doses of intrathecal bupivacaine (75 micrograms) or lidocaine (500 micrograms) produced motor block and hypotension (150 micrograms bupivacaine) lasting approximately 15 and 7 min, respectively, whereas low doses of intrathecal bupivacaine (25 micrograms) and lidocaine (100 micrograms) produced only a transient motor weakness lasting 2 min or less. Alone, neither agent altered the hot plate or paw pressure response at doses, or at times, where the agents had no effect upon motor function. In contrast, at the low dose of either local anesthetic, after the resolution of the transient motor weakness, these doses resulted in a significant leftward shift in the dose-response curves for intrathecal morphine on both the hot plate and paw pressure, as measured by the maximum observed peak effect and by the area under the time-effect curve. Thus, for example, the morphine ED50 (95% confidence intervals) for morphine/saline was 1.7 micrograms (0.7-1.9) on the hot plate and 1.1 micrograms (0.8-1.4) on the paw pressure versus for morphine/bupivacaine (25 micrograms): hot plate 0.25 micrograms (0.21-0.42) and paw pressure 0.28 micrograms (0.2-0.4). Intrathecal morphine was not observed to have any effect on the dose-dependent effects of intrathecal bupivacaine on motor or autonomic blockade. Comparable results were also observed with lidocaine (bupivacaine was found to have no significant effect on spinal cord morphine clearance). We conclude that low doses of intrathecal lidocaine and bupivacaine, which alone have no antinociceptive effect, at times when motor function was clearly unimpaired, are able to significantly augment the antinociceptive activity of intrathecal morphine on the hot plate and paw pressure tests. This prominent and selective potentiation appears to occur via a non-pharmacokinetic mechanism and probably reflects upon the interaction of low concentrations of local anesthetics with systems in the spinal dorsal horn that process acute high threshold afferent input.
            Bookmark
            • Record: found
            • Abstract: not found
            • Article: not found

            Epidural fentanyl for postcesarean delivery pain management.

              Bookmark
              • Record: found
              • Abstract: not found
              • Article: not found

              Antinociceptive synergy between intrathecal morphine and lidocaine during visceral and somatic nociception in the rat

                Bookmark

                Author and article information

                Contributors
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Role: ND
                Journal
                rba
                Revista Brasileira de Anestesiologia
                Rev. Bras. Anestesiol.
                Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (Campinas )
                1806-907X
                October 2004
                : 54
                : 5
                : 634-639
                Affiliations
                [1 ] Universidade Federal de São Paulo Brazil
                [2 ] Universidade Federal de São Paulo Brazil
                [3 ] Universidade Federal do Maranhão
                Article
                S0034-70942004000500003
                10.1590/S0034-70942004000500003
                d485eef2-7b2f-4c21-aef8-2ebc7afa1232

                http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/

                History
                Product

                SciELO Brazil

                Self URI (journal page): http://www.scielo.br/scielo.php?script=sci_serial&pid=0034-7094&lng=en
                Categories
                ANESTHESIOLOGY

                Anesthesiology & Pain management
                ANALGESIA,ANALGESICS,ANESTHETIC TECHNIQUES,ANALGÉSICOS,TÉCNICAS ANESTÉSICAS

                Comments

                Comment on this article