Dataset Information

Comparison of Postoperative Pain and Adverse Effects between Variable-Rate Feedback Infusion and Conventional Fixed-Rate Basal Infusion Modes of Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia following Open Gastrectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

ABSTRACT: Patient-controlled epidural analgesia is widely used to control postoperative pain following major intra-abdominal surgeries. However, determining the optimal infusion dose that can produce effective analgesia while reducing side effects remains a task to be solved. Postoperative pain and adverse effects between variable-rate feedback infusion (VFIM group, n = 36) and conventional fixed-rate basal infusion (CFIM group, n = 36) of fentanyl/ropivacaine-based patient-controlled epidural analgesia were evaluated. In the CFIM group, the basal infusion rate was fixed (5 mL/h), whereas, in the VFIM group, the basal infusion rate was increased by 0.5 mL/h each time a bolus dose was administered and decreased by 0.3 mL/h when a bolus dose was not administered for 2 h. Patients in the VFIM group experienced significantly less pain at one to six hours after surgery than those in the CFIM group. Further, the number of patients who suffered from postoperative nausea was significantly lower in the VFIM group than in the CFIM group until six hours after surgery. The variable-rate feedback infusion mode of patient-controlled epidural analgesia may provide better analgesia accompanied with significantly less nausea in the early postoperative period than the conventional fixed-rate basal infusion mode following open gastrectomy.

SUBMITTER: Jang YK

PROVIDER: S-EPMC8391703 | biostudies-literature |

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Similar Datasets

Project description:BACKGROUND:Phenylephrine is the most commonly used vasopressor for prophylaxis against maternal hypotension during cesarean delivery; however, the best regimen for its administration is not well established. Although variable infusion protocols had been suggested for phenylephrine infusion, evidence-based evaluation of variable infusion regimens are lacking. The aim of this work is to compare variable infusion, fixed on-and-off infusion, and intermittent boluses of phenylephrine for prophylaxis against maternal hypotension during cesarean delivery. METHODS:A randomized controlled study was conducted, including full-term pregnant women scheduled for elective cesarean delivery. Participants were divided into three groups which received phenylephrine by either intermittent boluses (1.5 mcg/Kg phenylephrine), fixed on-and-off infusion (with a dose of 0.75 mcg/Kg/min), or variable infusion (with a starting dose of 0.75 mcg/Kg/min). The three groups were compared with regard to frequency of: maternal hypotension (primary outcome), second episode hypotension, reactive hypertension, and bradycardia. Other outcomes included heart rate, systolic blood pressure, physician interventions, and neonatal outcomes. RESULTS:Two-hundred and seventeen mothers were available for final analysis. The 2 infusion groups showed less incidence of maternal hypotension {26/70 (37%), 22/71 (31%), and (51/76 (67%)} and higher incidence of reactive hypertension compared to the intermittent boluses group without significant differences between the two former groups. The number of physician interventions was highest in the variable infusion group compared to the other two groups. The intermittent boluses group showed lower systolic blood pressure and higher heart rate compared to the two infusion groups; whilst the two later groups were comparable. CONCLUSION:Both phenylephrine infusion regimens equally prevented maternal hypotension during cesarean delivery compared to intermittent boluses regimen. Due to higher number of physician interventions in the variable infusion regimen, the current recommendations which favor this regimen over fixed infusion regimen might need re-evaluation.

Project description:OBJECTIVE:To determine women's satisfaction with pain relief using patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil compared with epidural analgesia during labour. DESIGN:Multicentre randomised controlled equivalence trial. SETTING:15 hospitals in the Netherlands. PARTICIPANTS:Women with an intermediate to high obstetric risk with an intention to deliver vaginally. To exclude a clinically relevant difference in satisfaction with pain relief of more than 10%, we needed to include 1136 women. Because of missing values for satisfaction this number was increased to 1400 before any analysis. We used multiple imputation to correct for missing data. INTERVENTION:Before the onset of active labour consenting women were randomised to a pain relief strategy with patient controlled remifentanil or epidural analgesia if they requested pain relief during labour. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES:Primary outcome was satisfaction with pain relief, measured hourly on a visual analogue scale and expressed as area under the curve (AUC), thus providing a time weighted measure of total satisfaction with pain relief. A higher AUC represents higher satisfaction with pain relief. Secondary outcomes were pain intensity scores, mode of delivery, and maternal and neonatal outcomes. Analysis was done by intention to treat. The study was defined as an equivalence study for the primary outcome. RESULTS:1414 women were randomised, of whom 709 were allocated to patient controlled remifentanil and 705 to epidural analgesia. Baseline characteristics were comparable. Pain relief was ultimately used in 65% (447/687) in the remifentanil group and 52% (347/671) in the epidural analgesia group (relative risk 1.32, 95% confidence interval 1.18 to 1.48). Cross over occurred in 7% (45/687) and 8% (51/671) of women, respectively. Of women primarily treated with remifentanil, 13% (53/402) converted to epidural analgesia, while in women primarily treated with epidural analgesia 1% (3/296) converted to remifentanil. The area under the curve for total satisfaction with pain relief was 30.9 in the remifentanil group versus 33.7 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -2.8, 95% confidence interval -6.9 to 1.3). For who actually received pain relief the area under the curve for satisfaction with pain relief after the start of pain relief was 25.6 in the remifentanil group versus 36.1 in the epidural analgesia group (mean difference -10.4, -13.9 to -7.0). The rate of caesarean section was 15% in both groups. Oxygen saturation was significantly lower (SpO2 <92%) in women who used remifentanil (relative risk 1.5, 1.4 to 1.7). Maternal and neonatal outcomes were comparable between both groups. CONCLUSION:In women in labour, patient controlled analgesia with remifentanil is not equivalent to epidural analgesia with respect to scores on satisfaction with pain relief. Satisfaction with pain relief was significantly higher in women who were allocated to and received epidural analgesia. TRIAL REGISTRATION:Netherlands Trial Register NTR2551.

Project description:IntroductionThis study aimed to compare the efficacy between patient-controlled caudal epidural analgesia (PCCA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) after perianal surgery, to provide a feasible solution to postoperative pain.MethodsThis was a prospective, randomized controlled trial comprising 100 patients who underwent caudal epidural block on perianal surgery at Chengdu Shang Jin Nan Fu Hospital of West China Hospital at Sichuan University between April and August 2020. Patients were randomly divided into the PCCA and PCIA groups. Visual analog scale (VAS) scores were recorded at 2, 4, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h after surgery, and at the first dressing change and first defecation. The lower limb mobility in the post-anesthetic recovery room (PACU) was determined. The analgesic effect, usage amount of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), usage amount and frequency of remedial analgesic measures, number of individuals who must be catheterized, and incidence of adverse reactions were recorded. Satisfaction of postoperative analgesic effect and convenience of PCA were also assessed.ResultsThe patients in the PCCA group had significantly lower VAS scores at 4, 6, 24, 48, 72 h, the first dressing change, and the first defecation compared with the PCIA group. There were more patients receiving postoperative remedial analgesics in the PCIA group than in the PCCA group. The outcome of the number of PCA and catheterization rates did not differ significantly between the groups. There were two cases of sensory numbness below the S3 plane. The major postoperative complications in the PCIA group were pruritus (3/47, 6.4%), nausea, and vomiting (6/47, 12.8%) (one case combined with pruritus). Patients in the PCCA group were more satisfied with the analgesic effect, while those in the PCIA group were more satisfied with the convenience.ConclusionIn the postoperative analgesia program of perianal surgery, PCCA may provide a better analgesic effect without increasing the incidence of complications.Trial registrationChinese Clinical Trial Registry identifier, ChiCTR2000038425, September 2020, retrospectively registered.

Dataset Information

Comparison of Postoperative Pain and Adverse Effects between Variable-Rate Feedback Infusion and Conventional Fixed-Rate Basal Infusion Modes of Patient-Controlled Epidural Analgesia following Open Gastrectomy: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets