No abstract

No abstract

Intrathecal injection of 50 mg of preservative-free 2-chloroprocaine 1% resulted in quicker recovery of sensory/motor function, and unassisted ambulation, and fewer incidences of transient neurologic symptoms than the same dose of 1% lidocaine.

We conclude that 0.75% levobupivacaine provides a shorter onset time than 0.5% levobupivacaine and a longer duration of postoperative analgesia than both 0.5% levobupivacaine and 0.75% ropivacaine with reduced need for rescue analgesia after surgery.

In 60 patients receiving elective hallux valgus repair, we compared the efficacy of continuous popliteal sciatic nerve block produced with 0.2% ropivacaine (n = 20), 0.2% levobupivacaine (n = 20), or 0.125% levobupivacaine (n = 20) infused with a patient-controlled system starting 3 h after a 30-mL bolus of the 0.5% concentration of the study drug and for 48 h (baseline infusion rate, 6 mL/h; incremental dose, 2 mL; lockout time, 15 min; maximum incremental doses per hour, 3). No differences were reported in the intraoperative efficacy of the nerve block. The degree of pain was similar in the three groups throughout the study period, both at rest and during motion. Total consumption of local anesthetic solution during the first 24 h was 148 mL (range, 144-228 mL) with 0.2% ropivacaine, 150 mL (range, 144-200 mL) with 0.2% levobupivacaine, and 148 mL (range, 144-164 mL) with 0.125% levobupivacaine (P = 0.59). The volume of local anesthetic consumed during the second postoperative day was 150 mL (range, 144-164 mL) with 0.2% ropivacaine, 154 mL (range, 144-176 mL) with 0.2% levobupivacaine, and 151 mL (range, 144-216 mL) with 0.125% levobupivacaine (P = 0.14). A smaller proportion of patients receiving 0.2% levobupivacaine showed complete recovery of foot motor function as compared with 0.2% ropivacaine and 0.125% levobupivacaine, both at 24 h (35% vs 85% and 95%; P = 0.0005) and at 48 h (60% vs 100% and 100%; P = 0.001). We conclude that sciatic infusion with both 0.125% and 0.2% levobupivacaine provides adequate postoperative analgesia after hallux valgus repair, clinically similar to that provided by 0.2% ropivacaine; however, the 0.125% concentration is preferred if early mobilization of the operated foot is required.

We evaluated the effects of adding clonidine for continuous peripheral nerve infusions. Sixty patients undergoing total knee arthroplasty under combined single-injection sciatic block and continuous femoral infusion were randomly allocated to three groups: block induction with 0.75% ropivacaine followed by 0.2% ropivacaine (group control; n = 20); block induction with 0.75% ropivacaine and 1 microg/kg clonidine followed by 0.2% ropivacaine (group cloni-bolus; n = 20), and block induction with 0.75% ropivacaine and 1 microg/kg clonidine followed by 0.2% ropivacaine with 1 microg/mL clonidine (group cloni-infusion; n = 20). After surgery, continuous femoral infusion was provided with a patient-controlled infusion pump (basal infusion rate, 6 mL/h; incremental dose, 2 mL; lockout time, 15 min). The median (range) onset time of surgical block was 15 min (5-30 min) in group control, 10 min (5-35 min) in group cloni-bolus, and 10 min (5-30 min) in group cloni-infusion (P = 0.07). No differences were reported among groups in the degree of pain measured with the visual analog scale. The total consumption of local anesthetic solution after a 24-h infusion was 170 mL (144-220 mL) in group control, 169 mL (144-260 mL) in group cloni-bolus, and 164 mL (144-248 mL) in group cloni-infusion (P = 0.51); after the second day of infusion, total consumption was 168 mL (144-200 mL) in group control, 156 mL (144-288 mL) in group cloni-bolus, and 150 mL (144-210 mL) in group cloni-infusion (P = 0.48). Hemodynamic profiles and sedation were similar in the three groups. Motor function impairment after 48 h of infusion was observed in 27% of cloni-infusion patients but in only 6% of both the control and cloni-bolus groups (P = 0.05). We conclude that adding clonidine 1 microg/mL to local anesthetic for continuous femoral nerve block does not improve the quality of pain relief but has the potential for delaying recovery of motor function.

No abstract

No abstract