FIG. 3. Calculated equilibrium density profiles of a deformable 4 He cylinder rotating around its symmetry axis at fixed L SF =N He ¼ 7.83ℏ for different numbers of vortices. Streamlines are shown in black. The positions of the vortex cores are marked by red dots for visualization. The color bar shows the density in units of Å −3 .

Using -minute retention in veins, both tramadol and lidocaine significantly reduced propofol injection pain. A local anesthetic activity is postulated.

No abstract

Purpose: To compared the clinical efficacy of tramadol and morphine using a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) delivery system. Methods: In a prospective, randomized, double blind study, we evaluated 80 adult patients scheduled for elective hip or knee arthroplasty with general inhalational anesthesia. When patients complained of pain in the recovery room, patients were randomized to receive either tramadol or morphine by titration in 30 min to achieve analgesia (VAS ~ 4). Equivalent volumes containing either 30 mg-ml -I tramadol or I mgml -I morphine were used for PCA with a lockout interval of 10 min. The patients were followed six-hourly for 48 hr for VAS, satisfaction rate, analgesic dose, and side effects. Results: Patients obtained adequate analgesia with either drug. More patients had very good satisfaction scores in the morphine group in the recovery room (43% vs 23%, P < 0.05) and at 24 hr (40% vs 20%, P < 0.05) than those in the tramadol group. More nausea was evident in the tramadol group (48% vs I I% in recovery room and 28% vs 12% in 24 hr, P < 0.05) than in the morphine group. Vomiting was also more (28% vs 5% in recovery room, 15% vs 3% in 24 hr, P < 0..05). Morphine produced more sleepiness (45% vs 23% in recovery room, P < 0.05 and 35% vs 15% in 24 hr, P < 0.05). Conclusion: Tramadol PCA can provide effective analgesia following major orthopedic surgery provided sufficiently high doses are given for loading and by patient demand. However, the incidence of nausea/vomiting is also higher causing decreased satisfaction.Objectif : Comparer I'efficacit~ clinique du tramadol et de la morphine en utilisant un syst~me d'analg&ie contr61~e par le patient (ACP). M~.thode : Lors d'une &ude prospective, randomis~e et en double aveugle, nous avons ~valu~ 80 adultes dont rarthroplastie de la hanche ou du genou avait ~t~ pr~vue avec une anesth&ie g~n&ale d'inhalation./~ la salle de r~veil, les patients r~partis au hasard ont re,u, quand ils ~prouvaient de ta douleur, du tramadol ou de la morphine selon un dosage permettant d'atteindre I'analg&ie (EVA ~ 4) en 30 min. Des volumes ~quivalents contenant 30 mg.ml -~ de tramadol ou I mg-ml -~ de morphine ont ~t~ utilis& pour I'ACP, qui comprenait une p&iode r~ffac-taire de 10 min. Les patients ont ~t~ revus ~ toutes les six heures pendant 48 h pour I'enregistrement des scores de I'EVA, de la satisfaction, de la dose d'analg&ique et des effets secondaires. l~-'ultats : Les patients ont obtenu une analg&ie suffisante avec I'un ou ['autre m~dicament. Un plus grand nombre de patients a &~ tr~s satisfait darts le groupe ayant re~u de la morphine ~ la salle de r~veil (43 % vs 23 %, P < 0,05) et ~ 24 h (40 % vs 20 %, P < 0,05) que ceux du groupe ayant re~u le tramadol. II y a eu davantage de naus~es dans le groupe du tramadol (48 % vs I 1% dans la salle de r~veil et 28 % vs 12 % ~ pendant les 24 premi&es heures, P < 0,05) que dans le groupe de la morphine. Les vomissements ont ~t~ ~galement plus frequents (28 % vs 5 % en salle de r~veil, 15 % vs 3 % pendant les 24 premi&es...

Administering the loading dose of tramadol during surgery decreases the nausea/vomiting associated with high dose of tramadol and improves the quality of tramadol PCA in the relief of postoperative pain.