Effect of intravenous metoclopramide on intraocular pressure: a prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Prevention of rise in intraocular pressure (IOP) is essential in patients undergoing surgery for perforated eye injuries. Metoclopramide, a prokinetic agent, is commonly used to hasten gastric emptying in emergency surgeries. AIM: To study the change in IOP after intravenous metoclopramide and to study the influence of metoclopramide on change in IOP after succinylcholine and tracheal intubation. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study of 60 patients undergoing non-ophthalmic elective surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I adult patients were randomly assigned to receive normal saline (Group C) or metoclopramide 10 mg (Group M) 30 min before the induction of anesthesia. Thiopentone was used for induction and succinylcholine for tracheal intubation. Intraocular pressure was measured in both the eyes pre and post drug treatment and succinylcholine and tracheal intubation using Perkins applanation tonometer. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Student's t-test and repeated measures ANOVA were used. A P value < 0.05 was considered as significant. RESULTS: Intraocular pressure was consistently lower in Group M than in Group C after the test drug, though the difference was not statistically significant. Intraocular pressure decreased significantly after administration of thiopentone and increased significantly in Groups C and M after tracheal intubation (P<0.01). Intraocular pressure was comparable between the groups at all the times. CONCLUSIONS: Metoclopramide does not cause a clinically significant change in IOP nor does it influence the changes in IOP during anesthesia and tracheal intubation. Metoclopramide shows a trend towards decrease in IOP, though clinically insignificant. Therefore metoclopramide can be used to promote gastric emptying in patients with perforated eye injury.

Sedation in patients above 60 years of age undergoing urological surgery under spinal anesthesia: comparison of propofol and midazolam infusions.

CONTEXT: Propofol and midazolam are commonly used sedatives during regional anesthesia in adults. Smaller doses of these drugs are required in older age due to altered pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics. AIMS: To study the sedation, side-effects and the costs involved with smaller doses of propofol and midazolam in patients aged above 60 years during spinal anesthesia. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A randomized single-blind study was conducted in 60 ASA I-II patients aged > or = 60 years undergoing urological surgery under spinal anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sedation was administered after spinal anesthesia using propofol (bolus 0.4 mg.kg -1; infusion 3 mg/kg/hr) or midazolam (bolus 0.02 mg/kg; infusion 0.06 mg.kg -1.h -1) and titrated to achieve a sedation score of 3 on the modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation Scale. Perioperative sedation, hemodynamics and respiratory events were monitored. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: The analysis for parametric data was done using Student's unpaired t test and the incidence data using Chi-square test. RESULTS: The onset (13.0+/-4.2 vs. 18.8+/-4.2 min, P < 0.001) and offset (8.9+/-2.8 vs. 12.5+/-3.5 min, P < 0.001) of sedation were faster and the duration of adequate sedation longer (44.7+/-12.5 vs. 29.8+/-12.9% of total infusion time, P < 0.001) with propofol than midazolam. More patients receiving propofol compared to midazolam had hypotension (16 [50%] vs.4 [14.3%], P= 0.003). Airway obstruction occurred frequently in both the groups. Sedation was significantly more expensive with propofol than midazolam (US$ 9.83 +/- 2.80 vs. US$ 0.33 +/- 0.06, P 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Propofol provided better titration and adequacy of sedation than midazolam in patients above 60 years of age, but caused hypotension. Lighter sedation is recommended in this age group.

Neostigmine does not prolong the duration of analgesia produced by caudal bupivacaine in children undergoing urethroplasty.

CONTEXT: Neostigmine extends the duration of analgesia produced by caudal bupivacaine in children. AIMS: To study the effect of different doses of caudal neostigmine on the duration of postoperative analgesia. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: A randomized, double-blind study was conducted in 120 boys aged 1-12 years undergoing urethroplasty under combined general and caudal anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Children were administered 1.875 mg/kg bupivacaine alone (Group B) or with 2, 3 or 4 microg/kg of neostigmine (groups BN 2, BN 3 or BN 4 respectively) as caudal drug (0.75 ml/kg). Children with a pain score of 4 or more (OPS and NRS) postoperatively were administered rescue analgesic. Time to first analgesic and the number of analgesic doses administered in the 24h were recorded. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Parametric data were analyzed using ANOVA. Kaplan-Meier survival curves for the time to first analgesic administration were plotted and compared using log rank analysis. Chi-square test was used to analyze the incidence data. RESULTS: The median [IQR] time to first analgesic in Group B (540 [240-1441] min) was similar to that in Groups BN 2 (450 [240-720]), BN 3 (600 [360-1020]) and BN 4 (990 [420-1441]). Significantly more patients in Groups B (9 [34.6%]) and BN 4 (13 [44.8%]) required no supplemental analgesic for 24h than those in Groups BN 2 and BN 3 (4 [13.8%] and 4 [13.3%]). The number of analgesic doses required in 24h in the four groups was similar. CONCLUSION: Addition of neostigmine to 1.875 mg/kg of caudal bupivacaine did not prolong the analgesia following urethroplasty in children.