Comparison of Sensory and Motor Nerve Block in Epidural Anesthesia Using a Different Concentrations of Ropivacaine for Cesarean Section / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to evaluate the sensory and motor nerve block achieved by epidural anesthesia using 0.475% ropivacaine and 0.75% ropivacaine. METHODS: Fifty-six patients undergoing cesarean section were randomly allocated to group I (0.75% ropivacaine) or group II (0.475% ropivacaine). We assessed changes in sensory and motor block using the Bromage scale over 180 minutes after epidural anesthesia. The incidence of nausea, vomiting and the total dosage of ephedrine used were also recorded. Sensory changes, motor blockade and the total dosage of ephedrine used were compared using the t-test (P < 0.05). RESULTS: No significant differences were found between the two groups at the sensory block level except at 30 and 60 minutes after epidural anesthesia. However, the motor blockade of group I was significantly more intense than that of group II at 15, 20, 25, 30, 60, 120 and 180 minutes after epidural anesthesia. No significant differences were observed between the two groups in the incidences of nausea, vomiting or the total dosage of ephedrine used. CONCLUSIONS: The use of 0.475% ropivacaine instead of 0.75% ropivacaine in epidural anesthesia for cesarean section did not reduce the incidence of nausea, vomiting or the total dosage of ephedrine used. The sensory block achieved using 0.75% ropivacaine was similar, but the motor blockade achieved using 0.475% ropivacaine was less intense with a shorter duration and an earlier recovery to normal than that of 0.75% ropivacaine. These results suggest that 0.475% ropivacaine may be more useful in epidural anesthesia for cesarean section than 0.75% ropivacaine.

The Effect of the IV-PCA (Intravenous-Patient Controlled Analgesia) on the Recovery Index / 대한마취과학회지

BACKGROUND: It is well known that intravenous patient controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) is an effective method to reduce the magnitude of postoperative pain. However, we do not know the appropriate time to start the IV-PCA. To determine the appropriate time to minimalize the sympathetic stimulation and shorten the awakening time after general anesthesia, experiments to indicate whether starting an infusion of the IV-PCA before the end of an operation has a minimal hemodynamic change and similar recovery index compared with the control group were done. METHODS: Seventy-eight patients scheduled for a total abdominal hysterectomy were randomly allocated to two groups. In the IV-PCA group (n = 37), we started the infusion of the IV-PCA before the end of the operation and in the control group (n = 41) which received no IV-PCA, we did not use the IV-PCA as a postoperative pain control method. We measured heart rate, blood pressure, postanesthesia recovery score every 10 minutes for 60 minutes and awakening time at the post-anesthesia care unit. RESULTS: The postanesthesia recovery scores on arrival, 10, 20, 30, 40 and 50 minute after arrival at the post-anesthesia care unit were lower in the IV-PCA group than in the control group. In addition the awakening time after vaporizer-off and at the post-anesthesia care unit was longer in the IV-PCA group than in the control group. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that starting the infusion of the IV-PCA before the end of the operation is not effective in early recovery and awakening.