The use of neuromuscular blocking agents in noncardiac surgery after dynamic cardiomyoplasty.

Dynamic cardiomyoplasty is a surgical treatment to improve cardiac performance in patients with end-stage heart failure by wrapping the latissimus dorsi muscle around the heart. The use of skeletal muscle raises concerns about the safety of neuromuscular blocking agents used during general anaesthesia in noncardiac surgery in patients after cardiomyoplasty. We describe the administration of rocuronium to a patient undergoing carotid endarterectomy 18 months after cardiomyoplasty. No clinically relevant effects on haemodynamics were observed. We conclude that the use of nondepolarising neuromuscular blocking agents for noncardiac surgery in patients after cardiomyoplasty does not compromise cardiac performance in a clinically relevant way, although the time between the cardiomyoplasty procedure and the use of nondepolarising neuromuscular blocking agents remains a concern.

Postoperative analgesia with intramuscular morphine at fixed rate versus epidural morphine or sufentanil and bupivacaine in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery.

UNLABELLED: We assessed the efficacy and side effects of postoperative analgesia with three different pain regimens in 90 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. The patients were randomly assigned to one of three groups: epidural morphine (EM) or sufentanil (ES), both combined with bupivacaine, or IM morphine (IM) at fixed intervals. Before incision, patients in the epidural groups received sufentanil or morphine in bupivacaine via a thoracic catheter, followed by a continuous infusion 1 h later. General anesthesia consisted of N2O/O2 and isoflurane for all groups. Patients in all groups received IV sufentanil as part of their anesthetic management. Patients in the IM group received IV sufentanil 1 microg/kg before incision, and patients in all groups received sufentanil 10 microg for inadequate analgesia. Postoperatively, the epidural or IM treatment was continued for > or =5 days. Postoperative analgesia at rest and during coughing and movement was significantly better in the epidural groups than in the IM group during the 5 consecutive days. There were no significant differences between the epidural groups. The incidence of most side effects was similar in all groups. We conclude that epidural analgesia provided better pain relief than IM analgesia, even if the latter was optimized by fixed-dose administration at fixed intervals and included adjustments on demand. Epidural sufentanil and morphine, both combined with bupivacaine, seemed to be equally effective with similar side effects. IMPLICATIONS: Postoperative analgesia with epidural sufentanil or morphine and bupivacaine after major abdominal surgery seemed to be better than the conventional method of IM morphine treatment, despite optimal administration, i.e., fixed doses at fixed intervals with regular adjustments. Analgesic efficacy and side effects of epidural sufentanil and morphine were similar.

Postoperative analgesia with continuous epidural sufentanil and bupivacaine: a prospective study in 614 patients.

To assess the efficacy and safety of postoperative analgesia with continuous epidural sufentanil and bupivacaine, we performed a prospective study in 614 patients undergoing major surgery. Before surgical incision, all patients received an initial dose of 50 micrograms sufentanil in 6-10 mL bupivacaine 0.125% via a lumbar or thoracic catheter. After 1 h, a continuous infusion was started with 50 micrograms sufentanil in 50 mL bupivacaine 0.125% at a rate of 6-10 mL/h. The infusion was continued postoperatively for 1-5 days or longer, depending on the type of operation and the patient's analgesic need. In the majority of patients, adequate pain relief was obtained at rest and during movement. Late respiratory depression was observed in three patients; in most patients only minor side effects were seen. Technical complications during epidural puncture or insertion of the catheter were 4% and 3%, respectively. We conclude that continuous epidural sufentanil and bupivacaine is safe and effective.

Does epidural sufentanil provide effective analgesia per- and postoperatively for abdominal aortic surgery?

To assess the efficacy of epidural sufentanil in providing per- and postoperative analgesia, 40 patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic surgery received either 50 mu g sufentanil in 10 ml normal saline solution (n = 20, ES group) or 10 ml normal saline (n = 20, control group) via a thoracic epidural catheter. The study solution was given (double-blind and at random) after the patients had been anaesthetized with i.v. midazolam, sufentanil and vecuronium. Anaesthesia was maintained with 60% nitrous oxide in oxygen and halothane at a 1% inspiratory concentration. When patients showed signs of inadequate analgesia, supplementary doses of 25 mu g sufentanil were given i.v. The number of patients requiring additional i.v. sufentanil differed significantly between the two groups: 5 out of 20 patients in the ES group vs 13 out of 20 patients in the control group required additional sufentanil (P<0.05). The mean dose administered i.v. did not differ significantly between the two groups: 105 +/- 109.5 mu g vs 138.5 +/- 126.9 mu g (mean +/- SD) in 5 and 13 patients, respectively. No cardiovascular changes were observed after the epidural bolus dose. Postoperative analgesia, consisting of a continuous epidural infusion of 50 mu g sufentanil in 50 ml bupivacaine 0.125% at a rate of 6-10 ml/h after a bolus dose of 10 ml of this solution, was adequate in the majority of patients, as determined by VAS-scores assessed during the epidural treatment (4.3 +/- 1.5 days).

A case of malignant hyperthermia?

An acute episode of a malignant hyperthermia-like syndrome is described which occurred after suxamethonium and isoflurane anaesthesia in a 41-year-old healthy male patient undergoing a minor elective hand operation. Dantrolene therapy rapidly reversed the life-threatening signs. Laboratory results appeared to confirm the suspicion of malignant hyperthermia. However, the in vitro contracture test, which was carried out according to the standards of the European Malignant Hyperthermia Group, was equivocal.