Intrathecal fentanyl-induced pruritus is more severe in combination with procaine than with lidocaine or bupivacaine.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Fentanyl is used as an additive to prolong intrathecal anesthesia with both lidocaine and low-dose bupivacaine in the outpatient setting to minimize voiding or discharge delays. Pruritus is the most common side effect. When using procaine as a substitute for lidocaine, we perceived an increased frequency and severity of pruritus. We compared prospectively the frequency and severity of itching with combinations of fentanyl with lidocaine, bupivacaine, and procaine. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, 135 patients requesting neuraxial anesthesia were asked to evaluate the presence and severity (using a 100 point verbal pruritus score [VPS]) of itching 30 minutes after injection of their spinal anesthetic, on arrival to the postanesthesia care unit (PACU), and at the time of resolution of their block. Choice of anesthetic drug and dose and the use of intravenous sedation was left to the discretion of the attending and resident anesthesiologist. RESULTS: Thirty-three patients received lidocaine and fentanyl, 47 received bupivacaine and fentanyl, and 55 received procaine and fentanyl. In the lidocaine group, 21% of patients experienced pruritus compared with 55% of the bupivacaine group and 55% of the procaine group (P =.003). The average VPS at 30 minutes postblock was 18.4 in the procaine group compared with 0 and 5.5 in the lidocaine and bupivacaine groups (P =.06). On admission to the PACU, it was 37 compared with 16 and 20 for lidocaine and bupivacaine, respectively (P =.006). CONCLUSION: Procaine produces a higher frequency of pruritus than that seen with lidocaine-fentanyl combinations and a greater severity of pruritus than seen with lidocaine-fentanyl and bupivacaine-fentanyl spinal anesthesia. Reg Anesth Pain Med 2001;26:252-256.

Femoral nerve block with 0.25% or 0.5% bupivacaine improves postoperative analgesia following outpatient arthroscopic anterior cruciate ligament repair.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Femoral nerve block is effective in reducing postoperative pain after inpatient knee surgery. We studied its efficacy compared with standard analgesia following outpatient anterior cruciate ligament repair, including the duration of analgesia and the effect of different concentrations of bupivacaine. METHODS: After Institutional Review Board approval and informed consent, we prospectively randomized patients to receive, in a blinded fashion, either a sham block, a femoral nerve block with 25 mL 0.25% bupivacaine, or with 25 mL 0.5% bupivacaine after anterior cruciate ligament repair under epidural anesthesia. Verbal analog pain scores were evaluated by a blinded observer at 20 and 40 minutes after injection. Patients with pain >4 (out of 10) were assessed for the presence of a block and offered a supplemental block if no anesthesia was present at either evaluation. By prospective agreement, any study group with 6 failures was excluded from further recruitment. After discharge, patients recorded pain scores and analgesic consumption in a diary, and estimated the time at which they perceived that analgesia and sensory block from the femoral nerve block resolved, based on an increase in pain, sensation, and strength in the leg. RESULTS: In the sham block group, 6 of 12 patients reported inadequate analgesia in the postanesthesia care unit (4 at 20 minutes, 2 at 40 minutes; greater than other groups, P <.003) and were excluded from further study. Patients with sham blocks had higher pain scores 20 minutes after the block, and requested intravenous analgesia more often. Bupivacaine 0.25% and 0.5% provided 23.2 +/- 7 and 25.7 +/- 11 hours of analgesia, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Femoral nerve block with 0.25% bupivacaine contributes significantly to multimodal postoperative analgesia in the immediate postoperative period following outpatient anterior cruciate ligament repair. Both doses of bupivacaine studied provided analgesia for the first night after surgery.

A comparison of spinal, epidural, and general anesthesia for outpatient knee arthroscopy.

UNLABELLED: We compared general, epidural, and spinal anesthesia for outpatient knee arthroscopy (excluding anterior cruciate ligament repairs). Forty-eight patients (ASA physical status I-III) were randomized to receive either propofol-nitrous oxide general anesthesia with a laryngeal mask airway with anesthetic depth titrated to a bispectral index level of 40-60, 15-20 mL of 3% 2-chloroprocaine epidural, or 75 mg of subarachnoid procaine with 20 microg fentanyl. All patients were premedicated with <0.035 mg/kg midazolam and <1 microg/kg fentanyl and received intraarticular bupivacaine and 15-30 mg of IV ketorolac during the procedure. Recovery times, operating room turnover times, and patient satisfaction were recorded by an observer using an objective scale for recovery assessment and a verbal rating scale for satisfaction. Statistical analysis was performed with analysis of variance and chi(2). Postanesthesia care unit discharge times for the general and epidural groups were similar (general = 104+/-31 min, epidural = 92+/-18 min), whereas the spinal group had a longer recovery time (146+/-52 min) (P = 0.0003). Patient satisfaction was equally good in all three groups (P = 0.34). Room turnover times did not differ among groups (P = 0.16). There were no anesthetic failures or serious adverse events in any group. Pruritus was more frequent in the spinal group (7 of 16 required treatment) than in the general or epidural groups (no pruritus) (P<0.001). We conclude that epidural anesthesia with 2-chloroprocaine provides comparable recovery and discharge times to general anesthesia provided with propofol and nitrous oxide. Spinal anesthesia with procaine and fentanyl is an effective alternative and is associated with a longer discharge time and increased side effects. IMPLICATIONS: For outpatient knee arthroscopy, anesthesia can be provided adequately with regional or general anesthesia. Epidural and general anesthesia provide equal recovery times and patient satisfaction, whereas spinal anesthesia may prolong recovery and have increased side effects. The choice of anesthesia may depend primarily on the patient's interest in being alert or asleep during the procedure.