Anaesthetic management of two different modes of delivery in patients with dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa.

Dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa is an inherited severe bullous condition characterised by extreme skin fragility and blistering in response to minor trauma. We present two obstetric cases with recessive dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa, one who underwent elective caesarean section, the other who delivered vaginally. The key points in the anaesthetic management of the obstetric patient with dystrophic epidermolysis bullosa include multidisciplinary preassessment, airway management strategies and the role of regional anaesthesia.

Analgesia for adenotonsillectomy in children and young adults: a comparison of tramadol, pethidine and nalbuphine.

A prospective, double-blind, randomized, controlled study was undertaken to compare the perioperative analgesic and recovery characteristics of equipotent doses of tramadol, pethidine and nalbuphine (3.0 mg kg-1, 1.5 mg kg-1 and 0.3 mg kg-1 respectively) with placebo (saline 0.02 ml kg-1) given at induction of anaesthesia in 152 ASA 1 children and young adults undergoing tonsillo-adenoidectomy. Premedication (temazepam and diclofenac), induction and maintenance of anaesthesia (thiopentone, atracurium, nitrous oxide and isoflurane), with controlled ventilation, were standardized. Variables monitored were heart rate (HR) and systolic arterial pressure (SAP) during surgery, time to recovery of spontaneous respiration at the termination of anaesthesia and restlessness, time to awakening, sedation and emesis in the recovery unit. Increases in HR or SAP > 33% of baseline during surgery were treated with esmolol 2.0 mg kg-1 intravenously (i.v.) and restlessness during recovery was treated with the same opioid i.v. given with an aesthesia, or pethidine i.v. in the placebo group. With placebo, there was a high requirement for esmolol during surgery and for pethidine in the recovery ward. Tramadol did not reduce the rate of intra-operative treatment with esmolol, but reduced the tramadol requirement during recovery (P < 0.05). Pethidine and nalbuphine reduced the intra-operative esmolol requirement more significantly (P < 0.025 and P < 0.005 respectively) and the need for treatment during recovery with opioids (P < 0.005 each). The time to recovery of spontaneous respiration at the end of anaesthesia was only delayed by pethidine. Other recovery variables were similar, except that restlessness-pain scores were reduced by tramadol (P < 0.02), pethidine (P < 0.005) and nalbuphine (P < 0.005). These results suggest that pethidine 1.5 mg kg-1 and nalbuphine 0.3 mg kg-1 given with induction of anaesthesia provide better analgesia during and after tonsillo-adenoidectomy than does tramadol 3.0 mg kg-1. The delay to recovery of spontaneous respiration with pethidine suggests a greater safety profile of nalbuphine and tramadol.

The effects of tramadol on postoperative nausea, vomiting and headache after ENT surgery. A placebo-controlled comparison with equipotent doses of nalbuphine and pethidine.

BACKGROUND: Opioids given as adjuncts to balanced inhalational anaesthesia augment postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Tramadol, equipotent to pethidine, does not depress respiration, but can cause an increase in blood pressure and headache via its monoaminergic actions. Nalbuphine, ten times as potent as pethidine, has a ceiling respiratory depressant and ceiling analgesic effect at > 0.3 mg.kg-1. We compared the effects of equipotent doses of tramadol and nalbuphine (3.0 and 0.3 mg.kg-1, respectively) given as analgesic with induction of anaesthesia on emesis during recovery from anaesthesia and on PONV and headache until 24 h after ENT surgery, using saline (0.2 ml.kg-1) and an equipotent dose of pethidine (1.5 mg.kg-1) as controls. METHOD: The study population (N = 281) comprised 4 comparable subgroups (N = 69 to 71 each). Anaesthetic medications were standardised. Emesis during recovery from anaesthesia and nausea, vomiting, retching, headache and administrations of antiemetic and analgesics until 24 h after surgery were recorded. RESULTS: Emesis and antiemetic requirements during recovery from anaesthesia were similar and infrequent in each group, as were the incidences of nausea alone (3 to 5%), vomiting alone (17 to 31%), and nausea with vomiting (10 to 22%) during the first 24 h after surgery. However, any complaint of PONV was least frequent in the saline and pethidine groups (32% and 37%, respectively) and most frequent in the tramadol and nalbuphine groups (49% and 52%, respectively; P < 0.05 versus saline, both comparisons; P = NS versus pethidine, both comparisons). The times to onset and severity of PONV were similar in each group, but patients given nalbuphine most frequently (P < 0.025) needed rescue antiemetic to treat PONV. Headache occurred with similar frequency in each group. CONCLUSION: It is concluded that tramadol, nalbuphine and pethidine have similar emetic effect in the doses and manner used, and that tramadol does not increase the incidence of post-operative headache when used as peroperative analgesic.