Laparoscopic cholecystectomy with carbon dioxide pneumoperitoneum is safe even for high-risk patients.

BACKGROUND: Because of absorbed carbon dioxide (CO(2)) and elevated intraabdominal pressure (IAP), CO(2) pneumoperitoneum (CO(2)PP) has potentially harmful intraoperative circulatory and ventilatory effects. Although not clinically significant for healthy patients, these effects are assumed to be deleterious for patients with a high risk for anesthesia (American Society of Anesthesiology [ASA] 3 and 4) and significant cardiopulmonary, renal, or hepatic diseases. The authors assessed CO(2)PP-related adverse effects by comparing ASA 3 and 4 patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) with or without CO(2)PP. METHODS: A total of 20 successive ASA 3 and 4 patients who underwent LC were randomized into CO(2)PP (n = 10) and abdominal wall elevator (Laparolift) (n = 10) groups. The parameters for perioperative hemodynamics, ventilation, perfusion of intraabdominal organs, and blood chemistry were recorded periodically from before the induction of the anesthesia until postoperative day 2 and compared between the groups. RESULTS: Mean age, height, weight, the proportional number of ASA 3 vs ASA 4 patients, the volume of perioperative fluid loading, and the dose of analgesics did not differ significantly between the groups. The length of the operation was 49.9 +/- 10.6 min for the CO(2)PP group and 50.6 +/- 17.2 min for Laparolift group (nonsignificant difference). The mean central venous pressure (CVP) 30 min after insufflation was higher (12.3 +/- 4.8 vs 7.9 +/- 3.7 mmHg) and the (Gastric Mucosal pH) pHi at the end of the operation was lower (7.29 +/- 0.07 vs 7.35 +/- 0.04) in the CO(2)PP group than in the Laparolift group (p < 0.05). Later, CVP and pHi did not differ significantly. Other parameters of hemodynamics including oxygenation, perfusion, and blood chemistry did not differ significantly. CONCLUSIONS: For LC for patients with an ASA 3 and 4 risk for anesthesia, no significant adverse effects could be attributed to CO(2 )pneumoperitoneum. For high-risk patients, preoperative preparation and active perioperative monitoring are essential for safe anesthesia for LC with or without CO(2)PP.

Premedication with controlled-release oxycodone does not improve management of postoperative pain after day-case gynaecological laparoscopic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Controlled-release (CR) oxycodone provides an option for the prevention of postoperative pain. We designed this randomized double-blinded placebo controlled study to evaluate the control of pain after premedication with CR oxycodone 15 mg in addition to ibuprofen 800 mg orally in day-case gynaecological laparoscopic surgery. METHODS: Sixty consenting patients were anaesthetized in a standardized fashion. Postoperative analgesia was provided by ibuprofen 800 mg twice a day in combination with fentanyl i.v. in the recovery room and normal-release (NR) oxycodone orally after the recovery room. The visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain and side-effects, and the amounts of postoperative analgesics were recorded for 24 h after discharge from the hospital. After a statistical analysis of the original study, we extended the study to investigate another 10 patients, who received CR oxycodone 15 mg orally in an open-labelled fashion 60 min before surgery. The plasma concentrations of oxycodone were measured from samples drawn before and 2, 4, 6 and 8 h after premedication. RESULTS: The amounts of fentanyl [100 microg (0-330) in the CR oxycodone group; 125 microg (0-330) in the placebo group], NR oxycodone, or the VAS scores for pain during the first 24 h after the discharge from the hospital did not differ after the premedication with CR oxycodone or placebo. In the extension study group, the peak plasma concentration (C(max)) of oxycodone was 10.0 (4.6-14.7) ng ml(-1), indicating possibly a sub-therapeutic level. CONCLUSION: Oral premedication with CR oxycodone did not improve management of postoperative pain after day-case gynaecological laparoscopic surgery.

Response Entropy is not more sensitive than State Entropy in distinguishing the use of esmolol instead of remifentanil in patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Monitoring of analgesia remains a challenge during general anaesthesia. Activation of Response Entropy (RE) to painful stimuli has been suggested to be a sign of inadequate analgesia. We evaluated the ability of RE to be more sensitive than State Entropy (SE) in measuring nociception in patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy. Our hypothesis was that while keeping SE at a predetermined level, RE would be higher in patients receiving a beta-blocking agent (esmolol) instead of an opioid (remifentanil) during a propofol/nitrous oxide anaesthesia. METHODS: Fifty-one women aged between 22-53 years were randomly assigned to receive esmolol (n=25) or remifentanil (n=26). SE was kept at 50+/-5. RE and SE were recorded at an interval of 30 s to 2 min and the areas under the RE and SE value-time curves (AUCRE and AUCSE) were calculated during the time of intubation and start of surgery as well as during the entire anaesthesia. The difference between RE and SE recordings in both groups was determined by subtracting the AUCSE from the corresponding AUCRE. Movements of the patients were recorded. RESULTS: No significant differences were detected in any of the several AUC values between the groups. The difference between RE and SE recordings was similar in both groups. Every patient in the esmolol group moved some time during the procedure interfering with surgery while no one in the remifentanil group moved. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing gynaecological laparoscopic day-case surgery, RE seems not to be more sensitive than SE in guiding the use of opioids during general anaesthesia.