4.6 Article

Comparison of ropivacaine-fentanyl patient-controlled epidural analgesia with morphine intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for perioperative analgesia mad recovery after open colon surgery

Journal

JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA
Volume 14, Issue 8, Pages 571-577

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
DOI: 10.1016/S0952-8180(02)00451-8

Keywords

analgesia epidural; analgesia patient-controlled; bupivacaine; postoperative complications; ropivacaine

Categories

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Study Objective: To compare the effects of ropivacaine-fentanyl patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with morphine intravenous (IV) patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). Design: Prospective, randomized, multicenter trial. Setting: Five university-affiliated hospitals. Patients: 41 patients undergoing colon surgery. Interventions: Patients were randomized to receive either standardized combined epidural/general anesthesia followed by PCEA with ropivacaine 0.2% and fentanyl (2 mug/mL) or standardized general anesthesia followed by morphine X PCA. All patients participated in a standardized Postoperative clinical pathway. Measurements and Main Results: Analgesia was assessed with visual analog scale (VAS) scores. Postoperative recovery was assessed by completion of Prospectively defined discharge milestones and time until discharge. Statistical analyses included nonparametric and contingency table analyses. The PCEA group had better analgesia (> 50% reduction in pain scores, assessed both at rest and during a cough) for the first 3 days, after surgery (p < 0.0,005). The PCEA group achieved discharge milestones approximately 36 hours faster (p < 0.002), but time until discharge was similar between groups. Conclusions: Ropivacaine-fentanyl PCEA provides superior analgesia, reduced opioid requirement, and more rapid recovery after colon surgery. (C) 2003 by Elsevier Science Inc.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available