A randomised controlled trial comparing the effect of adjuvant intrathecal 2 mg midazolam to 20 micrograms fentanyl on postoperative pain for patients undergoing lower limb orthopaedic surgery under spinal anaesthesia.

Background: Intrathecal adjuvants are added to local anaesthetics to improve the quality of neuraxial blockade and prolong the duration of analgesia during spinal anaesthesia. Used intrathecally, fentanyl improves the quality of spinal blockade as compared to plain bupivacaine and confers a short duration of post-operative analgesia. Intrathecal midazolam as an adjuvant has been used and shown to improve the quality of spinal anaesthesia and prolong the duration of post-operative analgesia. No studies have been done comparing intrathecal fentanyl with bupivacaine and intrathecal 2 mg midazolam with bupivacaine. Objective: To compare the effect of intrathecal 2 mg midazolam to intrathecal 20 micrograms fentanyl when added to 2.6 ml of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine, on post-operative pain, in patients undergoing lower limb orthopaedic surgery under spinal anaesthesia. Methods: A total of 40 patients undergoing lower limb orthopaedic surgery under spinal anaesthesia were randomized to two groups. Group 1: 2.6mls 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 0.4mls (20micrograms) fentanyl Group 2: 2.6mls of 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine with 0.4mls (2mg) midazolam Results: The duration of effective analgesia was longer in the midazolam group (384.05 minutes) as compared to the fentanyl group (342.6 minutes). There was no significant difference (P 0.4047). The time to onset was significantly longer in midazolam group 17.1 minutes as compared to the fentanyl group 13.2 minutes (P 0.023). The visual analogue score at rescue was significantly lower in the midazolam group (5.55) as compared to the fentanyl group 6.35 (P - 0.043). Conclusion: On the basis of the results of this study, there was no significant difference in the duration of effective analgesia between adjuvant intrathecal 2 mg midazolam as compared to intrathecal 20 micrograms fentanyl for patients undergoing lower limb orthopaedic surgery.

A randomised controlled trial comparing weight adjusted dose versus fixed dose prophylactic phenylephrine infusion on maintaining systolic blood pressure during caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia.

Background: Spinal anaesthesia is the standard of care for elective caesarean delivery. It has advantages over general anaesthesia. However the sympathetic blockade induced by spinal anaesthesia results in an 80 percent incidence of hypotension without prophylactic management. Current evidence supports co-loading with intravenous fluids in conjunction with the use of vasopressors as the most effective way to prevent and treat the hypotension. Phenylephrine is the accepted vasopressor of choice in the parturient. A prophylactic phenylephrine infusion combined with a fluid co-load is proven to be an effective and safe method of maintaining maternal hemodynamic stability. While most published studies have assessed the effectiveness of a prophylactic phenylephrine fixed dose infusion, few studies have assessed the effect of a prophylactic phenylephrine weight adjusted dose infusion on maintaining maternal hemodynamic stability following spinal anesthesia for a cesarean delivery. Objective: To compare the incidence of hypotension between women undergoing elective caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia, receiving prophylactic phenylephrine infusion at a fixed dose of 37.5 micrograms per minute versus a weight adjusted dose of 0.5 micrograms per kilogram per minute. Methods: One hundred and eight patients scheduled for non-urgent caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia were randomized into 2 groups; control group and intervention group using a computer generated table of numbers. Control group; Received prophylactic phenylephrine fixed dose infusion at 37.5 micrograms per minute. Intervention group; Received prophylactic phenylephrine weight adjusted dose infusion at 0.5 micrograms per kilogram per minute Results: The two groups had similar baseline characteristics in terms of ; Age, sex, weight and height. There was a 35.2% incidence of hypotension in the fixed dose group and an 18.6% incidence of hypotension in the weight adjusted dose group. This difference was found to be of borderline statistical significance p-value 0.05, and the difference in the incidence rates between the two groups was found to be statistically significant p= 0.03. The difference in the incidence of reactive hypertension and bradycardia between the two groups was not statistically significant: p-value of 0.19 for reactive hypertension and p-value of 0.42 for the incidence of bradycardia. There was also no statistically significant difference in the use of phenylephrine boluses, use of atropine, intravenous fluid used and the number of times the infusion was stopped. Conclusion: Among this population, the incidence of hypotension was significantly less in the weight adjusted dose group than in the fixed dose group. There was no difference in the number of physician interventions required to keep the blood pressure within 20% of baseline, and no difference in the proportion of reactive hypertension or bradycardia between the two groups. Administering prophylactic phenylephrine infusion at a weight adjusted dose of 0.5 micrograms per kilogram per minute results in a lower incidence of hypotension compared to its administration at a fixed dose of 37.5 micrograms per minute.