Effects of epidural nalbuphine on intraoperative isoflurane and postoperative analgesic requirements in dogs

PURPOSE: To measure the change in the minimum alveolar concentration of isoflurane (EtISO) associated with epidural nalbuphine and the postoperative analgesic requirements in dogs after ovariohysterectomy.METHODS: Twenty four healthy female dogs were randomly assigned to receive saline or nalbuphine at 0.3 or 0.6 mg/kg (n=8 for each group) administered via lumbosacral epidural catheter introduced cranially into the epidural canal. Changes in heart and respiratory rates and arterial blood pressure during surgery were recorded along with the corresponding EtISO. Immediately after tracheal extubation, analgesia, sedation, heart rate, respiratory rate, and arterial blood pressure were measured at predetermined intervals and every 60 min thereafter until the first rescue analgesic.RESULTS: A significant decrease in EtISO was associated with epidural nalbuphine at 0.3 mg/kg (26.3%) and 0.6 mg/kg (38.4%) but not with saline in ovariohysterectomized dogs. In the postoperative period, VAS and Colorado analgesic scores were lower for the dogs that received the higher nalbuphine dose, which only required supplemental analgesia 10 h following its administration, compared with dogs that received the lower dose.CONCLUSION: Epidural nalbuphine significantly reduces the intra-operative isoflurane requirement and provides prolonged postoperative analgesia after ovariohysterectomy in dogs.

Anestesia convencional e técnica de tumescência em cadelas submetidas à mastectomia. Avaliação da dor pós-operatória

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Incidência de parada cardíaca e mortalidade durante anestesia em hospital universitário de atendimento terciário no período de 2005 a 2012

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Anestesia espinhal no lagarto Iguana iguana (Linnaeus, 1758)

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Falha no bloqueio após anestesia subaracnoidea: frequência e fatores contribuintes

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Air versus saline in the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space

BackgroundThe success of epidural anaesthesia depends on correct identification of the epidural space. For several decades, the decision of whether to use air or physiological saline during the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space has been governed by the personal experience of the anaesthesiologist. Epidural block remains one of the main regional anaesthesia techniques. It is used for surgical anaesthesia, obstetrical analgesia, postoperative analgesia and treatment of chronic pain and as a complement to general anaesthesia. The sensation felt by the anaesthesiologist from the syringe plunger with loss of resistance is different when air is compared with saline (fluid). Frequently fluid allows a rapid change from resistance to non-resistance and increased movement of the plunger. However, the ideal technique for identification of the epidural space remains unclear.ObjectivesTo evaluate the efficacy and safety of both air and saline in the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space.To evaluate complications related to the air or saline injected.Search methodsWe searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (2013, Issue 9), MEDLINE, EMBASE and the Latin American and Caribbean Health Science Information Database (LILACS) (from inception to September 2013). We applied no language restrictions. The date of the most recent search was 7 September 2013.Selection criteriaWe included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and quasi-randomized controlled trials (quasi-RCTs) on air and saline in the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space.Data collection and analysisTwo review authors independently assessed trial quality and extracted data.Main resultsWe included in the review seven studies with a total of 852 participants. The methodological quality of the included studies was generally ranked as showing low risk of bias inmost domains, with the exception of one study, which did not mask participants. We were able to include data from 838 participants in the meta-analysis. We found no statistically significant differences between participants receiving air and those given saline in any of the outcomes evaluated: inability to locate the epidural space (three trials, 619 participants) (risk ratio (RR) 0.88, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.33 to 2.31, low-quality evidence); accidental intravascular catheter placement (two trials, 223 participants) (RR 0.90, 95% CI 0.33 to 2.45, low-quality evidence); accidental subarachnoid catheter placement (four trials, 682 participants) (RR 2.95, 95% CI 0.12 to 71.90, low-quality evidence); combined spinal epidural failure (two trials, 400 participants) (RR 0.98, 95% CI 0.44 to 2.18, low-quality evidence); unblocked segments (five studies, 423 participants) (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.72 to 3.85); and pain measured by VAS (two studies, 395 participants) (mean difference (MD) -0.09, 95% CI -0.37 to 0.18). With regard to adverse effects, we found no statistically significant differences between participants receiving air and those given saline in the occurrence of paraesthesias (three trials, 572 participants) (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.69 to 1.15); difficulty in advancing the catheter (two trials, 227 participants) (RR 0.91, 95% CI 0.32 to 2.56); catheter replacement (two trials, 501 participants) (RR 0.69, 95% CI 0.26 to 1.83); and postdural puncture headache (one trial, 110 participants) (RR 0.83, 95% CI 0.12 to 5.71).Authors' conclusionsLow-quality evidence shows that results do not differ between air and saline in terms of the loss of resistance technique for identification of the epidural space and reduction of complications. Applicability might be compromised, as most of the results described in this review were obtained from parturient patients. This review underlines the need to conduct well-designed trials in this field.

Uso da morfina na analgesia de equinos

Pain control is an important aspect of equine medicine. Musculoskeletal and gastrointestinal diseases are the most important clinical and surgical painful situations in this specie. In these cases, opioids have been used successfully for the treatment of pain, administered both local (intra-articular and epidural) and systemically. Otherwise, opioids, specially mu agonists like morphine, present important side effects in horses. Amongst these effects, CNS stimulation with increased motor activity and impairment of intestinal motility are observed in several cases. Therefore, adequate dosing of administration are essential for the safe use of opioids in horses

Avaliação da motilidade e do trânsito gastrintestinal de equinos após injeção epidural de morfina ou tramadol

Pós-graduação em Cirurgia Veterinária - FCAV

Achados clínicos, hemodinâmicos e hemogasométricos da infusão contínua de propofol associado ou não ao tramadol em ovelhas submetidas à videolaparoscopia

Pós-graduação em Cirurgia Veterinária - FCAV

Avaliação da pressão liquórica em pacientes obstétricas submetidas à anestesia subaracnoidea que apresentaram cefaleia pós-punção dural

Pós-graduação em Anestesiologia - FMB

Avaliação de danos oxidativos no DNA de linfócitos e estresse oxidativo no plasma de pacientes a cirurgia sob anestesia balanceada com sevoflurano

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Efeitos da administração subaracnoidea em punção única, de cetamina S(+) a 5%, sem conservantes, sobre a medula espinal e as meninges de coelhos

Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Científico e Tecnológico (CNPq)

Effects of ropivacaine combined with morphine at 0.15 and 0.2 mg kg-1 in bitches undergoing epidural anesthesia

Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior (CAPES)

Ocular effects of retrobulbar block with different local anesthetics in healthy dogs

Fundação de Amparo à Pesquisa do Estado de São Paulo (FAPESP)

Potentiation of epidural lidocaine by co-administering tramadol by either intramuscular or epidural route in cats

This study investigated the analgesic and systemic effects of intramuscular (IM) versus epidural (EP) administration of tramadol as an adjunct to EP injection of lidocaine in cats. Six healthy, domestic, shorthair female cats underwent general anesthesia. A prospective, randomized, crossover trial was then conducted with each cat receiving the following 3 treatments: EP injection of 2% lidocaine [LEP; 3.0 mg/kg body weight (BW)]; EP injection of a combination of lidocaine and 5% tramadol (LTEP; 3.0 and 2.0 mg/kg BW, respectively); or EP injection of lidocaine and IM injection of tramadol (LEPTIM; 3.0 and 2.0 mg/kg BW, respectively). Systemic effects, spread and duration of analgesia, behavior, and motor blockade were determined before treatment and at predetermined intervals afterwards. The duration of analgesia was 120 ± 31 min for LTEP, 71 ± 17 min for LEPTIM, and 53 ± 6 min for LEP (P < 0.05; mean ± SD). The cranial spread of analgesia obtained with LTEP was similar to that with LEP or LEPTIM, extending to dermatomic region T13-L1. Complete motor blockade was similar for the 3 treatments. It was concluded that tramadol produces similar side effects in cats after either EP or IM administration. Our findings indicate that EP and IM tramadol (2 mg/kg BW) with EP lidocaine produce satisfactory analgesia in cats. As an adjunct to lidocaine, EP tramadol provides a longer duration of analgesia than IM administration. The adverse effects produced by EP and IM administration of tramadol were not different. Further studies are needed to determine whether EP administration of tramadol could play a role in managing postoperative pain in cats when co-administered with lidocaine after painful surgical procedures.