We have located links that may give you full text access.
CLINICAL TRIAL
COMPARATIVE STUDY
JOURNAL ARTICLE
RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL
[Sedation in spinal anesthesia. Comparison of remifentanil and propofol].
OBJECTIVES: To assess the efficacy and safety of remifentanil for analgesia and sedation during subarachnoidea anesthesia, and to compare remifentanil with propofol.
METHOD: Ninety ASA I-III patients undergoing orthopedic or traumatologic surgery under subarachnoid anesthesia were enrolled for prospective study and randomly assigned to two treatment groups. The propofol group (n = 45) received a single dose of 0.5 mg/kg followed by infusion at 3 mg/kg/h. The remifentanil group (n = 45) received a single dose of 0.5 microgram/kg followed by infusion at 0.1 microgram/kg/min. We evaluated quality of sedation, pain intensity during nerve blockade, hemodynamic and respiratory parameters and time until recovery.
RESULTS: The remifentanil group experienced less moderate-to-intense pain (13%) than did the propofol group (63%) (p < 0.01). Sedation was adequate in both groups and was easy to control by adjusting the rate of infusion. Times until recovery of consciousness and respiratory frequency after withdrawal of infusion until recovery of baseline levels were 7.87 +/- 3.54 min and 5.22 +/- 2.49 min, respectively, in the remifentanil group and 8.72 +/- 4.59 min and 5.36 +/- 2.49 min, respectively, in the propofol group, respectively. Patients in the remifentanil group experienced a significantly greater decrease in SpO2 than did those in the propofol group (20% and 4%, respectively; p < 0.05). Mean blood pressure was higher for patients treated with remifentanil. The incidence of vomiting was also higher in the remifentanil group than in the propofol group (9% vs 0%).
CONCLUSION: Remifentanil is more effective in reducing pain related to nerve blockade and level of sedation is lower; however remifentanil is associated with a higher incidence of respiratory depression and vomiting.
METHOD: Ninety ASA I-III patients undergoing orthopedic or traumatologic surgery under subarachnoid anesthesia were enrolled for prospective study and randomly assigned to two treatment groups. The propofol group (n = 45) received a single dose of 0.5 mg/kg followed by infusion at 3 mg/kg/h. The remifentanil group (n = 45) received a single dose of 0.5 microgram/kg followed by infusion at 0.1 microgram/kg/min. We evaluated quality of sedation, pain intensity during nerve blockade, hemodynamic and respiratory parameters and time until recovery.
RESULTS: The remifentanil group experienced less moderate-to-intense pain (13%) than did the propofol group (63%) (p < 0.01). Sedation was adequate in both groups and was easy to control by adjusting the rate of infusion. Times until recovery of consciousness and respiratory frequency after withdrawal of infusion until recovery of baseline levels were 7.87 +/- 3.54 min and 5.22 +/- 2.49 min, respectively, in the remifentanil group and 8.72 +/- 4.59 min and 5.36 +/- 2.49 min, respectively, in the propofol group, respectively. Patients in the remifentanil group experienced a significantly greater decrease in SpO2 than did those in the propofol group (20% and 4%, respectively; p < 0.05). Mean blood pressure was higher for patients treated with remifentanil. The incidence of vomiting was also higher in the remifentanil group than in the propofol group (9% vs 0%).
CONCLUSION: Remifentanil is more effective in reducing pain related to nerve blockade and level of sedation is lower; however remifentanil is associated with a higher incidence of respiratory depression and vomiting.
Full text links
Related Resources
Trending Papers
Heart failure with preserved ejection fraction: diagnosis, risk assessment, and treatment.Clinical Research in Cardiology : Official Journal of the German Cardiac Society 2024 April 12
Proximal versus distal diuretics in congestive heart failure.Nephrology, Dialysis, Transplantation 2024 Februrary 30
World Health Organization and International Consensus Classification of eosinophilic disorders: 2024 update on diagnosis, risk stratification, and management.American Journal of Hematology 2024 March 30
Efficacy and safety of pharmacotherapy in chronic insomnia: A review of clinical guidelines and case reports.Mental Health Clinician 2023 October
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app
All material on this website is protected by copyright, Copyright © 1994-2024 by WebMD LLC.
This website also contains material copyrighted by 3rd parties.
By using this service, you agree to our terms of use and privacy policy.
Your Privacy Choices
You can now claim free CME credits for this literature searchClaim now
Get seemless 1-tap access through your institution/university
For the best experience, use the Read mobile app