Comparative Study
Journal Article
Observational Study
Add like
Add dislike
Add to saved papers

Thoracotomy Patients Under General Anesthesia: A Comparison on Intra-Operative Anesthetic and Analgesic Requirements, When Combined with Either Epidural Analgesia or Continuous Unilateral Paravertebral Analgesia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Regional analgesia is effective for post-thoracotomy pain. The primary objective of the study is to compare the intraoperative requirement of isoflurane and fentanyl between general anaesthesia (GA) with epidural analgesia and GA with paravertebral analgesia.

METHODS AND MATERIAL: A prospective observational comparative study was conducted on 56 patients undergoing open thoracotomy procedures. The patients were divided into two groups of 28 by assigning the study participants alternatively to each group: Group GAE - received thoracic epidural catheterization with GA, and Group GAP - received ultrasound guided thoracic paravertebral catheterization on the operative side with GA. Intraoperative requirement of isoflurane, fentanyl, postoperative analgesia, stress response, need of rescue analgesics and adverse effects were observed and analysed.

RESULTS: 25 patients in each group were included in the data analysis. The intraoperative requirement of isoflurane (32.28 ± 1.88 vs 48.31 ± 4.34 ml; p < 0.0001) and fentanyl (128.87 ± 25.12 vs 157 ± 30.92 μg; p = 0.0009) were significantly less in the GAE group than in the GAP group. VAS scores and need of rescue analgesics and blood glucose levels were not statistically significant during the postoperative period (p > 0.05). The incidence of adverse effects was comparable except for hypotension and urinary retention which were significantly higher in the GAE group.

CONCLUSION: GA with epidural analgesia resulted in significant reduction in the intraoperative consumption of isoflurane and fentanyl in comparison to GA with paravertebral analgesia. However, both the techniques were equally effective in the postoperative period.

Full text links

We have located links that may give you full text access.
Can't access the paper?
Try logging in through your university/institutional subscription. For a smoother one-click institutional access experience, please use our mobile app.

Related Resources

For the best experience, use the Read mobile app

Mobile app image

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 Toggle icon

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