Intravenous versus epidural administration of hydromorphone. Effects on analgesia and recovery after radical retropubic prostatectomy. Effect of epidural anesthesia and analgesia on perioperative outcome: a randomized, controlled Veterans Affairs cooperative study. Epidural analgesia with bupivacaine reduces postoperative paralytic ileus after hysterectomy. Double-masked randomized trial comparing alternate combinations of intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative analgesia in abdominal aortic surgery. Epidural patient-controlled analgesia: an alternative to intravenous patient-controlled analgesia for pain relief after cesarean delivery. Myoelectric activity in the stomach and duodenum after epidural administration of morphine or bupivacaine. Intraoperative epidural analgesia combined with ketamine provides effective preventive analgesia in patients undergoing major digestive surgery. Effect of continuous postoperative epidural analgesia on intestinal motility. Opioid treatment for radiating cancer pain: oral administration vs. epidural techniques.
It remains unclear whether epidural administration of hydromorphone results in spinal analgesia or clinical benefit when compared with intravenous administration. Therefore, we undertook this study to determine whether epidural administration of hydromorphone resulted in decreased opioid requirement, improved analgesia, reduced side effects, more rapid return of gastrointestinal function, or shorter duration of hospital stay than intravenous administration.
                Sixteen patients undergoing radical retropubic prostatectomy were randomized in a double-blind manner to receive either intravenous or epidural hydromorphone via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) for postoperative analgesia. All patients underwent a standardized combined epidural and general anesthetic and all received ketorolac for 72 h postoperatively. To decrease variability, patients were cared for according to a standardized protocol and were deemed ready for discharge according to prospectively defined criteria.
                Patients in the intravenous PCA group required approximately twice as much opioid than the epidural PCA group (P < 0.008), but there were no differences between groups in pain scores or patient satisfaction. Epidural administration resulted in a greater incidence of pruritus (P = 0.02). Gastrointestinal function recovered quickly in all patients with little variation, and there were no differences between groups. All patients were deemed ready for discharge by the third postoperative day, and removal of surgical drains was the last discharge criterion reached in all patients.
                Our results indicate that epidural administration of hydromorphone results in spinally mediated analgesia. However, epidural administration did not provide significant benefits in terms of postoperative analgesia, recovery of gastrointestinal function, or duration of hospitalization. Furthermore, we suggest that radical retropubic prostatectomy no longer be used as a model to assess the effects of analgesic technique on postoperative recovery, because control of discharge criteria revealed that hospital discharge was primarily dependent on removal of surgical drains. To test the hypothesis that epidural anesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia decrease the incidence of death and major complications during and after four types of intraabdominal surgical procedures.
                Even though many beneficial aspects of epidural anesthesia have been reported, clinical trials of epidural anesthesia for outcome of surgical patients have shown conflicting results.
                The authors studied 1,021 patients who required anesthesia for one of the intraabdominal aortic, gastric, biliary, or colon operations. They were assigned randomly to receive either general anesthesia and postoperative analgesia with parenteral opioids (group 1) or epidural plus light general anesthesia and postoperative epidural morphine (group 2). The patients were monitored for death and major complications during and for 30 days after surgery, as well as for postoperative pain, time of ambulation, and length of hospital stay.
                Overall, there was no significant difference in the incidence of death and major complications between the two groups. For abdominal aortic surgical patients, unlike the other three types of surgical patients, the overall incidence of death and major complications was significantly lower in group 2 patients (22%) than in group 1 patients (37%), stemming from differences in the incidence of new myocardial infarction, stroke, and respiratory failure between the two groups. Overall, group 2 patients received significantly less analgesic medication but had better pain relief than group 1 patients. In group 2 aortic patients, endotracheal intubation time was 13 hours shorter and surgical intensive care stay was 3.5 hours shorter.
                The effect of anesthetic and postoperative analgesic techniques on perioperative outcome varies with the type of operation performed. Overall, epidural analgesia provides better postoperative pain relief. Epidural anesthesia and epidural analgesia improve the overall outcome and shorten the intubation time and intensive care stay in patients undergoing abdominal aortic operations. This study was undertaken to compare the effects of postoperative bupivacaine epidural analgesia with those of intermittent injections of ketobemidone (a synthetic opioid) on postoperative bowel motility in patients who had had hysterectomies. The epidural group (N = 20) received continuous epidural anesthesia with bupivacaine postoperatively for 26-30 hours and the control group (N = 20) received intermittent injections of ketobemidone for postoperative pain relief. Postoperative bowel movements and propulsive colonic motility were estimated from the first passage of flatus and feces and by following radiopaque markers by serial abdominal radiographs. In the epidural group, the times for first passing of flatus (31 +/- 22 hours; mean +/- SD) and feces (70 +/- 44 hours) were significantly shorter than in the control group (flatus 58 +/- 14 hours and feces 103 +/- 26 hours). The average position of the markers was significantly more distally in the epidural group immediately after operation and the markers continued to move forward during the first postoperative day. In the control group, the markers did not move during this period. The results demonstrate that postoperative bowel peristalsis returned earlier in the patients given epidural analgesia with bupivacaine for pain relief than in patients given a narcotic. Improvement in patient outcome and reduced use of medical resources may result from using epidural anesthesia and analgesia as compared with general anesthesia and intravenous opioids, although the relative importance of intraoperative versus postoperative technique has not been studied. This prospective, double-masked, randomized clinical trial was designed to compare alternate combinations of intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative analgesia with respect to postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing surgery of the abdominal aorta.
                One hundred sixty-eight patients undergoing surgery of the abdominal aorta were randomly assigned to receive either thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with a light general anesthesia or general anesthesia alone intraoperatively and either intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia postoperatively (four treatment groups). Patient-controlled analgesia was continued for at least 72 h. Protocols were used to standardize perioperative medical management and to preserve masking intraoperatively and postoperatively. A uniform surveillance strategy was used for the identification of prospectively defined postoperative complications. Outcome evaluation included postoperative hospital length of stay, direct medical costs, selected postoperative morbidities, and postoperative recovery milestones.
                Length of stay and direct medical costs for patients surviving to discharge were similar among the four treatment groups. Postoperative outcomes were similar among the four treatment groups with respect to death, myocardial infarction, myocardial ischemia, reoperation, pneumonia, and renal failure. Epidural patient-controlled analgesia was associated with a significantly shorter time to extubation (P = 0.002). Times to intensive care unit discharge, ward admission, first bowel sounds, first flatus, tolerating clear liquids, tolerating regular diet, and independent ambulation were similar among the four treatment groups. Postoperative pain scores were also similar among the four treatment groups.
                In patients undergoing surgery of the abdominal aorta, thoracic epidural anesthesia combined with a light general anesthesia and followed by either intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia, offers no major advantage or disadvantage when compared with general anesthesia alone followed by either intravenous or epidural patient-controlled analgesia. Epidural administration of an opioid analgesic by means of a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) system was compared with conventional intravenous PCA for pain relief after cesarean delivery. One hundred seventeen healthy women were randomly assigned to receive hydromorphone either intravenously (IV-PCA) or epidurally (EPI-PCA) after cesarean delivery with epidural bupivacaine for operative anesthesia. The hydromorphone requirements were 3.4 and 4.2 times more in the IV-PCA group on the first (P less than 0.01) and second (P less than 0.01) postoperative days, respectively. The mean number (+/- SD) of PCA demands during the first 24 h after the operation was 105 (+/- 88) for the IV-PCA group and 33 (+/- 48) for the EPI-PCA group (P less than 0.01). This difference was also significant 24-48 h after surgery. Although the EPI-PCA group utilized significantly less opioid medication, pain and sedation scores were similar in the two treatment groups; however, a significantly larger percentage of patients in the IV-PCA group (46% vs 22%) stated that they felt drowsy during the first postoperative day. Pruritus was reported more frequently in the EPI-PCA (67%) than in the IV-PCA (33%) group. Nausea was experienced by only 10% of patients in the IV-PCA and 6% in the EPI-PCA group. There was no evidence of postoperative respiratory depression, with minimal oxygen saturation values of 93% (+/- 3%) and 94% (+/- 1%) in the IV-PCA and EPI-PCA groups, respectively.(ABSTRACT TRUNCATED AT 250 WORDS) Gastric emptying is delayed in patients receiving postoperative pain relief with epidural morphine compared to patients receiving epidural bupivacaine. The electrophysiological basis for this effect is unknown. The aim of this study was to compare the effects of epidural morphine with epidural bupivacaine on gastroduodenal myoelectric activity (EMG) in patients after surgery.
                Fourteen patients with epidural analgesia who underwent open cholecystectomy were randomly assigned to receive either epidural morphine (EM) or epidural bupivacaine (EB) for postoperative pain relief. During surgery EMG electrodes were placed in the subserosa in the antrum and duodenum and the EMG registration started 3.5 hours after the end of surgery. Gastric emptying measured with the acetaminophen test was studied in the morning the day after surgery.
                The spike activity in the antrum was significantly lower 160-340 minutes after the administration of morphine in the EM-group compared to the activity in the EB-group (P < 0.04). The incidence of regular slow wave rhythm in the antrum was significantly lower 160-520 minutes after the administration of morphine in the EM-group compared to the EB-group (P < 0.03). Duodenal Phase III activity measured with EMG was significantly more frequent during 160-520 minutes after the morphine administration in the EM-group compared to the EB-group (P < 0.02). The acetaminophen absorption was significantly delayed in the epidural morphine group compared to the epidural bupivacaine group.
                Gastroduodenal electromyographic activity was significantly changed during epidural morphine compared to epidural bupivacaine. The delayed gastric emptying during epidural morphine may be explained by decreased and uncoordinated contractile activity in the antrum, shown by decreased spike activity and irregular slow wave rhythm. The increased pressure activity in the duodenum, shown by increased Phase III activity, may also impair gastric emptying. As a broader definition of preemptive analgesia, preventive analgesia aims to prevent the sensitization of central nervous system, hence the development of pathologic pain after tissular injury. To demonstrate benefits from preventive treatment, objective measurement of postoperative pain such as wound hyperalgesia and persistent pain should be evaluated. The current study assessed the role and timing of epidural analgesia in this context.
                In a randomized, double-blinded trial, 85 patients scheduled to undergo neoplastic colonic resection were included. All the patients received a thoracic epidural catheter, systemic ketamine at a antihyperalgesic dose, and general anesthesia. Continuous infusion of analgesics belonging to the same class was administered by either intravenous or epidural route before incision until 72 h after surgery. Patients were allocated to four groups to receive intraoperative intravenous lidocaine-sufentanil-clonidine or epidural bupivacaine-sufentanil-clonidine followed postoperatively by either intravenous (lidocaine-morphine-clonidine) or epidural (bupivacaine-sufentanil-clonidine) patient-controlled analgesia. Postoperative pain scores (visual analog scale), analgesic consumption, wound area of punctuate hyperalgesia, residual pain, and analgesics needed from 2 weeks until 12 months were recorded.
                Analgesic requirements, visual analog scale scores, and area of hyperalgesia were significantly higher in the intravenous treatment group (intravenous-intravenous), and more patients reported residual pain from 2 weeks until 1 yr (28%). Although postoperative pain measurements did not differ, postoperative epidural treatment (intravenous-epidural) was less effective to prevent residual pain at 1 yr (11%; P = 0.2 with intravenous-intravenous group) than intraoperative one (epidural-epidural and epidural-intravenous groups) (0%; P = 0.01 with intravenous-intravenous group).
                Combined with an antihyperalgesic dose of ketamine, intraoperative epidural analgesia provides effective preventive analgesia after major digestive surgery. The effect of postoperative epidural bupivacaine on intestinal motility was studied by measuring the transit time of barium contrast through the intestines in 16 patients after resection of the left colon and/or rectum. Fourteen patients served as controls and received postoperative injections of pentazocine. Mean transit time through the intestinal tract was 35 h in the epidural group and 150 h in the control group, a difference that is significant at the 0.1 per cent level. The average time before passage of flatus and faeces was different between the two groups at the 0.1 per cent level. We conclude that postoperative epidural bupivacaine constitutes an effective means of analgesia after colorectal surgery and is associated with a short duration of intestinal paralysis. In order to determine the optimal pain treatment for patients with cancer involvement of the brachial or lumbar nerve plexuses, a prospective comparative study was carried out using peroral opioid therapy (SO), epidural opioid by a conventional tunnelled epidural catheter (CE) or an epidural catheter connected to an implanted injection port (Port). Pain relief, measured by a visual analog scale (VAS), was similar and adequate in every group already after the first 24 h. CNS side-effects were less frequent and the Karnofsky performance grades slightly superior in the epidural groups. Occlusion and catheter disconnection complicated the pain therapy of five epidural port patients. Epidural dislocation occurred three times in the conventional epidural group. One local infection in the CE group and two in the Port group were recorded. However, no signs of epidural infection were seen at autopsy. The results suggest that due to a lower incidence of side-effects, epidural catheter techniques are superior to peroral opioid in treating pain in these patients. However, complete pain relief was not achieved in all patients, suggesting neurogenic, non-nociceptive pain components. Both epidural techniques seem suitable for long-term pain therapy. Technical improvements are needed in the epidural catheter and the port. The long-term epidural catheter does not seem to cause any major changes in the histology of the dura mater or the connective tissue of the epidural space.
Administration of epidural local anaesthetics to patients undergoing laparotomy reduce gastrointestinal paralysis compared with systemic or epidural opioids, with comparable postoperative pain relief. Addition of opioid to epidural local anaesthetic may provide superior postoperative analgesia compared with epidural local anaesthetics alone. The effect of additional epidural opioid on gastrointestinal function is so far unsettled. Randomized, controlled trials comparing the effect of combinations of epidural local anaesthetic and opioid with epidural local anaesthetic alone on postoperative gastrointestinal function and pain are warranted.