COMPARISON OF POSTOPERATIVE ANALGESIC EFFECT OF INTRATHECAL KETAMINE AND FENTANYL ADDED TO BUPIVACAINE IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING CESAREAN SECTION: A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND STUDY.

Marzieh Beigom Khezri, Elham Tahaei, Amir Hossein Atlasbaf
{"title":"COMPARISON OF POSTOPERATIVE ANALGESIC EFFECT OF INTRATHECAL KETAMINE AND FENTANYL ADDED TO BUPIVACAINE IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING CESAREAN SECTION: A PROSPECTIVE RANDOMIZED DOUBLE-BLIND STUDY.","authors":"Marzieh Beigom Khezri,&nbsp;Elham Tahaei,&nbsp;Amir Hossein Atlasbaf","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objectives: </strong>To compare the analgesic efficacy of intrathecal Ketamine and fentanyl added to bupivacaine in patients undergoing cesarean section.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>Ninety patients 18-40 years old were recruited in a prospective double-blinded, randomized way. Spinal anesthesia was performed in the three groups by using bupivacaine 10mg combined with 0.1mg/kg ketamine in group K, bupivacaine 10mg combined with 25 µg fentanyl in group F and bupivacaine 10mg combined 0.5 ml distilled water in group P. The time to first analgesic request, analgesic requirement in the first 24 hours after surgery, sensory and motor blockade onset time, duration of sensory and motor blockade, the incidence of adverse effects were recorded.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>The mean time to first analgesic request was longer in group K (296.80 ± 32.46) compared to group F (277.87 ± 94.25) and group P (235.43 ± 22.35). The difference between group K and F (P = 0.504) was not significant but the difference between group K and group P (P <0.001) and group F and group P (P = 0.042) was significant.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Addition of ketamine or fentanyl to spinal bupivacaine were equally effective in pain control after cesarean section and therefore, based on the specific conditions of patients, ketamine at concentrations mentioned earlier, could be a proper alternative to achieve postoperative analgesia</p>","PeriodicalId":35975,"journal":{"name":"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology","volume":"23 4","pages":"427-36"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2016-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objectives: To compare the analgesic efficacy of intrathecal Ketamine and fentanyl added to bupivacaine in patients undergoing cesarean section.

Methods: Ninety patients 18-40 years old were recruited in a prospective double-blinded, randomized way. Spinal anesthesia was performed in the three groups by using bupivacaine 10mg combined with 0.1mg/kg ketamine in group K, bupivacaine 10mg combined with 25 µg fentanyl in group F and bupivacaine 10mg combined 0.5 ml distilled water in group P. The time to first analgesic request, analgesic requirement in the first 24 hours after surgery, sensory and motor blockade onset time, duration of sensory and motor blockade, the incidence of adverse effects were recorded.

Results: The mean time to first analgesic request was longer in group K (296.80 ± 32.46) compared to group F (277.87 ± 94.25) and group P (235.43 ± 22.35). The difference between group K and F (P = 0.504) was not significant but the difference between group K and group P (P <0.001) and group F and group P (P = 0.042) was significant.

Conclusion: Addition of ketamine or fentanyl to spinal bupivacaine were equally effective in pain control after cesarean section and therefore, based on the specific conditions of patients, ketamine at concentrations mentioned earlier, could be a proper alternative to achieve postoperative analgesia

分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
剖宫产术后布比卡因鞘内加氯胺酮和芬太尼镇痛效果的比较:一项前瞻性随机双盲研究。
目的:比较布比卡因鞘内加氯胺酮与芬太尼在剖宫产术中的镇痛效果。方法:采用前瞻性双盲随机方法,招募90例18-40岁的患者。三组患者行脊髓麻醉,K组为布比卡因10mg联合氯胺酮0.1mg/kg, F组为布比卡因10mg联合芬太尼25µg, p组为布比卡因10mg联合0.5 ml蒸馏水。记录患者首次请求镇痛时间、术后24小时内的镇痛需求、感觉和运动阻断发作时间、感觉和运动阻断持续时间、不良反应发生情况。结果:K组患者首次请求镇痛的平均时间(296.80±32.46)比F组(277.87±94.25)和P组(235.43±22.35)长。K组与F组差异无统计学意义(P = 0.504),但K组与P组差异无统计学意义(P)。结论:在脊髓布比卡因中加入氯胺酮或芬太尼对剖宫产术后疼痛的控制效果相同,因此,根据患者的具体情况,上述浓度的氯胺酮可作为实现剖宫产术后镇痛的合适选择
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology
Middle East Journal of Anesthesiology Medicine-Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine
CiteScore
0.20
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊介绍: The journal is published three times a year (February, June, and October) and has an Editorial Executive Committee from the department and consultant editors from various Arab countries. A volume consists of six issues. Presently, it is in its 42nd year of publication and is currently in its 19th volume. It has a worldwide circulation and effective March 2008, the MEJA has become an electronic journal. The main objective of the journal is to act as a forum for publication, education, and exchange of opinions, and to promote research and publications of the Middle Eastern heritage of medicine and anesthesia.
期刊最新文献
Amniotic fluid embolism. THE EFFECT OF ETHNICITY ON THE INCIDENCE OF POSTOPERATIVE NAUSEA AND VOMITING IN MODERATE TO HIGH RISK PATIENTS UNDERGOING GENERAL ANESTHESIA IN SOUTH AFRICA: A CONTROLLED OBSERVATIONAL STUDY. Dose-Dependent Anti-Inflammatory Effect of Ketamine in Liver Ischemia-Reperfusion Injury. Effects of Circuit Leak Development Over Time and Response During Low-Flow Volume and Pressure-Controlled Ventilation. Post-Partum Malignant Hypertension in a Patient with Preeclampsia and Abruptio Placenta.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1