A comparison of thoracic and lumbar epidural techniques for postthoracoabdominal esophagectomy analgesiaPurpose: To compare thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) using a bupivacaine/[entanyl mixture and lumbar epidural analgesia (LEA) with morphine, in respect to the time to extubation and the quality of post-operative analgesia, in patients having thoracoabdominal esophagectomy. Methods: Twenty two patients scheduled for elective thoracoal:x:lominal esophagectomy were randomized to TEA or LEA. Postoperatively, the TEA group received Patient Controlled Epidural Analgesia (PCEA) with bupivacaine 0.12596 and 5/./g'ml Bt fentanyl, and the LEA group received PCEA with 0.2/ag'ml Bl morphine. A blinded observer assessed criteria for tracheal extubation and the time of tracheal extubation was recorded. Early extubation was defined as tracheal extubation within four hours postoperatively. Visual analogue pain scores at rest (Static Visual Analogue Pain Scores, SVAPS) and with movement (Dynamic Visual Analogue Pain Scores, DVAPS) were recorded at I , 6, 12, 18 and 24 hr post-extubation. Failure of the epidural protocol (FEP) was defined as a request for additional analgesia. Results: Tracheal extubation was achieved in 70% of the LEA and 100~ of the TEA at four hours postoperatively (P=NS). However, the TEA group achieved earlier extubation times when assessed with log rank testing (P = 0.01 ). By six hours postextubation FEP had occurred in 50% of the LEA group but in none of the TEA group (P = 0.0 I). Mean SVAPS and DVAPS were lower in the TEA than in the LEA group at all measured times (P < 0.01).Conclusion: This study has demonstrated superior pain control in patients undergoing thoraco-abdominal esophagectomy treated with TEA than with LEA, particularly for pain with movement. Tracheal extubation occurred earlier in the TEA group, but this difference was not significant at four hours postoperatively.
No abstract
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.