Background and Aims:Combined spinal–epidural (CSE) anaesthesia is being increasingly used for effective post-operative analgesia. This study was designed to evaluate the effect of epidural clonidine on characteristics of spinal anaesthesia for gynaecological surgeries.Methods:This was a prospective randomised, double-blind, controlled study involving sixty patients belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status I and II who underwent gynaecological surgeries were randomly divided into clonidine (C) group and saline (S) group of thirty each. All patients received CSE anaesthesia. Ten minutes before subarachnoid block (SAB), Group C received clonidine 150 μg diluted to 5 ml in normal saline (NS) and Group S received NS epidurally. Hyperbaric bupivacaine (15 mg) was administered intrathecally for both groups after epidural injection. Sensory and motor block characteristics, analgesia, sedation and haemodynamics were observed. Statistical analysis was performed using appropriate tests.Results:Epidural clonidine produced faster onset (37.83 ± 8.58 s in Group C compared to 50.33 ± 8.80 s in Group S, P = 0.001) and prolonged duration of sensory block (241.17±18.65 minutes in group C compared to 150.33±19.16 minutes in group S, P = 0.001). Time for two segment regression of sensory block was193.67 ± 19.82 min in Group C and 109.33 ± 18.56 min Group S (P < 0.001). The duration of analgesia was 299.00 ± 43.38 min in Group C and 152.50 ± 21.04 min in Group S (P < 0.001). Haemodynamics and sedation scores were comparable between two groups.Conclusion:Administration of clonidine epidurally, 10 min before SAB, caused early onset and prolonged duration of motor blockade and analgesia, without any significant post-operative complication.

Introduction:Co-administration of phenylephrine prevents oxytocin-induced hypotension during caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia (SA), but higher doses cause reflex bradycardia. This study compares the effects of co-administration of two different doses of phenylephrine on oxytocin-induced hypotension during caesarean section under SA.Methods:In this prospective, double-blind study, 90 parturients belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists' physical status 1 or 2, undergoing caesarean section under SA were randomised into Group A: oxytocin 3U and phenylephrine 50 μg, Group B: oxytocin 3U and phenylephrine 75 μg, Group C: oxytocin 3U and normal saline, administered intravenously over 5 min after baby extraction. The incidence of hypotension (the primary outcome), rescue vasopressor requirement and side effects were recorded. Statistical analyses were with analysis of variance, Kruskal-Wallis, chi-square and Fisher's exact tests.Results:Demographic parameters such as age, height, weight, level of sensory block at 20 min and duration of surgery were comparable in all the groups. The incidence of hypotension (Group A – 90%, Group B – 10%, Group C – 98%, P = 0.001), magnitude of fall in mean arterial pressure (Group A-15.03 ± 6.12 mm of Hg, Group B – 6.63 ± 4.49 mm of Hg and Group C-13.03 ± 3.39 mm of Hg, P < 0.001) and rescue vasopressor requirement (Group A-45 ± 15.25 mg, Group B-5 ± 15.25, Group C-91.66 ± 26.53, P < 0.001) were significantly lower in Group B compared to A and C.Conclusion:Co-administration of phenylephrine 75 μg with oxytocin 3U reduces the incidence of oxytocin-induced hypotension compared to phenylephrine 50 μg with oxytocin 3U during caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia.

BACKGROUNDLow-dose bupivacaine with opioids like fentanyl have been used traditionally as an adjunct for epidural labour analgesia, but has side effects like pruritus, urinary retention, nausea, vomiting, etc. Dexmedetomidine, an α-2 adrenergic agonist with a high placental retention, decreased sympathetic outflow and norepinephrine release thereby causing sedation, anxiolysis, analgesia, sympatholysis and maternal haemodynamic stability. Hence, this study was carried out to compare dexmedetomidine and fentanyl as adjuvants in epidural labour analgesia. MATERIALS AND METHODSA prospective randomised, double-blind study was conducted in 60 term parturients in active labour of ASA I and II physical status. They were randomised into 2 groups with 30 parturients in each and received 15 mL of 0.0625% Inj. Bupivacaine plus either 1.5 μg/mL Inj. Dexmedetomidine (BD group) or 2 μg/mL Inj. Fentanyl (BF group). VAS, sedation scores, modified four grade Bromage scale, haemodynamics, peripheral oxygen saturation were recorded at baseline and regular intervals. When VAS was ≥4, subsequent doses of 5 mL of the respective group drug was administered. Parturients were ambulated when Bromage scale was 0 with no postural hypotension. Duration of analgesia, labour outcome, neonatal Apgar scores and side effects were noted. RESULTSDemography and haemodynamic stability were similar and comparable. Duration of analgesia was significantly longer in BD group (131.83±45.760) than BF group (85.33±22.512) (p<0.0001). More no. of top-ups was needed in BF group (1.80±1.518) than BD group (0.17±0.461) (p<0.0001). Significantly reduced VAS scores was observed in BD group than BF group. Mean sedation scores (p<0.05) and maximum Bromage scores (p=0.004) were significantly higher in BD group than BF group. Ambulation was less in BD group (3 parturients) than BF group (26 parturients). Side effects were significantly more in BF group than BD group (p=0.007). The labour outcomes were better in BD group than BF group and Apgar scores were comparable in both the groups. CONCLUSIONBupivacaine-dexmedetomidine provides longer duration and better quality of analgesia for labour pain control compared to bupivacaine-fentanyl without deleterious effects on newborns and labour outcomes.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES To compare the effectiveness of acupressure at P6 point and palonosetron in prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing laparoscopic tubal sterilisation. METHODS AND MATERIALS After obtaining institutional ethical clearance and patient consent, this study was conducted during the period of July 2015 to November 2015. Patients undergoing laparoscopic tubal sterilisation belonging to ASA 1 and 2 were included, and patients with hypertension, diabetes neurological diseases, peripheral vascular diseases, local skin diseases, patients on antiemetics and unwilling patients were excluded from the study. Randomisation done by sealed envelope method into two groups of sample size 25 each; group A (acupressure, at P6 point) and group B (palonosetron 0.075 mg IV). Acupressure band and Inj palonosetron were given just before the induction of anaesthesia. Episodes of PONV were recorded at 0-2 hours, 2-6 hours, 6-12 hours and evaluated separately as none, mild, moderate and severe. Rescue antiemetic was given to those who had episode of vomiting. Data analysed using Student 't' test and P value <0.05 considered to be significant. RESULTS Between two group comparisons no significant differences in terms of severity of PONV was observed and Group B showed no incidence of PONV. CONCLUSION Acupressure being non-invasive, non-pharmacological, inexpensive and better patient acceptability can be effectively used as an alternative for the prophylaxis of PONV. However, palonosetron was more effective than acupressure in preventing PONV.