Context:Different adjuvants are coadministered with local anesthetics to improve the speed of onset and duration of analgesia, and to reduce the dose, the selection of which is often left to the choice of an anesthesiologist.Aim:The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy and safety profile of fentanyl and clonidine as an adjuvant to epidural ropivacaine anesthesia.Setting and Design:With institutional ethical committee clearance, a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled double-blind clinical study was conducted at Vivekananda Polyclinic and Institute of Medical Sciences, Lucknow.Material and Methods:Two groups with thirty patients each were randomly allocated to receive 15–20 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine with 75 μg clonidine or 15–20 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine with 75 μg fentanyl, respectively. Block characteristics such as onset of analgesia, maximum level of sensory blockade, complete motor blockade, hemodynamic, time to two-segment regressions, time for rescue analgesia, time to complete motor recovery, and side effects were analyzed.Results:Results showed that the onset of blockade is faster when fentanyl is used as additives. Time for two-segment regression was earlier in fentanyl group but time for rescue analgesia was longer in clonidine group.Statistical Analysis:Two groups were compared by Student's t-test and Chi-square test; ANOVA and significance of mean difference bet were done by Newman–Keuls test.Conclusion:Addition of clonidine to epidural ropivacaine provides superior analgesia than the addition of fentanyl to epidural ropivacaine without much difference in side effect profile.
BackgroundPercutaneous nephrolithotomy (PCNL) is presently the preferred method for managing renal calculi. Visceral pain from the kidney and ureter and somatic pain from the incision site are the primary causes of immediate postoperative pain following PCNL. Poor pain control is associated with unwanted consequences such as patient discomfort, delayed recovery, and prolonged hospital stay. Recently, the erector spinae plane (ESP) block has been used in many thoracic and abdominal surgeries for the control of postoperative pain. In this study, we aimed to assess the effectiveness of the ultrasound-guided ESP block following PCNL. MethodologyThis was a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled study including 60 patients who were scheduled for elective PCNL under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into two groups. Group E underwent an ultrasound-guided ESP block with 20 mL of the local anesthetic mixture at the T-9 level unilaterally on the side of surgery, and group C was a sham group in which 20 mL of normal saline was injected on the side of surgery. Changes in postoperative pain score were the primary outcome, and the duration of analgesia, the total analgesic requirement in 24 hours, and patient satisfaction were the secondary outcomes. ResultsThe demographic data of both groups were comparable. The Visual Analog Scale score was considerably lower in group E than in group C at two, four, six, and eight hours postoperatively. In group E, the mean analgesic duration was substantially longer than that in group C (8.87 ± 2.45 hours vs. 5.67 ± 1.58 hours, respectively). The tramadol requirement was higher in group C (286.67 ± 62.88 mg) than in group E (133.33 ± 47.95 mg) during the 24-hour postoperative period. At 12 hours, patient satisfaction was considerably higher in group E than in group C (6.73 ± 0.45 vs. 5.87 ± 0.35, respectively). ConclusionsThe ultrasound-guided ESP block provided efficient postoperative pain relief, prolonged duration of analgesia, and reduced tramadol intake after PCNL surgery.
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 © 2025 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.