Plain 0.5% bupivacaine 3 ml was compared with plain 0.25% bupivacaine 6 ml for spinal anaesthesia during transurethral surgery in 40 patients. The solutions were injected over 30 s at the L3/4 space with the patient in the sitting position. The patient was kept sitting for 2 min, supine for 5 min and then placed in the lithotomy position. No significant differences were found in onset time, extent of cephalad spread, duration of sensory or motor blockade, or side effects. The use of a 0.5% plain solution of bupivacaine did not appear to confer any advantage over the 0.25% solution.
Thirty-six patients undergoing lower abdominal surgery were included in a prospective randomized controlled study to compare the effects of patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) and a standard intramuscular/intravenous treatment (conventional analgesia, CA) of postoperative pain. Morphine was used in both groups. There were no significant differences between the two analgesic regimens in respect of linear analogue pain scores, verbal pain-relief scores, amount of morphine used or side-effects. No treatment-induced alterations in vital values were experienced.
A case report of total transection of the pancreas occurring during karate training is described. The clinical features and delayed diagnosis are discusssed.
Forty patients (age range 60-79 yr) undergoing transurethral surgery were allocated randomly to receive 0.5% plain bupivacaine 4 ml at the L2-3 (n = 20) or L4-5 (n = 20) space. The solution was injected over 30 s with the patient in the sitting position. The patient was kept sitting for 2 min, then placed supine and, 5 min later, placed in the lithotomy position. No significant differences were found in onset time, extent and duration of analgesia or duration of motor block.
B359 Figure 2 Results In 90% of the cases, selective MFCN-A block completely anesthetized the non-anesthetized gap following combined IFCNB and distal FTB completely, whereas MFCN-P did not contribute (p=0.004) (fig 3).
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.