A Comparison of Thoracic Versus Lumbar Epidural Meperidine for Analgesia after Thoracotomy.
10.4097/kjae.1999.37.3.453
- Author:
Jun Soon PARK
1
;
Sang Gon LEE
;
Jong Il KIM
;
Jong Seouk BAN
;
Byoung Woo MIN
Author Information
1. Department of Anesthesiology, Fatima Hospital, Taegu, Korea.
- Publication Type:Original Article ; Randomized Controlled Trial
- Keywords:
Analgesia, postthoracotomy;
Analgesics, meperidine;
Anesthetic techniques, epidural, lumbar, thoracic
- MeSH:
Analgesia*;
Analgesia, Epidural;
Anesthesia;
Blood Pressure;
Catheters;
Heart Rate;
Humans;
Meperidine*;
Pain, Postoperative;
Patient Satisfaction;
Prospective Studies;
Solubility;
Thoracotomy*;
Visual Analog Scale
- From:Korean Journal of Anesthesiology
1999;37(3):453-458
- CountryRepublic of Korea
- Language:Korean
-
Abstract:
BACKGROUND: Meperidine, having intermediate lipid solubility, permits postthoracotomy analgesia. The aim of this study is to compare the analgesic efficacy, side effects, and patient satisfactions of istered thoracic versus lumbar epidural route anesthesia during the first 48 hours postthoracotomy. METHODS: A prospective randomized study was conducted for 48 hours after thoracotomy with ridine administered 50 mg as a bolus and continuously at 0.21 mg/kg/hr via either a thoracic (group T), or a lumbar (group L) epidural catheter at the end of the operation. Postoperative pain was assessed 2, 8, 24, 48 hours after the operation on a visual analog scale (VAS). Side effects and levels of patient ction of the epidural analgesia were assessed. RESULTS: There were no significant intergroup differences in heart rate, blood pressure, pain score, side effects and levels of patient satisfaction with analgesia. CONCLUSIONS: We conclude that there is no difference between thoracic and lumbar epidural eridine analgesia for postthoracotomy pain relief.
