OBJECTIVE: To investigate if intrathecally administered morphine combined with a low-dose mode of total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) accelerates recovery after abdominal surgery as compared, to patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) combined with anaesthesia, based on volatile anaesthetics. STUDY DESIGN: Fifty-three patients who were hysterectomised abdominally were randomised to TIVA or PCA. Their per- and post-operative course was strictly monitored and their pain score was evaluated with a visual analogue scale at repeated time intervals. RESULTS: Patients with TIVA had a significantly shorter stay on the post-operative ward, 180 (105-330)min, compared with the PCA group, 237 (120-1140)min (p<0.01). The start of peroral fluid also differed significantly between groups, 4h (2-6) for TIVA versus 5h (2-24) for the PCA group (p<0.01). The removal of the indwelling catheter took place significantly earlier in the TIVA group, 9h (5-23) versus 22h (17-24) in the PCA group (p<0.0001). There was significantly less post-operative nausea in the TIVA group compared with the PCA group on the first post-operative day (p<0.01). The length of stay was shorter, 2 days (1-3) compared with 3 days (1-6) for the TIVA group versus PCA (p<0.001). There was no difference in complications between groups. One patient in each group was re-admitted to hospital because of a vaginal cuff infection. CONCLUSION: The TIVA per- and post-operative care was an advantage over PCA in most respects. Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
RCT Entities:
OBJECTIVE: To investigate if intrathecally administered morphine combined with a low-dose mode of total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) accelerates recovery after abdominal surgery as compared, to patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) combined with anaesthesia, based on volatile anaesthetics. STUDY DESIGN: Fifty-three patients who were hysterectomised abdominally were randomised to TIVA or PCA. Their per- and post-operative course was strictly monitored and their pain score was evaluated with a visual analogue scale at repeated time intervals. RESULTS:Patients with TIVA had a significantly shorter stay on the post-operative ward, 180 (105-330)min, compared with the PCA group, 237 (120-1140)min (p<0.01). The start of peroral fluid also differed significantly between groups, 4h (2-6) for TIVA versus 5h (2-24) for the PCA group (p<0.01). The removal of the indwelling catheter took place significantly earlier in the TIVA group, 9h (5-23) versus 22h (17-24) in the PCA group (p<0.0001). There was significantly less post-operative nausea in the TIVA group compared with the PCA group on the first post-operative day (p<0.01). The length of stay was shorter, 2 days (1-3) compared with 3 days (1-6) for the TIVA group versus PCA (p<0.001). There was no difference in complications between groups. One patient in each group was re-admitted to hospital because of a vaginal cuff infection. CONCLUSION: The TIVA per- and post-operative care was an advantage over PCA in most respects. Copyright 2010. Published by Elsevier Ireland Ltd.
Authors: Ester Miralpeix; Alpa M Nick; Larissa A Meyer; Juan Cata; Javier Lasala; Gabriel E Mena; Vijaya Gottumukkala; Maria Iniesta-Donate; Gloria Salvo; Pedro T Ramirez Journal: Gynecol Oncol Date: 2016-03-09 Impact factor: 5.482
Authors: P Reif; T Drobnitsch; T Aigmüller; R Laky; D Ulrich; J Haas; A Bader; K Tamussino Journal: Geburtshilfe Frauenheilkd Date: 2014-05 Impact factor: 2.915
Authors: Elisa R Trowbridge; Caitlin N Dreisbach; Bethany M Sarosiek; Catherine Page Dunbar; Sarah Larkin Evans; Lee Anne Hahn; Kathie L Hullfish Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2017-09-04 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Elisa Rodriguez Trowbridge; Sarah L Evans; Bethany M Sarosiek; Susan C Modesitt; Dana L Redick; Mohamed Tiouririne; Robert H Thiele; Traci L Hedrick; Kathie L Hullfish Journal: Int Urogynecol J Date: 2018-10-29 Impact factor: 2.894
Authors: Paolo Parise; Lorenzo Cinelli; Carlo Ferrari; Andrea Cossu; Francesco Puccetti; Leonardo Garutti; Ugo Elmore; Riccardo Rosati Journal: World J Surg Date: 2020-01 Impact factor: 3.352
Authors: Jin Chen Hu; Li Xin Jiang; Li Cai; Hai Tao Zheng; San Yuan Hu; Hong Bing Chen; Guo Chang Wu; Yi Fei Zhang; Zhong Chuan Lv Journal: J Gastrointest Surg Date: 2012-08-02 Impact factor: 3.452