| Literature DB >> 32513111 |
Huai-Zhen Wang1, Ling-Yu Wang1, Hui-Hong Liang1, Yan-Ting Fan1, Xing-Rong Song1, Ying-Jun She2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Caudal ketamine has been shown to provide an effective and prolonged post-operative analgesia with few adverse effects. However, the effect of caudal ketamine on the minimum local anesthetic concentration (MLAC) of ropivacaine for intra-operative analgesia is unclear.Entities:
Keywords: Analgesia; Anesthesia, caudal; Anesthetic techniques; Ketamine; Ropivacaine
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32513111 PMCID: PMC7278144 DOI: 10.1186/s12871-020-01058-y
Source DB: PubMed Journal: BMC Anesthesiol ISSN: 1471-2253 Impact factor: 2.217
Fig. 1Consort flow diagram
Children’s demographic and experimental data and postoperative side effects data
| Group | Group C | Group K0.25 | Group K0. 5 | Group K0.75 | Group K1.0 | P |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Number of Patients (n) | 32 | 31 | 34 | 34 | 38 | / |
| Age (months) | 22 (7) | 20 (7) | 21 (7) | 19 (6) | 20 (7) | 0.653 |
| Weight (kg) | 11.6 (1.6) | 11.3 (1.6) | 11.8 (1.7) | 11.4 (1.7) | 11.3 (1.8) | 0.737 |
| Duration of surgery (min) | 32 (9) | 30 (7) | 29 (5) | 29 (6) | 30 (8) | 0.378 |
| Recovery time (min) | 31 (4) | 31 (8) | 31 (3) | 30 (6) | 30 (7) | 0.850 |
| Propofol dose (mg) | 105 (27) | 104 (26) | 107 (30) | 103 (28) | 102 (28) | 0.957 |
| Type of surgery | ||||||
| Inguinal hernia (n) | 22 | 23 | 24 | 26 | 27 | 0.96 |
| Hydrocele (n) | 10 | 8 | 10 | 8 | 11 | |
| PONV (n) | 4 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 10 | 0.513 |
| Agitation (n) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | / |
| Urine retention (n) | 1 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0.366 |
| Bradycardia (n) | 1 | 1 | 2 | 1 | 3 | 0.822 |
| Hypotension (n) | 0 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 0 | 0.517 |
| Respiratory depression (n) | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 0 | / |
Values are mean (SD) or numbers, Data are mean ± SD or numbers of cases (n)
Fig. 2The response curve of consecutive children in each of the five groups. Skin incisions were attempted at different concentrations of caudal ropivacaine. The MLAC values of ropivacaine were 0.128% (0.03%) in the control group, 0.112% (0.02%) in Group K0.25, 0.112% (0.02%) in Group K0.5, 0.110% (0.02%) in Group K0.75, and 0.110% (0.02%) in Group K1.0. There were no significant differences among the five groups for the MLAC values (p = 0.11)
Fig. 3Results of Kaplan-Meier survival analysis were displayed as survival curves for the five caudal solution. The log-rank test was used to compare the rate of requirement for additional analgesia in the study