BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of two anesthesia techniques, combined epidural/general anesthesia (CEGA) versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS:Forty patients were randomly assigned to one of two different groups: group A received TIVA and group B received CEGA. At preset times during the operation, systolic and diastolic arterial pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation (SaO2) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (Etco2) were monitored. Postoperatively, recovery (Steward's test) and analgesia (visual analog scale [VAS] pain scores) were assessed, as well as the incidence of adverse effects. RESULTS: The groups were comparable as to demographic data and duration of surgery and of anesthesia. Intraoperative parameters also showed no statistical differences. Both groups had a rapid recovery (Steward score of 6 within 12 minutes), but group B showed better recovery scores at 4 minutes. Postoperative pain was well controlled in both groups, but group B exhibited better scores at postoperative hour 2. The incidence of postoperative side effects was low in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of CEGA for laparoscopic cholecystectomy seems to be effective and safe and to offer some advantages as compared to TIVA alone. CEGA can control pain due to CO2-induced peritoneal irritation, providing excellent intra- and postoperative analgesia. CEGA does not require the use of intraoperative intravenous opioids and shortens recovery time, without increasing the incidence of side effects.
RCT Entities:
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to compare the efficacy and safety of two anesthesia techniques, combined epidural/general anesthesia (CEGA) versus total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA), for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. METHODS: Forty patients were randomly assigned to one of two different groups: group A received TIVA and group B received CEGA. At preset times during the operation, systolic and diastolic arterial pressure, heart rate, oxygen saturation (SaO2) and end-tidal carbon dioxide (Etco2) were monitored. Postoperatively, recovery (Steward's test) and analgesia (visual analog scale [VAS] pain scores) were assessed, as well as the incidence of adverse effects. RESULTS: The groups were comparable as to demographic data and duration of surgery and of anesthesia. Intraoperative parameters also showed no statistical differences. Both groups had a rapid recovery (Steward score of 6 within 12 minutes), but group B showed better recovery scores at 4 minutes. Postoperative pain was well controlled in both groups, but group B exhibited better scores at postoperative hour 2. The incidence of postoperative side effects was low in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The use of CEGA for laparoscopic cholecystectomy seems to be effective and safe and to offer some advantages as compared to TIVA alone. CEGA can control pain due to CO2-induced peritoneal irritation, providing excellent intra- and postoperative analgesia. CEGA does not require the use of intraoperative intravenous opioids and shortens recovery time, without increasing the incidence of side effects.
Authors: H Kehlet; A W Gray; F Bonnet; F Camu; H B J Fischer; R F McCloy; E A M Neugebauer; M M Puig; N Rawal; C J P Simanski Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2005-08-11 Impact factor: 4.584
Authors: K Kuramochi; Y Osuga; T Yano; M Momoeda; T Fujiwara; O Tsutsumi; H Tamai; K Hanaoka; K Koga; O Yoshino; Y Taketani Journal: Surg Endosc Date: 2004-04-02 Impact factor: 4.584