RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES OF LOCAL ANESTHESIA (SUBCUTANEOUS VERSUS SUBCUTANEOUS & DEEP INFILTRATION) FOR POSTOPERATIVE PAIN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING OPEN APPENDECECTOMY
REFAAT, A., HEDAYA, M., EZZAT, H., FAYED, M., SALAMA, A., HELMY, A. (2015). RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES OF LOCAL ANESTHESIA (SUBCUTANEOUS VERSUS SUBCUTANEOUS & DEEP INFILTRATION) FOR POSTOPERATIVE PAIN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING OPEN APPENDECECTOMY. EKB Journal Management System, 45(1), 177-182. doi: 10.21608/jesp.2015.89738
AHMED I. REFAAT; MOHAMMED S. HEDAYA; HUSSEIN M. EZZAT; M.MAHER H. FAYED; A. F. SALAMA; AHMED H. HELMY. "RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES OF LOCAL ANESTHESIA (SUBCUTANEOUS VERSUS SUBCUTANEOUS & DEEP INFILTRATION) FOR POSTOPERATIVE PAIN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING OPEN APPENDECECTOMY". EKB Journal Management System, 45, 1, 2015, 177-182. doi: 10.21608/jesp.2015.89738
REFAAT, A., HEDAYA, M., EZZAT, H., FAYED, M., SALAMA, A., HELMY, A. (2015). 'RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES OF LOCAL ANESTHESIA (SUBCUTANEOUS VERSUS SUBCUTANEOUS & DEEP INFILTRATION) FOR POSTOPERATIVE PAIN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING OPEN APPENDECECTOMY', EKB Journal Management System, 45(1), pp. 177-182. doi: 10.21608/jesp.2015.89738
REFAAT, A., HEDAYA, M., EZZAT, H., FAYED, M., SALAMA, A., HELMY, A. RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES OF LOCAL ANESTHESIA (SUBCUTANEOUS VERSUS SUBCUTANEOUS & DEEP INFILTRATION) FOR POSTOPERATIVE PAIN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING OPEN APPENDECECTOMY. EKB Journal Management System, 2015; 45(1): 177-182. doi: 10.21608/jesp.2015.89738

RANDOMIZED CLINICAL TRIAL COMPARING TWO DIFFERENT TECHNIQUES OF LOCAL ANESTHESIA (SUBCUTANEOUS VERSUS SUBCUTANEOUS & DEEP INFILTRATION) FOR POSTOPERATIVE PAIN IN PATIENTS UNDERGOING OPEN APPENDECECTOMY

Journal of the Egyptian Society of Parasitology
Article 21, Volume 45, Issue 1, April 2015, Page 177-182  XML PDF (212.74 K)
Document Type: Original Article
DOI: 10.21608/jesp.2015.89738
View on SCiNiTO View on SCiNiTO
Authors
AHMED I. REFAAT1; MOHAMMED S. HEDAYA2; HUSSEIN M. EZZAT2; M.MAHER H. FAYED1; A. F. SALAMA3; AHMED H. HELMY3
1Departments of Anesthesiology, Theodore Bilharz Research Institute, Imbaba P.O. Box 30, Giza, Egypt.
2Departments of Surgery, Theodore Bilharz Research Institute, Imbaba P.O. Box 30, Giza, Egypt.
3Department of Surgery, Theodore Bilharz Research Institute, Imbaba P.O. Box 30, Giza, Egypt.
Abstract
This study compared the postoperative analgesic effect of local anesthetic (LA) injected subcutaneous (SC) alone versus local anesthetic injected both SC and deep in patients undergoing open appendecectomy operations. Sixty patients ASA class I- II undergoing open appendecectomy for presumed acute appendicitis will be randomly assigned into three groups. After routine monitoring, anesthesia induction was performed with propofol, fentanyl and, cis-atracurium; later, maintenance was continued with isoflurane. GA received local infiltration of the skin prior to incision with bupivacaine 0.25% (10ml), GB received received half the bupivacaine infiltrated into the skin and other half deep-to external oblique prior to incision to create a local nerve field blockade & GC received half dose of saline subcutaneous & half deep to external oblique muscle prior to incision. Postoperative pain was assessed using visual analogue score (VAS) at 1, 4, 8,
& 24 hours post extubation. Pethidine 1 mg/kg was given if VAS is ≥4. All patients in GA (SC) and Control required postoperative analgesics, compared to only 60% of the patients in GB (SC+deep). Time for the first analgesic requirement was prolonged in GB compared to other groups (P<0.01). VAS scores were significantly lower in patients of GB in the first 8 hr. postoperative compared to GA &GC (P<0.01).
Keywords
Appendectomy; pre-incisional infiltration; bupivacaine
Statistics
Article View: 116
PDF Download: 156