Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

A Randomized-Controlled Study of Intrathecal Versus Epidural Thoracic Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Cancer Surgery

  • Published:
Journal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Background

We sought to determine the effectiveness of continuous intrathecal thoracic analgesia (ITA) in comparison with continuous epidural thoracic analgesia (ETA) for the management of postoperative pain after abdominal cancer surgery in a randomised controlled study.

Materials and methods

Catheters were inserted at T8-10 level for both techniques. Sixty patients were randomized to receive ITA providing levobupivacaine 0.25%, at 0.5–0–7 ml/h, associated with a single bolus of morphine 0.15 mg, or ETA with levobupivacaine 0.25% 4–6 ml/h and a single bolus of epidural morphine 2–3 mg. Data were collected before discharging from recovery room to the surgical ward, 1, 2, 3, 8, 12, 24 h, and 48 h after operation. The primary outcome was pain intensity evaluation. Postoperative morphine consumption, hemodynamics, fluids, and blood losses for the first postoperative 48 h, surgical outcome, hospital stay, and complications were also collected.

Results

Pain intensity at rest mean values ranged from 1.12 to 1.44 and from 1.04 to 1.20 in ITA group and ETA group, respectively. Dynamic pain intensity mean values ranged from 1.28 to 1.70 and from 1.16 to 1.80 in ITA group and ETA group, respectively. No significant differences were found between the two groups. Total amount morphine consumption was minimal in both groups, 4.4 mg (±2.9) and 3.1 mg (±2.4), for ITA and ETA groups, respectively. There were no severly sedated patients. Hemodynamic variables, diuresis, amounts of fluids, and red cell transfusion were equivalent between the groups. No important technical complications were reported in both groups and postoperative surgical complications were not related to the examined techniques.

Conclusion

ITA and ETA produced the same levels of analgesia, without relevant complications.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Ballantyne JC, Kupelnick B, McPeek B, Lau J. Does the evidence support the use of spinal and epidural anesthesia for surgery? J Clin Anesth 2005;17:382–391

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  2. Ballantyne JC, Carr DB, deFerranti S, et'al. The comparative effects of postoperative analgesic therapies on pulmonary outcome: cumulative meta-analyses of randomized, controlled trials. Anesth Analg. 1998;86:598–612

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  3. Park WY, Thompson J, Lee KK. Effect of epidural anesthesia and analgesia on perioperative outcome. Ann Surg 2001;234:560–571

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. Bakhtiary F, Therapidis P, Dzemali O, Ak K, Ackermann H, Meininger D, Kessler P, Kleine P, Moritz A, Aybek T, Dogan S. Impact of high thoracic epidural anesthesia on incidence of perioperative atrial fibrillation in off-pump coronary bypass grafting: a prospective randomized study. J Thorac Cardiovasc Surg. 2007; 134:460–464

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  5. Kessler P, Aybek T, Neidhart G, Dogan S, Lischke V, Bremerich DH, Byhahn C. Comparison of three anesthetic techniques for off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting: general anesthesia, combined general and high thoracic epidural anesthesia, or high thoracic epidural anesthesia alone. J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2005;19:32–39

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  6. Carli F, Trudel JL, Belliveau P. The effect of intraoperative thoracic epidural anesthesia and postoperative analgesia on bowel function after colorectal surgery: a prospective, randomized trial. Dis Colon Rectum. 2001;44:1083–1089

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Davies MJ. Perioperative epidural anaesthesia and analgesia – an appraisal of its role. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2007;35:593–600

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. de Leon-Casasola OA, Parker BM, Lema MJ, Groth RI, Orsini-Fuentes J. Epidural analgesia versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Differences in the postoperative course of cancer patients. Reg Anesth. 1994;19:307–315

    PubMed  Google Scholar 

  9. Jayr C, Thomas H, Rey A, Farhat F, Lasser P, Bourgain JL. Postoperative pulmonary complications. Epidural analgesia using bupivacaine and opioids versus parenteral opioids. Anesthesiology. 1993; 78:666–676

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Zutshi M, Delaney CP, Senagore AJ, Mekhail N, Lewis B, Connor JT, Fazio VW. Randomized controlled trial comparing the controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet pathway versus the controlled rehabilitation with early ambulation and diet with preemptive epidural anesthesia/analgesia after laparotomy and intestinal resection. Am J Surg. 2005;189:268–272

    Article  PubMed  Google Scholar 

  11. Hansdottir V, Philip J, Olsen MF, Eduard C, Houltz E, Ricksten SE. Thoracic epidural versus intravenous patient-controlled analgesia after cardiac surgery: a randomized controlled trial on length of hospital stay and patient-perceived quality of recovery. Anesthesiology. 2006;104:142–151

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Mollmann M, Cord S, Holst D, Auf der Landwehr U. Continuous spinal anaesthesia or continuous epidural anaesthesia for post-operative pain control after hip replacement? Eur J Anaesthesiol. 1999;16:454–461

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Gurlit S, Reinhardt S, Mollmann M. Continuous spinal analgesia or opioid-added continuous epidural analgesia for postoperative pain control after hip replacement. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2004;21:708–714

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  14. Maurer K, Bonvini JM, Ekatodramis G, Serena S, Borgeat A. Continuous spinal anesthesia/analgesia vs. single shot spinal anesthesia with patient-controlled analgesia for elective hip artroplasty. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2003;47:878–883

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Niemi L, Pitkanen M, Dunkel P, Laakso E, Rosenberg PH. Evaluation of the usefulness of intrathecal bupivacaine infusion for analgesia after hip and knee arthroplasty. Br J Anaesth 1996;77:544–545

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  16. Michaloudis D, Petrou A, Bakos P, Chatzimichali A, Kafkalaki K, Papaioannou A, Zeaki M, Flossos A. Continuous spinal anaesthesia/analgesia for the perioperative management of high-risk patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2000;17:239–247

    Article  PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Niemi L, Pitkanen M, Tuominen M, Rodenberg PH. Technical problems and side effects associate with continuous intrathecal or epidural post-operative analgesia in patients undergoing hip artroplasty. Eur J Anaesthesiol 1994;11:469–474

    PubMed  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

Authors wish to thank the nurse staff of operatory room and surgical ward for their valuable support.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Anesthesia & Intensive Care Unit, Pain Relief & Palliative Care Unit, La Maddalena Cancer Center, Via San Lorenzo 312, 90146, Palermo, Italy

    Sebastiano Mercadante MD & Patrizia Villari MD

  2. Department of Neuroscience, University of Palermo, Palermo, Italy

    Alessandra Casuccio BS

  3. Department of Oncologic Surgery, La Maddalena Cancer Center, Palermo, Italy

    Antonio Marrazzo MD

Authors
  1. Sebastiano Mercadante MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Patrizia Villari MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Alessandra Casuccio BS
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. Antonio Marrazzo MD
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Sebastiano Mercadante MD.

Additional information

Mercadante S, Villari P, Casuccio A, Marrazzo A. A Randomized-controlled study of intrathecal versus epidural thoracic analgesia in patients undergoing abdominal cancer surgery.

J Clin Monit Comput 2008

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Mercadante, S., Villari, P., Casuccio, A. et al. A Randomized-Controlled Study of Intrathecal Versus Epidural Thoracic Analgesia in Patients Undergoing Abdominal Cancer Surgery. J Clin Monit Comput 22, 293–298 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-008-9132-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10877-008-9132-1

Keywords

Search

Navigation