-transparent.png){kind=logo}
OBJECTIVE To evaluate both effectiveness and incidence of side effects of two techniques of postoperative pain treatment: intravenous and epidural PCA. METHODS Prospective analysis of data from two groups of randomized patients. METHODS Orthopedic and trauma center. METHODS Figty ASA class II-III patients undergoing total hip replacement under combined Spinal-Epidural Anesthesia. METHODS Patients were divided into 2 groups who received different postoperative pain treatment. One group (group PCA) received a patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine 30 mg and ketorolac 90 mg in 100 ml of saline (back-ground infusion 2-4 ml, according to body weith, bolus 1 ml, lockout 5 min, 4 h dose limit 40 ml). PCEA group received a patient-controlled epidural analgesia with morphine 4 mg and bupivacaine 0.125% 100 ml, (background infusion 3-4 ml, according to patient' height, bolus 1 ml, lockout 10 min, 4 h dose limit 25 ml). Postoperative pain intensity was evaluated, through 24 postoperative hours, by a verbal analogue scale (VPS = 0 to 3) and a total pain score (TOTPAR) was calculated for each patient at 6 and 24 postoperative hours. Side effects were recorded and their incidence was obtained for each group. Statistical data analysis was performed by one-way ANOVA and non-parametric tests for ordinal data. Nominal data were analyzed by chi 2 test. p < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS Patient receiving PCEA showed a significant (p < 0.005) decrease of incident pain, while VPS at rest was similar in the two groups. TOTPAR VPS was lower (p < 0.05) in PCEA group both at 6 and 24 postoperative hours. Somnolence was observed more often in PCA patients (8% vs 2%; p 0.05), while no significant differences were noted among other side effects incidence. CONCLUSIONS Our data show a better control of postoperative pain arising from total hip replacement during PCEA when compared to PCA. It should be emphasized that incident pain is far more decreased by PCEA, so that this technique is particularly indicated when an early postoperative mobilization is required.
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
November 2006,
Anesthesia and analgesia,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
January 2010,
Sao Paulo medical journal = Revista paulista de medicina,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
January 2015,
Regional anesthesia and pain medicine,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
October 2013,
Korean journal of anesthesiology,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
November 2005,
Surgery,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
September 2017,
Annals of surgery,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
May 2001,
Zhonghua fu chan ke za zhi,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
January 1995,
Regional anesthesia,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
September 2012,
Acta anaesthesiologica Taiwanica : official journal of the Taiwan Society of Anesthesiologists,
L Bertini, and
V Tagariello, and
F M Molino, and
C M Posteraro, and
S Mancini, and
L Rossignoli
November 2008,
Masui. The Japanese journal of anesthesiology,
