Yıl: 2020 Cilt: 46 Sayı: 3 Sayfa Aralığı: 243 - 248 Metin Dili: İngilizce DOI: 10.5152/tud.2019.19191 İndeks Tarihi: 31-10-2020

Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study

Öz:
Objective: Optimal analgesia following ambulatory surgery is an important matter in patient satisfaction, and it reduces unnecessary hospital admissions. This study investigated whether a caudal block with bupivacaine alone or in a combination with lidocaine can alter postoperative pain scores, complications, and peroperative and postoperative analgesic consumption.Material and methods: This is a retrospective study that included children who underwent elective circumcision surgery under general anesthesia and caudal analgesia between January and June 2018. Among the 103 children, 17 cases were not analyzed due to an unsuccessful caudal block and procedures simultaneously underwent another operation unrelated to circumcision. We divided the study participants into two groups according to the type of local anesthetic applied: 0.5 mL/kg 0.25% bupivacaine (Group B) and 0.5 mL/kg 0.25% bupivacaine + 3 mg/kg 1% lidocaine (Group BL) caudally.Results: Pain scores were similar between these groups and remained in the mild-to-moderate range throughout the hospitalization (p>0.05). There were significant differences regarding the rescue analgesic use, first micturition, and mobilization times (p<0.001). In addition, we applied the multivariable logistic regression for fentanyl consumption adjusted for first mobilization and micturition time, unlike mobilization, a significantly increased risk for postoperative delayed micturition (OR, 1.06; 95% CI, 1.0–1.12; p=0.038) was found with intra-operative intravenous fentanyl use.Conclusion: Our results suggest that the caudal block with a lidocaine+bupivacaine combination decreases rescue analgesic consumption at day–case surgery. In circumcision procedures, the caudal block is an effective and safe analgesic method for intraoperative and postoperative pain control with no side effects. This trial was registered at Clinicaltrals.gov, NCT03911648.
Anahtar Kelime:

Belge Türü: Makale Makale Türü: Araştırma Makalesi Erişim Türü: Erişime Açık
  • 1. Brennan LJ. Modern day-case anaesthesia for children. Br J Anaesth 1999;83:91-103. [CrossRef]
  • 2. Bosenberg A. Pediatric regional anesthesia update. Paediatr Anaesth 2004;14:398-402. [CrossRef]
  • 3. Samol NB, Furstein JS, Moore DL. Regional anesth and Pain Management for the Pediatric Patient. Int Anesthesiol Clin 2012;50:83-95. [CrossRef]
  • 4. Brislin RP, Rose JB. Pediatric acute pain management. Anesthesiol Clin North America 2005;23:789-814. [CrossRef]
  • 5. Corliss A, Alyssa A, Timothy J, Hamilton DA. Buffered lidocaine and bupivacaine mixture-the ideal local anesthetic solution? Plast Surg 2015;23:87-90. [CrossRef]
  • 6. Inomata S, Tanaka E, Miyabe M, Kakiuchi Y, Nagashima A, Yamasaki Y, et al. Plasma lidocaine concentrations during continuous thorasic epidural anesthesia after clonidine premedication in children. Anesth Analg 2001;93:1147-51. [CrossRef]
  • 7. De Jonghe B, Cook D, Appere-De-Vecchi C, Guyatt G, Meade M, Outin H. Using and understanding sedation scoring systems: a systematic review. Intensive Care Med 2000;26:275-85. [CrossRef]
  • 8. Graham AC, McClure JH. Quantitative assessment of motor block in labouring women receiving epidural analgesia. Anaesthesia 2001;56:470-6. [CrossRef]
  • 9. Crellin DJ, Harrison D, Hutchinson A, Schuster T, Santamaria N, Babl FE. Procedural Pain Scale Evaluation (PROPoSE) study: protocol for an evaluation of the psychometric properties of behavioural pain scales for the assessment of procedural pain in infants and children aged 6-42 months. BMJ Open 2017;7:e016225. [CrossRef]
  • 10. Jöhr M. Regional anaesthesia in neonates, infants and children: an educational review. Eur J Anaesthesiol 2015;32:289-97. [CrossRef]
  • 11. Wang C, Slikker W Jr. Strategies and experimental models for evaluating anesthetics: effects on the developing nervous system. Anesth Analg 2008;106:1643-58. [CrossRef]
  • 12. Lönnqvist PA, Ecoffey C, Bosenberg A, Suresh S, Ivani G. The European society of regional anesthesia and pain therapy and the American society of regional anesthesia and pain medicine joint committee practice advisory on controversial topics in pediatric regional anesthesia I and II: what do they tell us? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2017;30:613-20. [CrossRef]
  • 13. Aouad MT, Moussa AR, Dagher CM, Muwakkit SA, Jabbour-Khoury SI, Zbeidy RA, et al. Addition of ketamine to propofol for initiation of procedural anesthesia in children reduces propofol consumption and preserves hemodynamic stability. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand 2008;52:561-5. [CrossRef]
  • 14. Köknel Talu G, Ozyalçin NS, Balsak R, Karadeniz M. The efficacy of preemptive ketamine and ropivacaine in pediatric patients: a placebo controlled, double-blind. Agri 2008;20:31-6.
  • 15. Baldini G, Bagry H, Aprikian A, Carli F. Postoperative urinary retention. Anesthesiology 2009;110:1139-57. [CrossRef]
  • 16. Matsuura S, Downie JW. Effect of anesthetics on reflex micturition in the chronic cannula-implanted rat. Neurourol Urodyn 2000;19:87-99. [CrossRef]
  • 17. Llewellyn N, Moriarty A. The national pediatric epidural audit. Paediatr Anaesth 2007;17:520-33. [CrossRef]
  • 18. Wong GK, Arab AA, Chew SC, Naser B, Crawford MW. Major complications related to epidural analgesia in children: a 15-year audit of 3,152 epidurals. Can J Anaesth 2013;60:355-63. [CrossRef]
  • 19. Polaner DM, Taenzer AH, Walker BJ, Bosenberg A, Krane EJ, Suresh S, et al. Pediatric Regional Anesthesia Network (PRAN): a multi-institutional study of the use and incidence of complications of pediatric regional anesthesia. Anesth Analg 2012;115:1353-64. [CrossRef]
  • 20. Ecoffey C, Lacroix F, Giaufré E, Orliaguet G, Courrèges P. Epidemiology and morbidity of regional anesthesia in children: a follow-up one-year prospective survey of the French-Language Society of Paediatric Anaesthesiologists (ADARPEF). Paediatr Anaesth 2010;20:1061-9. [CrossRef]
  • 21. Suresh S, Long J, Birmingham PK, De Oliveira GS Jr. Are Caudal Blocks for Pain Control Safe in Children? An Analysis of 18,650 Caudal Blocks from the Pediatric Regional Anesthesia Network (PRAN) Database. Anesth Analg 2015;120:151-6. [CrossRef]
APA Atasever A, Ermis O, Sencan Demir B, Kasali K, Savran Karadeniz M (2020). Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. , 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
Chicago Atasever Ayşe Gülşah,Ermis Okan,Sencan Demir Bilge,Kasali Kamber,Savran Karadeniz Meltem Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. (2020): 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
MLA Atasever Ayşe Gülşah,Ermis Okan,Sencan Demir Bilge,Kasali Kamber,Savran Karadeniz Meltem Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. , 2020, ss.243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
AMA Atasever A,Ermis O,Sencan Demir B,Kasali K,Savran Karadeniz M Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. . 2020; 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
Vancouver Atasever A,Ermis O,Sencan Demir B,Kasali K,Savran Karadeniz M Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. . 2020; 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
IEEE Atasever A,Ermis O,Sencan Demir B,Kasali K,Savran Karadeniz M "Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study." , ss.243 - 248, 2020. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
ISNAD Atasever, Ayşe Gülşah vd. "Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study". (2020), 243-248. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2019.19191
APA Atasever A, Ermis O, Sencan Demir B, Kasali K, Savran Karadeniz M (2020). Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. Turkish Journal of Urology, 46(3), 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
Chicago Atasever Ayşe Gülşah,Ermis Okan,Sencan Demir Bilge,Kasali Kamber,Savran Karadeniz Meltem Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. Turkish Journal of Urology 46, no.3 (2020): 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
MLA Atasever Ayşe Gülşah,Ermis Okan,Sencan Demir Bilge,Kasali Kamber,Savran Karadeniz Meltem Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. Turkish Journal of Urology, vol.46, no.3, 2020, ss.243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
AMA Atasever A,Ermis O,Sencan Demir B,Kasali K,Savran Karadeniz M Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. Turkish Journal of Urology. 2020; 46(3): 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
Vancouver Atasever A,Ermis O,Sencan Demir B,Kasali K,Savran Karadeniz M Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study. Turkish Journal of Urology. 2020; 46(3): 243 - 248. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
IEEE Atasever A,Ermis O,Sencan Demir B,Kasali K,Savran Karadeniz M "Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study." Turkish Journal of Urology, 46, ss.243 - 248, 2020. 10.5152/tud.2019.19191
ISNAD Atasever, Ayşe Gülşah vd. "Comparison of bupivacaine alone and in a combination with lidocaine for caudal block in patients undergoing circumcision: A historical cohort study". Turkish Journal of Urology 46/3 (2020), 243-248. https://doi.org/10.5152/tud.2019.19191