A randomized-controlled study of intrathecal versus epidural thoracic analgesia in patients undergoingabdominal cancer surgery.

Alessandra Casuccio, Antonio Marrazzo, Sebastiano Mercadante, Antonio Marrazzo, Patrizia Villari

Risultato della ricerca: Articlepeer review

6 Citazioni (Scopus)


Background. We sought to determine theeffectiveness of continuous intrathecal thoracic analgesia (ITA)in comparison with continuous epidural thoracic analgesia(ETA) for the management of postoperative pain afterabdominal cancer surgery in a randomised controlledstudy. Materials and methods. Catheters were inserted atT8-10 level for both techniques. Sixty patients wererandomized to receive ITA providing levobupivacaine 0.25%,at 0.5–0–7 ml/h, associated with a single bolus of morphine0.15 mg, or ETA with levobupivacaine 0.25% 4–6 ml/h and asingle bolus of epidural morphine 2–3 mg. Data were collectedbefore discharging from recovery room to the surgical ward, 1,2, 3, 8, 12, 24 h, and 48 h after operation. The primaryoutcome was pain intensity evaluation. Postoperative morphineconsumption, hemodynamics, fluids, and blood losses for thefirst postoperative 48 h, surgical outcome, hospital stay, andcomplications were also collected. Results. Pain intensity atrest mean values ranged from 1.12 to 1.44 and from 1.04 to 1.20in ITA group and ETA group, respectively. Dynamic painintensity mean values ranged from 1.28 to 1.70 and from 1.16 to1.80 in ITA group and ETA group, respectively. No significantdifferences were found between the two groups. Total amountmorphine 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 redcell transfusion were equivalent between the groups. Noimportant technical complications were reported in bothgroups and postoperative surgical complications were notrelated to the examined techniques. Conclusion. ITA andETA produced the same levels of analgesia, without relevantcomplications
Lingua originaleEnglish
pagine (da-a)293-298
Numero di pagine6
RivistaJournal of Clinical Monitoring and Computing
Stato di pubblicazionePublished - 2008

All Science Journal Classification (ASJC) codes

  • ???subjectarea.asjc.2700.2718???
  • ???subjectarea.asjc.2700.2706???
  • ???subjectarea.asjc.2700.2703???


Entra nei temi di ricerca di 'A randomized-controlled study of intrathecal versus epidural thoracic analgesia in patients undergoingabdominal cancer surgery.'. Insieme formano una fingerprint unica.

Cita questo