JOURNAL HOME CME HOME THIS MONTH PAST ISSUES ETOC COLLECTIONS
AUTHORS REVIEWERS EDITORIAL BOARD FEEDBACK RSS HELP
A&A International Anesthesia Research Society
QUICK SEARCH:   [advanced]


     

This Article
Right arrow Full Text
Right arrow Full Text (PDF)
Right arrow Alert me when this article is cited
Right arrow Alert me if a correction is posted
Services
Right arrow Email this article to a colleague
Right arrow Similar articles in this journal
Right arrow Similar articles in ISI Web of Science
Right arrow Similar articles in PubMed
Right arrow Alert me to new issues of the journal
Right arrow Download to citation manager
Citing Articles
Right arrow Citing Articles via HighWire
Right arrow Citing Articles via ISI Web of Science (6)
Right arrow Citing Articles via Google Scholar
Google Scholar
Right arrow Articles by Akrofi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Fox, M. A.
Right arrow Search for Related Content
PubMed
Right arrow PubMed Citation
Right arrow Articles by Akrofi, M.
Right arrow Articles by Fox, M. A.
Related Collections
Right arrow Critical Care
Right arrow Heart
Right arrow Postanesthetic Care Unit

Anesth Analg 2005;100:205-209
© 2005 International Anesthesia Research Society
doi: 10.1213/01.ANE.0000140237.96510.E5

REVIEW ARTICLE

A Randomized Comparison of Three Methods of Analgesia for Chest Drain Removal in Postcardiac Surgical Patients

Maria Akrofi, FRCA, Scott Miller, FRCA, Steve Colfar, Peter R. Corry, FRCA, Brian M. Fabri, FRCS, Mark D. Pullan, FRCS, Glenn N. Russell, FRCA, and Mark A. Fox, FRCA

Cardiothoracic Centre National Health Service Trust, Thomas Drive, Liverpool, United Kingdom

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Mark A. Fox, FRCA, The Cardiothoracic Centre, Thomas Dr., Liverpool, UK L14 3PE. Address e-mail to mark.fox{at}ctc.nhs.uk

Sixty-six patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft and/or valve surgery were recruited in a prospective, randomized study designed to compare the effectiveness of three analgesic regimens for chest drain removal. Patients were randomized to receive 0.1 mg/kg IV morphine, 20 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine infiltrated subcutaneously, or inhaled 50% nitrous oxide in oxygen (Entonox) via a demand valve. We assessed pain by measuring visual analog scale pain scores before and during drain removal. Median (25th, 75th centile) visual analog scale pain scores associated with drain removal in the bupivacaine, Entonox, and morphine groups were 9.5 mm (3, 18 mm), 37.0 mm (13, 56 mm), and 15.0 mm (7, 27 mm), respectively. The pain scores were higher in the Entonox group compared with the bupivacaine group (P = 0.005) and the morphine group (P = 0.047). Differences between baseline and drain-removal scores were –0.5 mm (–13, 7 mm), +10 mm (1, 29 mm), and –3.0 mm (–11, 12 mm), respectively. There was no difference among groups in arterial blood pressure, heart rate, PaCO2, oxygenation, or sedation. Bupivacaine and morphine, unlike Entonox, produce lower pain scores associated with drain removal.

IMPLICATIONS: The efficacy of IV morphine, subcutaneous bupivacaine, and inhaled 50% nitrous oxide in oxygen as analgesia for the removal of mediastinal chest drains after cardiac surgery was compared. All methods afford hemodynamic stability, but Entonox was the least effective in providing analgesia.




This article has been cited by other articles:


Home page
 ChestHome page
A. Horsley, L. Jones, J. White, and M. Henry
Efficacy and Complications of Small-Bore, Wire-Guided Chest Drains
Chest, December 1, 2006; 130(6): 1857 - 1863.
[Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]


Lippincott, Williams & Wilkins Anesthesia & Analgesia® is published for the International Anesthesia Research Society® by Lippincott Williams & Wilkins with the assistance of Stanford University Libraries' HighWire Press®. Copyright 2006 by the International Anesthesia Research Society. Online ISSN: 1526-7598   Print ISSN: 0003-2999 HighWire Press
Copyright © 2005 by the International Anesthesia Research Society.