This Article Full Text Full Text (PDF) Alert me when this article is cited Alert me if a correction is posted Services Email this article to a colleague Similar articles in this journal Similar articles in Web of Science Similar articles in PubMed Alert me to new issues of the journal Download to citation manager Request Permissions Citing Articles Citing Articles via HighWire Citing Articles via Web of Science (7) Citing Articles via Google Scholar Google Scholar Articles by Cheng, S. S. Articles by Flood, P. Search for Related Content PubMed PubMed Citation Articles by Cheng, S. S. Articles by Flood, P. Related Collections Pain Medicine Pain Pharmacology

---

ANALGESIA

Anesthesia Matters: Patients Anesthetized with Propofol Have Less Postoperative Pain than Those Anesthetized with Isoflurane

From the Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University, New York City, New York.

Address correspondence and reprint requests to Pamela Flood, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Columbia University, 630 West 168th St., New York City, NY 10032. Address e-mail to Pdf3{at}columbia.edu.

Abstract

BACKGROUND: Preclinical studies have suggested that some volatile anesthetics induce a hyperalgesic state that may be secondary to nicotinic inhibition. A previous trial of treatment with nicotine nasal spray demonstrated postoperative analgesia in women anesthetized with isoflurane. To determine whether the effect of nicotine was reversing hyperalgesia induced by isoflurane, or simply acting as an analgesic, we studied the effect of nicotine on postoperative pain in women anesthetized with isoflurane or propofol, with fentanyl.

METHODS: In a randomized, prospective, double-blind trial, we assigned 80 women having open uterine surgery to be anesthetized with isoflurane or propofol. Within each anesthetic group, the subjects were further randomly assigned to receive nicotine 3 mg or placebo. Pain reported with a numerical analog scale was the primary outcome variable.

RESULTS: The patient demographics were similar. Women who were anesthetized with propofol reported less pain and used less morphine during the first day after surgery than women who were anesthetized with isoflurane (P < 0.01, P < 0.01). Nicotine treatment did not change pain report or morphine use in either anesthetic group (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS: General anesthesia with propofol and is associated with less postoperative pain and morphine use than general anesthesia with isoflurane. Nicotine was not analgesic in this trial. If these results are repeated in other populations, reduced postoperative pain can be added to the previously described improvement in nausea and vomiting as a potential benefit of anesthesia with propofol.

This article has been cited by other articles:

				L. C. Olson, D. Hong, J. S. Conell-Price, S. Cheng, and P. Flood A Transdermal Nicotine Patch Is Not Effective for Postoperative Pain Management in Smokers: A Pilot Dose-Ranging Study Anesth. Analg., December 1, 2009; 109(6): 1987 - 1991. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				B. Ben-David and J. E. Chelly Propofol Alters Ketamine Effect on Opiate-Induced Hyperalgesia Anesth. Analg., April 1, 2009; 108(4): 1353 - 1353. [Full Text] [PDF]

				A. Fassoulaki, A. Melemeni, A. Paraskeva, I. Siafaka, and C. Sarantopoulos Postoperative Pain and Analgesic Requirements After Anesthesia with Sevoflurane, Desflurane or Propofol Anesth. Analg., November 1, 2008; 107(5): 1715 - 1719. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				H. Eilers Anesthetic Activation of Nociceptors: Adding Insult to Injury? Mol. Interv., October 1, 2008; 8(5): 226 - 229. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				D. Hong, J. Conell-Price, S. Cheng, and P. Flood Transdermal Nicotine Patch for Postoperative Pain Management: A Pilot Dose-Ranging Study Anesth. Analg., September 1, 2008; 107(3): 1005 - 1010. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. L. Shafer Full Disclosure Matters! Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2008; 106(3): 1017 - 1017. [Full Text] [PDF]

				S. L. Shafer and V. Nekhendzy Anesthesia Matters: Statistical Anomaly or New Paradigm? Anesth. Analg., January 1, 2008; 106(1): 3 - 4. [Full Text] [PDF]