| ||||||||||||||
|
|
|||||||||||||

*Service dAnesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital de lHôtel-Dieu et Debrousse, Lyon, France; and
Department of Anesthesiology, Bowman Gray School of Medicine, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, North Carolina
Address correspondence and reprint requests to Dominique Chassard, MD, PhD, Service dAnesthésie-Réanimation, Hôpital de lHôtel-Dieu, 69002, Lyon, France. Address e-mail to dominique.chassard{at}chu-lyon.fr
Epidural ropivacaine infusion has been used in children; however, patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) has not been evaluated in the pediatric population. In this study, we compared the clinical efficiency of PCEA and of continuous epidural infusion analgesia (CEA) in children. Forty-eight children undergoing orthopedic surgery were randomized to receive PCEA or CEA with ropivacaine 0.2%. All patients underwent a standard general anesthetic. Children also received ketoprofen and propacetamol. Pain scores and side effects were recorded for 48 h. If the visual analog score scale score was >4 of 10, analgesia was considered inadequate, and rescue treatment was administered. Both groups obtained effective pain relief. Children in the PCEA group received significantly less local anesthetic than those in the CEA group (0.20 ± 0.08 mg · kg-1 · h-1 versus 0.40 ± 0.08 mg · kg-1 · h-1; P < 0.001). Motor effects, supplemental analgesic requirements, and side effects did not differ. We concluded that PCEA with ropivacaine 0.2% can provide adequate postoperative analgesia for pediatric orthopedic procedures with smaller dose requirements than CEA.
IMPLICATIONS: We studied patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) and continuous epidural infusion analgesia (CEA) with 0.2% ropivacaine during the postoperative period in children. We found that either PCEA or CEA with plain ropivacaine 0.2% provided adequate pain relief in children during the first 48-h postoperative course. However, adequate analgesia was obtained with 50% less volume infused with PCEA compared with CEA.
This article has been cited by other articles:
![]() |
F. Duflo, V. Sautou-Miranda, A. Pouyau, P. Taylor, S. Combet, F. Chotel, N. Bleyzac, and D. Chassard Efficacy and plasma levels of ropivacaine for children: controlled regional analgesia following lower limb surgery Br. J. Anaesth., August 1, 2006; 97(2): 250 - 254. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
C. Dadure, S. Bringuier, F. Nicolas, L. Bromilow, O. Raux, A. Rochette, and X. Capdevila Continuous epidural block versus continuous popliteal nerve block for postoperative pain relief after major podiatric surgery in children: a prospective, comparative randomized study. Anesth. Analg., March 1, 2006; 102(3): 744 - 749. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
![]() |
F. Duflo, Y. Qamouss, C. Remond, A. Pouyau, A. Heilporn, P. Taylor, B. Paturel, S. Combet, E. Boselli, F. Chotel, et al. Patient-controlled regional analgesia is effective in children: a preliminary report: [L'analgesie regionale auto-controlee est efficace chez les enfants : une etude preliminaire] Can J Anesth, November 1, 2004; 51(9): 928 - 930. [Abstract] [Full Text] [PDF] |
||||
|