Summary

Background and objective: This study was designed to evaluate early postoperative cognitive recovery after total intravenous anaesthesia with remifentanil–propofol or sufentanil–propofol in patients undergoing craniotomy for supratentorial expanding lesions. Methods: Sixty patients were consecutively enrolled, and randomly assigned to one of two study groups: remifentanil–propofol or sufentanil–propofol anaesthesia. To evaluate cognitive function the Short Orientation Memory Concentration Test (SOMCT) and Rancho Los Amigos Scale (RLAS) were administered to all patients in a double-blind procedure before surgery at 15, 45 min and 3 h after extubation. Results: Mean extubation time was similar in the two groups (13 ± 5 min vs. 19 ± 6 min). A significantly larger number of patients in the remifentanil–propofol group than in the sufentanil–propofol group required antihypertensive medication postoperatively to maintain mean arterial pressure within 20% of baseline (18/30 vs. 4/29; P = 0.0004). Intergroup analysis showed no differences in baseline SOMCT scores (28 ± 1 vs. 28 ± 1) whereas mean SOMCT scores at 15, 45 min and 3 h after extubation were significantly higher in the remifentanil–propofol group (30 patients) than in the sufentanil–propofol group (29 patients) (22 ± 3 vs. 16 ± 3; P < 0.0001 and 27 ± 1 vs. 22 ± 3; P < 0.0001; 28 ± 1 vs. 26 ± 2; P = 0.0126). Conclusions: In conclusion, propofol–remifentanil and propofol–sufentanil are both suitable for fast-track neuroanaesthesia and provide similar intraoperative haemodynamics, awakening and extubation times. Despite a higher risk of treatable postoperative hypertension propofol–remifentanil allows earlier cognitive recovery.

Background and objective: The aim was to determine if the intravenous administration of sufentanil or clonidine before the induction of anaesthesia could obtund the increase of intraocular pressure associated with rapid-sequence induction.

Methods: Thirty-two ASA I—II patients with no history of eye illness scheduled for elective non-ophthalmic surgery were randomly assigned to receive either sufentanil 0.05 µg kg−1 i.v. (Group A, n = 15) or clonidine 2 µg kg−1 i.v. (Group B, n = 17) prior to induction. General anaesthesia was induced with thiopental (5 mg kg−1) followed by succinylcholine 1 mg kg−1 to facilitate tracheal intubation. The general anaesthetic technique was standardized in both groups. Intraocular pressure was measured using the Schioetz tonometer just before the succinylcholine administration (t0), just before tracheal intubation (t1) and immediately after intubation (t2). Mean arterial pressure and heart rate were recorded at the same time intervals.

Results: Intraocular pressures were similar in both groups at t0, but the sufentanil group had significantly lower values compared with the clonidine group just before (t1) and immediately after tracheal intubation (t2).

Conclusions: Sufentanil is effective in blunting the increase in intraocular pressure caused by rapid-sequence induction with succinylcholine, while clonidine did not seem to have any effect in intraocular pressures just before (t1) and just after (t2) intubation.

Background and objective: Epidural analgesia with bupivacaine plus either sufentanil or fentanyl is widely used during labour, but it is not clear which opioid is to be preferred. The study compared these opioids at equianalgesic doses in terms of analgesia, onset time and side-effects.

Methods: Ninety females in active labour were entered into the randomized, double-blind trial. A test dose of bupivacaine was given into the epidural space. Parturients in Group S received sufentanil 8 mL as a bolus dose, followed by an infusion at a rate of 5 mL h−1 of a mixture containing sufentanil 1 µg mL−1 and bupivacaine 1 mg mL−1. Patients in Group F received fentanyl 8 mL as a bolus, followed by an infusion at 5 mL h−1 of a solution containing fentanyl 3.5 µg mL−1 and bupivacaine 1 mg mL−1. Additional boluses of 5 mL were of the relevant solution were given if necessary.

Results: In a ratio of 1.0 : 3.5 (sufentanil 1 µg versus fentanyl 3.5 µg), both groups reported the same analgesia with the same onset time. The onset time to obtain 50% of the initial visual analogue score was 10 and 11 min for Groups S and F, respectively. Mean visual analogue scores in Groups S and F respectively declined from 77 and 82 before epidural blockade, to 29 and 27 during the first stage of labour, and to 69 and 59 respectively during the second stage. Overall satisfaction among parturients was high (98 and 96%), particularly during the first stage (98 and 98%), and also to a large degree during the second stage of labour (74 and 79%). Furthermore, only a few extra bolus doses were required (mean 0.9 and 1.2, Groups S and F, respectively). All the females could stand on their own, and almost all (81% Group S; 79% Group F) could walk 20 m without help. There were no serious adverse effects. Moderate side-effects occurred equally often with the possible exception of less nausea and vomiting in the fentanyl group.

Conclusions: Epidural analgesia for ambulatory parturients with bupivacaine plus either sufentanil or fentanyl (ratio 1.0 : 3.5) provides good analgesia with a low frequency of modest side-effects. No clinical differences were found between the opioids.

Background and objective: We assessed the analgesic efficacy of postoperative epidural infusions of ropivacaine 0.1 and 0.2% combined with sufentanil 1 μg mL−1 in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study.

Methods: Twenty-two ASA I—III patients undergoing elective total-knee replacement were included. Lumbar epidural blockade using ropivacaine 0.75% was combined with either propofol sedation or general anaesthesia for surgery. After surgery, the epidural infusion was commenced. Eleven patients in each group received either an epidural infusion of ropivacaine 0.1% with 1 μg mL−1 sufentanil (Group 1) or ropivacaine 0.2% with 1 μg mL−1 sufentanil (Group 2) at a rate of 5–9 mL h−1. All patients had access to intravenous pirinatrimide (piritramide) via a patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) device.

Results: Motor block was negligible for the study duration in both groups. There was no significant difference with the 100 mm visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, with the consumption of rescue analgesia or with patient satisfaction. Patients in Group 1 experienced significantly less nausea (P < 0.05) than those in Group 2. Both treatment regimens provided effective postoperative analgesia with only a minimal use of supplemental opioid PCA.

Conclusions: We recommend the use of ropivacaine 0.1% with 1 μg mL−1 sufentanil for postoperative analgesia after total knee replacement as it provides efficient pain relief with no motor block of the lower limbs. In addition, compared with 0.2% ropivacaine with sufentanil, the mixture reduces local anaesthetic consumption without compromise in patient satisfaction or VAS scores. Patients even experience less nausea.

Background and objective: Induction of general anaesthesia in combination with positive-pressure ventilation is often associated with a significant decrease of arterial pressure. A decreased preload may contribute to this phenomenon. The aim was to investigate whether a change in cardiac filling occurs following the induction of general anaesthesia with sufentanil under typical clinical conditions.

Methods: Fifteen patients scheduled for elective coronary bypass grafting were studied immediately before surgery. In addition to standard monitors, a transpulmonary double-indicator dilution technique measured in vivo intrathoracic blood volume, global end-diastolic volume and total circulating blood volume. For induction of anaesthesia 2 μg kg−1 sufentanil was given. Measurements were performed awake and after the induction of anaesthesia, intubation and mechanical ventilation of the lungs.

Results: To maintain arterial pressure during the induction period within −20% of baseline pressure, on average 22 ± 6 mL kg−1 crystalloids and 8 ± 6 mL kg−1 colloids were given. Despite these amounts of fluid, cardiac filling was decreased, whereas circulating blood volume increased significantly. Both central venous pressure and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure increased.

Conclusions: Induction of general anaesthesia with positive-pressure ventilation is regularly associated with a blood volume shift from intra- to extrathoracic compartments. Even in low-dose opioid monoanaesthesia with sufentanil – often regarded as relatively inert in haemodynamic terms – the phenomenon could be demonstrated as the primary cause of the often-observed decrease of arterial pressure. It seems, therefore, rationally justified to restore cardiac filling by generous administration of intravenous fluids, at least in patients with unaffected cardiac pump function. During induction of anaesthesia, central venous pressure and pulmonary capillary wedge pressure do not reliably indicate cardiac filling.

Background and objective: Drug mixtures containing sufentanil may be unstable owing to absorption into the drug reservoirs of patient-controlled epidural analgesia systems that contain polyvinylchloride. The stability of sufentanil in a mixture of ropivacaine 0.2% in a 750 mL reservoir was therefore investigated.

Methods: During simulated epidural infusions of 5 mL h−1 at 25°C, sufentanil concentrations were measured for 96 h. Samples were taken from the reservoir and from the end of the epidural catheter under the following conditions: into glass or polyvinylchloride reservoirs containing ropivacaine 0.2% with sufentanil 1, 0.75 or 0.5 μg mL−1; and into polyvinylchloride reservoirs with ropivacaine 0.2% and sufentanil 1 μg mL−1 which were stored for 4 weeks at 8°C.

Results: The different solutions remained stable over the observation period of 96h. Using the same solutions, independent samples’ ANOVA showed no difference in the sufentanil concentrations between the glass and polyvinylchloride reservoirs, or between the polyvinylchloride reservoirs when stored for 4 weeks. Correlations between the concentrations at the different measurement times were extremely high for the reservoir (rmin = 0.98, rmax = 1.00) and the catheter end (rmin = 0.86, rmax = 1.00).

Conclusions: Sufentanil citrate at 0.5–1.0 μg mL−1 in an admixture of ropivacaine 0.2% for 5 days, which is the usual period for postoperative epidural analgesia, remains stable in a polyvinylchloride reservoir. There is no change in the drug concentration even if the reservoir is stored for 4 weeks at 8°C.

Background and objective The aim of the present study was to compare and assess the quality of analgesia, the safety and the side-effects after the use of a continuous, thoracic epidural infusion of sufentanil (5 μg h−1), 0.25% bupivacaine (10 mL h−1), 0.2% ropivacaine (10 mL h−1) alone or in combination in patients who had undergone major urological surgery. This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study investigated the efficacy of thoracic epidural infusions after major urological surgery.

Methods Patients received a 72-h continuous infusion␣(10 mL h−1) of 0.25% bupivacaine (B), 0.2% ropivacaine (R), 0.25% bupivacaine with 0.5 μg mL−1 sufentanil (BS), 0.2% ropivacaine with 0.5 μg mL−1 sufentanil (RS) or 0.5 μg mL−1 sufentanil only (S). The analysis included 109 patients.

Results The mean visual analogue scale (VAS) scores for pain were highest in the groups R and S (P < 0.001). The PaCO2 values were significantly higher in the groups RS and S (P = 0.003). Motor block occurred more frequently in the groups B and BS than in the other groups (P < 0.001). Sedation, nausea and pruritus were more common in the groups that received sufentanil.

Conclusions A continuous, epidural infusion with these drugs was safe and effective in our patients. The combination of 0.2% ropivacaine plus sufentanil appeared preferable because of the low incidence of motor block.

Background and objective To compare the effects on cardiovascular changes induced by tracheal intubation when small doses of either remifentanil or sufentanil are used in the presence of midazolam.

Methods Thirty normotensive, ASA physical status I–II patients, receiving general anaesthesia for major abdominal surgery, received an intravenous midazolam premedication (0.05 mg kg−1) 10 min before induction. They were randomly allocated to receive in a double-blind fashion an intravenous bolusofeither(a)remifentanil given as a bolus dose 1 μg kg−1 (n = 15), or else (b) sufentanil 0.1 μg kg−1 infused over 60s (n = 15). In each instance this loading dose was followed by a continuous intravenous infusion (0.1 μg kg−1 min−1 or 0.01 μg kg−1 min−1 of remifentanil or sufentanil, respectively). General anaesthesia was induced with propofol (2 mg kg−1), followed by atracurium besilate (0.5 mg kg−1) to facilitate tracheal intubation. Following intubation, the lungs were mechanically ventilated with a 60% nitrous oxide in oxygen mixture and a 1% inspired sevoflurane.

Results Arterial pressure and heart rate were recorded before induction of anaesthesia (baseline), immediately before intubation, immediately after tracheal intubation and every minute for the first five minutes thereafter. No differences in systolic and diastolic arterial pressures were observed between the two groups. At the end of the study period, systolic and diastolic pressures slightly decreased from preinduction values in both groups. Four patients in the remifentanil group (26%) and five patients in sufentanil group (33%) showed at least one systolic pressure value <90 mm Hg during the study period (P = not significant); however, the observed decreases in systolic pressure were transient and did not require treatment. Heart rate values were not affected by tracheal intubation in either group.

Conclusions In healthy normotensive patients without cardiovascular disease the use of a relatively small dose of either remifentanil or sufentanil after standard midazolam premedication results in a similar and clinically acceptable effectiveness in blunting the cardiovascular changes induced by tracheal intubation.

This study investigated the changes in the hypnotic component of anaesthesia, estimated by the bispectral index of the electroencephalogram, during normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass. Twenty-six patients (20 men, 6 women), aged 61±11 years (Mean±SD) scheduled for cardiac surgery were premedicated with hydroxyzine and meperidine. Anaesthesia was induced and maintained with a computer-controlled continuous infusion (not adjusted for haemodilution) of sufentanil (effect site concentration 0.4–0.6 ng mL−1) and a manually adjusted continuous infusion of propofol (4.4±1.8 mg kg−1 h−1). Cardiopulmonary bypass was normothermic with moderate haemodilution. Bispectral index was measured with a referential montage before, 30 s, 1, and 3 min after cardiopulmonary bypass onset, before and after aortic cross-clamping, 30 min after cardiopulmonary bypass onset, before and after aorta cross-clamp release and before and after weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass. Bispectral index values were 48±8 before cardiopulmonary bypass onset, 50±10 before, and 48±8 after end of cardiopulmonary bypass (P=NS). No patient had increases in bispectral index values during cardiopulmonary bypass consistent with awakening. We conclude that with the anaesthetic regimen presented in this study bispectral index values do not change during normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass.

The aim of this study was to evaluate whether the addition of clonidine, or sufentanil, or both, to a bupivacaine solution for a caudal block prolonged the period of analgesia after operation in children. Sixty ASA class I or II boys, aged between 8 months and 13 years, admitted for hypospadias repair were enrolled into a prospective randomised study. After induction of general anaesthesia and endotracheal intubation the children were allocated into four groups. Group I received 0.5 mL kg−1 bupivacaine 0.25% caudally, in addition group II received 1 mg kg−1 clonidine, group III 0.5 mg kg−1 sufentanil and group IV 0.5 mg kg−1 clonidine and 0.25 mg kg−1 sufentanil. The concentrations of clonidine and sufentanil in group IV were halved to reduce possible side-effects with higher dosages. Analgesia and side-effects were assessed 2, 4, 6, 8 and 12 h after operation. No significant differences were found among the four groups for the pain scores at 2, 4, 6, 8 and 12 h. All groups had a similar frequency of vomiting and a comparable appetite and quality of night rest during the first 24 h following the operation. There was no signficant difference in the requirement for additional doses of analgesics. The addition of sufentanil, or clonidine, or both, to bupivacaine for caudal administration provides no additional clinical benefit over bupivacaine alone.

The aim of the study was to test the hypothesis that the requirement of sufentanil is reduced in elderly patients when the opiate is primarily used to facilitate mechanical ventilation in a medical intensive care unit. A further aim was to study whether elderly patients developed withdrawal symptoms after discontinuing prolonged sufentanil administration. We have studied prospectively two groups of patients requiring mechanical ventilation for more than 96 h; group 1 age < 60 years (n=316 or 68%) and group 2 age > 70 years (n=150 or 32%). In all patients sufentanil and midazolam were administered continuously in order to facilitate ventilatory support. After an initial intravenous bolus injection of sufentanil 3.0–8.0 μg kg−1, the dosage was adjusted to the patients needs (0.75–1.0 μg−1 kg−1 h) using a modified Ramsey score by accepting between 3b and 4a as the end point. The amount of sufentanil administered and side effects were recorded at 24-h intervals. Seventy-two hours following the start of sedation with sufentanil/midazolam the dose of sufentanil required for sedation increased significantly (P <0.05) in both groups when compared with the first 24 h. There was no statistical difference between the two groups in sufentanil requirement at any time during the study. This suggests that tachyphylaxis develops to a similar degree in patients in both age groups. In addition, weaning in the elderly was characterized by a similar degree of withdrawal-like symptoms suggesting that independent of age, there are similar receptor related reactions once the opiate is withdrawn.

Epidural analgesia for pain relief during labour has certain disadvantages including slow onset. However, intrathecal sufentanil provides rapid onset and well-controlled analgesia lasting 1–4 h. The aim of this study was to compare the analgesia and the side effects of intrathecal sufentanil with epidural bupivacaine during labour. In a randomized, double-blind and controlled trial 58 parturient women requesting analgesia during labour were studied. The patients received either intrathecal sufentanil 10 μg and epidural saline, or intrathecal saline and epidural bupivacaine 20 mg. Visual analogue scores (VAS) for pain, blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, level of sedation and the incidence of pruritus and nausea were recorded. Pain scores were significantly lower between 5 and 90 min after injection in patients receiving intrathecal sufentanil. Pruritus was significantly more frequent among those receiving intrathecal sufentanil. The rapid onset and effective analgesia of intrathecal sufentanil may in certain situations be advantageous.

Desflurane has been reported to cause tachycardia and hypertension during induction of anaesthesia. The aim of this study was to determine the effects of desflurane on cerebral blood flow (CBF) velocity using transcranial Doppler ultrasonography in a setting that closely resembled usual clinical practice. In two groups (n = 9 in each) ASA Grade I or II patients, anaesthesia was induced with etomidate and vecuronium intravenously (i.v.), sufentanil (0.3 μg kg−1 i.v.) was added in the second group. Patients were ventilated by facemask for 2 min before desflurane was administered in steps of 0.5 MAC min−1 until 1.5 MAC was reached and maintained for 7 min. Haemodynamic variables and CBF velocity in the middle cerebral artery (MCA) were monitored throughout the study period. In group 1 heart rate increased to 108 ± 2 b.p.m. (37% increase) whereas MAP increased to 114 ± 6 mmHg after administration of desflurane (33% increase). CBF velocity increased to 86 ± 7 cm s−1 (69% increase). In group 2 no significant changes in systemic haemodynamic responses were measured after desflurane administration; however, CBF velocity increased to 73 ± 5 cm s−1 (59% increase). The results indicate that desflurane increases CBF velocity concurrently with induction of tachycardia and hypertension. Although sufentanil and N2O attenuate the systemic haemodynamic alterations caused by desflurane, the CBF velocity increases. These data suggest that the abrupt addition of desflurane may have adverse consequences in patients at risk for intracranial hypertension.

Sufentanil or a sufentanil-clonidine combination was evaluated to determine whether the basal rate in patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) might affect the daily consumption, quality of analgesia or incidence of side effects. Following Caesarean section delivery, 60 patients were randomly assigned to receive one of the four following PCA regimens (15 patients per group) for the relief of post-operative pain by the epidural route: sufentanil 2μg mL−1 in 0.9% NaCl, demand dose 5μg i.e. 2.5mL, (group S+ with, group S without an infusion at 2.5mL hr−1) or sufentanil 2μg mL−1 + clonidine 3μg mL−1, demand dose 5μg sufentanil + 7.5μg clonidine i.e. 2.5mL (group SC+ with and SC without an infusion of 2.5ml hr−1). The other PCA settings (Bard I PCA pump) were a lock out interval of 10 min and a 1h limit of 20μg sufentanil and 30μg clonidine i.e. 10mL. The parameters measured were the analgesic drug consumption and number of dose demands during the first 24h, pain scores at 6h intervals, side effects and quality of sleep. The concurrent infusion increased the dose requirements regardless of the content of the syringe. Consumption of sufentanil was the highest in those patients receiving the plain solution with a basal infusion. Clonidine addition reduced the dose requirements but only significantly in those receiving the background infusion. Patients treated with the mixture tended to reach lower pain scores than those receiving sufentanil only without basal rate. Patients receiving the mixture with basal rate requested significantly fewer additional demands compared with the three other groups, but this did not influence the quality of sleep. Since side effects were more frequently registered in the patients in this group, it was concluded that the optimum regimen was the sufentanil-clonidine combination but with deletion of the basal rate.