Neostigmine combined with bupivacaine, clonidine, and sufentanil for spinal labor analgesia.

Department of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University School of Medicine, Winston-Salem, North Carolina 27103, USA.
Anesthesia & Analgesia (Impact Factor: 3.42). 01/2002; 93(6):1560-4, table of contents. DOI: 10.1097/00000539-200112000-00048
Source: PubMed

ABSTRACT We previously found that spinal clonidine prolongs labor analgesia when combined with spinal bupivacaine and sufentanil. We sought to determine whether the addition of spinal neostigmine to these drugs would further enhance labor analgesia. By use of a combined spinal/epidural technique, 36 patients were randomized to receive a hyperbaric spinal injection of bupivacaine 2.5 mg plus clonidine 50 microg and sufentanil 10 microg with or without neostigmine 10 microg. Pain, maternal hemodynamics, fetal heart rate, nausea, pruritus, sedation, motor block, sensory levels to pinprick, and maternal oxygen saturation were assessed at regularly specified intervals after spinal injection until additional analgesia was requested. The duration of spinal analgesia was similar between groups (215 +/- 60 min in the Control group versus 205 +/- 62 min in the Neostigmine group). Likewise, pain scores, the duration of labor, Apgar scores, and side effects were similar between groups except that patients administered neostigmine experienced significantly more nausea and vomiting (53% vs 7%, P = 0.01). We conclude that spinal neostigmine 10 microg produces severe nausea and does not potentiate the duration of spinal analgesia in laboring women from spinal bupivacaine, clonidine, and sufentanil. IMPLICATIONS: Spinal neostigmine 10 microg as an adjunct to spinal bupivacaine, clonidine, and sufentanil produces severe nausea and fails to potentiate analgesia in laboring women.

  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Various intrathecal and systemic adjuvants to local anaesthetics have been found to improve the quality and extend the duration of spinal block. Intrathecal opioids are the most frequently used; the lipophilic fentanyl and sufentanil enhance and moderately prolong the sensory block, whereas the hydrophilic morphine significantly prolongs spinal analgesia. Nausea/vomiting, pruritus, urinary retention and respiratory depression are possible side effects. Adrenergic agonists, such as adrenaline and phenylephrine may prolong the block due to vasoconstriction, while clonidine and dexmedetomidine accelerate the onset and prolong the duration of block and analgesia. Hypotension, sedation and respiratory depression have been reported with clonidine. Other intrathecal adjuvants, such as midazolam, ketamine and neostigmine may also improve the quality of block and prolong analgesia, but are not popular because of their adverse effects. Intrathecal magnesium sulphate mainly potentiates the analgesic action of intrathecal opioids, without significant side effects. A positive impact on spinal analgesia has also been suggested -from animal studies- for intrathecal calcium channel blockers, while the analgesic efficacy of intrathecal nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs remains questionable. Several drugs may also affect the spinal block characteristics after systemic administration. Opioids enhance, alpha-2 agonists and ketamine prolong the block, magnesium sulphate reduces postoperative analgesic consumption and nimodipine may delay the regression of sensory block. Nitrous oxide inhalation has also been found to enhance the level of sensory spinal block. Even though opioids are the most popular adjuvants to spinal local anaesthetics, a variety of drugs given intrathecally or systemically, can accelerate, improve and extend the spinal block. Key words: Adjuvants, Anaesthesia; Anaesthesia, Spinal; Intrathecal Injections; Intravenous Injections.
    Minerva anestesiologica 07/2013; · 2.27 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Regional anesthesia is widely used to perform different surgical procedures including those performed on the extremities. In this study, the anesthetic effects of adding intrathecal neostigmine or magnesium sulphate to bupivacaine in patients under lower extremities surgeries were assessed. In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 90 patients, candidate for lower extremities surgeries in a training hospital, were recruited. The patients with ASA class I and II aging from 20 to 65 years between 2009 and 2010 were evaluated. The selected patients were randomly assigned to receive either bupivacaine alone (Group A, n=30), or bupivacaine plus magnesium sulphate 50% (Group B, n=30), or bupivacaine plus neostigmine (Group C, n=30). Then sensory and motor onset and complete block and the time of recovery were measured. The sensory block onset time were 3.03 ± 0.981 in group A, 3.90 ± 2.71 in group B and 3.7 ± 1.08 in group C and knee flexion time were not significantly different among the three groups (P > 0.05), whereas the time to complete motor block was significantly longer in group C and motor recovery time were significantly different between groups (P=0.001). According to the obtained results, it may be concluded that magnesium sulphate is a safe and effective adjuvant for increasing the onset time of motor block.
    Journal of research in medical sciences 10/2012; 17(10):918-22. · 0.61 Impact Factor
  • [Show abstract] [Hide abstract]
    ABSTRACT: Opioids are considered mainstream for combined spinal-epidural anesthesia, but frequently limited by adverse effects. The aim of this study was to examine whether low-dose spinal neostigmine, epidural dexamethasone or their combination enhances analgesia from spinal bupivacaine without adverse effects. A total of 60 patients undergoing orthopedic surgery were randomized to one of four groups and evaluated for 24-h after surgery for analgesia (time to first rescue analgesic) and rescue analgesic consumption. Patients received 15 mg bupivacaine plus the test drug intrathecally (saline or 1 microgram (μg) neostigmine). The epidural test drug was either saline or 10 mg dexamethasone. The Control group (CG) received spinal and epidural saline. The Neostigmine group (NG), spinal neostigmine and epidural saline; the Dexamethasone group (DG), spinal saline and epidural dexamethasone; and the Neostigmine-dexamethasone group (NDG), spinal neostigmine and epidural dexamethasone. The CG (282 ± 163 min) and NG (524 ± 142 min) were similar in their times to first rescue analgesic and analgesic consumption. The time to first rescue analgesic was longer for the DG (966 ± 397 min) compared with CG and NG (P < 0.0002), and the DG had less ketoprofen consumption and lower overall visual analogue scale-pain sores compared with CG and NG (P < 0.0005). Addition of 1 mg-neostigmine (NDG) resulted in longer time to rescue analgesic (1205 ± 303 min; P < 0.02) and lower ketoprofen consumption (P < 0.05) compared to DG. Sporadic cases of vesical catheterization and emesis were observed, however adverse effects were similar among groups. Spinal 1 microgram (μg) neostigmine further enhanced analgesia from spinal bupivacaine combined with epidural dexamethasone, without increasing the incidence of adverse effects.
    Journal of research in medical sciences : the official journal of Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. 09/2014; 19(9):801-6.