Tramadol wound infiltration is not different from intravenous tramadol in children: a randomized controlled trial
Carregando...
Citações na Scopus
6
Tipo de produção
article
Data de publicação
2016
Título da Revista
ISSN da Revista
Título do Volume
Editora
ELSEVIER SCIENCE INC
Autores
GIRALDES, Ana Laura Albertoni
SLULLITEL, Alexandre
SAKATA, Rioko Kimiko
Citação
JOURNAL OF CLINICAL ANESTHESIA, v.28, p.62-66, 2016
Resumo
Study Objective: The purpose of this trial was to assess if tramadol wound infiltration is superior to intravenous (IV) tramadol after minor surgical procedures in children because tramadol seems to have local anesthetic like effect. Design: Randomized double-blind controlled trial. Setting: Postanesthesia care unit. Patients: Forty children, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II, scheduled to elective inguinal hernia repair. Interventions: Children were randomly distributed in 1 of 2 groups: IV tramadol (group 1) or subcutaneous infiltration with tramadol (group 2). At the end of the surgery, group 1 received 2 mg/kg tramadol (3 mL) by IV route and 3-mL saline into the surgical wound; group 2 received 2 mg/kg tramadol (3 mL) into the surgical wound and 3-mL saline by IV route. Measurements: In the postanesthesia care unit, patients were evaluated for pain intensity, nausea and vomiting, time to first rescue medication, and total rescue morphine and dipyrone consumption. Main Results: Pain scores measured during the postanesthesia recovery time were similar between groups. Time to first rescue medication was shorter, but not statistically significant in the IV group. The total dose of rescue morphine and dipyrone was also similar between groups. Conclusions: We concluded that tramadol was effective in reducing postoperative pain in children, and there was no difference in pain intensity, nausea and vomiting, or somnolence regarding IV route or wound infiltration.
Palavras-chave
Infiltration anesthesia, Tramadol, Intravenous administration, Postoperative pain, Hemioplasty
Referências
- Abdellatif Abualhassan A, 2012, Saudi J Anaesth, V6, P367, DOI 10.4103/1658-354X.105868
- Allemanno F, 2012, MINERVA ANESTESIOL, V78, P291
- Demiraran Y, 2013, J ANESTH, V27, P175, DOI 10.1007/s00540-012-1510-7
- Kaabachi O, 2009, ANESTH ANALG, V108, P367, DOI 10.1213/ane.0b013e31818e0c6b
- Hicks CL, 2001, PAIN, V93, P173, DOI 10.1016/S0304-3959(01)00314-1
- Saudan S, 2007, ANN FR ANESTH, V26, P560, DOI 10.1016/j.annfar.2007.03.015
- Bozkurt P, 2005, PEDIATR ANESTH, V15, P1041, DOI 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2005.01738.x
- Murthy BVS, 2000, BRIT J ANAESTH, V84, P346
- Sousa AM, 2015, REV BRAS ANESTESIOL, V65, P186, DOI [10.1016/j.bjan.2014.06.008, 10.1016/j.bjane.2014.06.006]
- Jagannathan N, 2009, PEDIATR ANESTH, V19, P892, DOI 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2009.03092.x
- Matkap E, 2011, J CLIN ANESTH, V23, P197, DOI 10.1016/j.jclinane.2010.08.010
- Baird R, 2013, J PEDIATR SURG, V48, P1077, DOI 10.1016/j.jpedsurg.2013.02.030
- Tomlinson D, 2010, PEDIATRICS, V126, pE1168, DOI 10.1542/peds.2010-1609
- Boretsky KR, 2014, CURR OPIN ANESTHESIO, V27, P556, DOI 10.1097/ACO.0000000000000106
- Sezen G, 2014, INT J CLIN EXP MED, V7, P1391
- Katsuki R, 2006, BRIT J PHARMACOL, V149, P319, DOI 10.1038/sj.bjp.0706868
- Ozyilmaz K, 2012, J NEUROSURG ANESTH, V24, P331, DOI 10.1097/ANA.0b013e3182611a1d
- Ecoffey C, 2012, PEDIATR ANESTH, V22, P25, DOI 10.1111/j.1460-9592.2011.03705.x
- Kargi E, 2010, UROLOGY, V75, P672, DOI 10.1016/j.urology.2009.06.108
- Kargi E, 2008, J INT MED RES, V36, P971
- Heiba MH, 2012, J LARYNGOL OTOL, V126, P1138, DOI 10.1017/S0022215112002058
- Sousa AM, 2012, BRAZ J MED BIOL RES, V45, P147
- Lonnqvist PA, 2011, CURR OPIN ANESTHESIO, V24, P627, DOI 10.1097/ACO.0b013e32834a276d
- Polat F, 2012, J PEDIAT UROL, V9, P670
- Schnabel A, 2015, COCHRANE DB SYST REV, DOI 10.1002/14651858.CD009574.pub2
- Vervoort T, 2001, PAIN, V152, P1751
- Yaster M, 2010, EUR J ANAESTH, P851