254 385

Cited 35 times in

Comparison of intrathecal fentanyl and sufentanil in low-dose dilute bupivacaine spinal anaesthesia for transurethral prostatectomy

DC Field Value Language
dc.contributor.author구본녀-
dc.contributor.author길혜금-
dc.contributor.author김소연-
dc.contributor.author김정민-
dc.contributor.author조장은-
dc.contributor.author홍정연-
dc.date.accessioned2015-04-24T17:46:42Z-
dc.date.available2015-04-24T17:46:42Z-
dc.date.issued2009-
dc.identifier.issn0007-0912-
dc.identifier.urihttps://ir.ymlib.yonsei.ac.kr/handle/22282913/106051-
dc.description.abstractBACKGROUND: The administration of low-dose bupivacaine can limit the distribution of spinal block to reduce adverse haemodynamic effects. Intrathecal opioids can enhance analgesia in combination with subtherapeutic doses of local anaesthetics. We aimed at comparing the efficacy of intrathecal fentanyl and sufentanil with low-dose diluted bupivacaine for transurethral prostatectomy (TURP) in elderly patients. METHODS: Seventy patients undergoing TURP were randomly allocated into two groups. Group F (n=35) received fentanyl 25 microg+bupivacaine 0.5% (0.8 ml)+normal saline 0.3 ml and Group S (n=35) received sufentanil 5 microg+bupivacaine 0.5% (0.8 ml)+normal saline 0.7 ml--in total, bupivacaine 0.25% (1.6 ml) intrathecally. Onset and duration of the sensory block, the degree of the motor block, side-effects, and the perioperative analgesic requirements were assessed. RESULTS: The median peak level of the sensory block was significantly higher in Group S than in Group F (P=0.049). Group S required fewer perioperative analgesics than Group F (P=0.008). The time to the first analgesic request was longer in Group S (P=0.025). There were no differences between the groups for the onset and recovery time of the sensory block, degree of the motor block, quality of anaesthesia, or adverse effects. CONCLUSIONS: Low-dose diluted bupivacaine with fentanyl 25 microg or sufentanil 5 microg can provide adequate anaesthesia without haemodynamic instability for TURP in elderly patients. However, sufentanil was superior to fentanyl in the quality of the spinal block produced-
dc.description.statementOfResponsibilityopen-
dc.format.extent750~754-
dc.relation.isPartOfBRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA-
dc.rightsCC BY-NC-ND 2.0 KR-
dc.rights.urihttps://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/2.0/kr/-
dc.subject.MESHAdjuvants, Anesthesia/administration & dosage*-
dc.subject.MESHAged-
dc.subject.MESHAged, 80 and over-
dc.subject.MESHAnesthesia, Spinal/methods*-
dc.subject.MESHAnesthetics, Local/administration & dosage-
dc.subject.MESHBupivacaine/administration & dosage-
dc.subject.MESHDouble-Blind Method-
dc.subject.MESHFentanyl/administration & dosage*-
dc.subject.MESHHumans-
dc.subject.MESHMale-
dc.subject.MESHMiddle Aged-
dc.subject.MESHProstatic Hyperplasia/surgery-
dc.subject.MESHSufentanil/administration & dosage*-
dc.subject.MESHTransurethral Resection of Prostate*-
dc.titleComparison of intrathecal fentanyl and sufentanil in low-dose dilute bupivacaine spinal anaesthesia for transurethral prostatectomy-
dc.typeArticle-
dc.contributor.collegeCollege of Medicine (의과대학)-
dc.contributor.departmentDept. of Anesthesiology (마취통증의학)-
dc.contributor.googleauthorS. Y. Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJ. E. Cho-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJ. Y. Hong-
dc.contributor.googleauthorB. N. Koo-
dc.contributor.googleauthorJ. M. Kim-
dc.contributor.googleauthorH. K. Kil-
dc.identifier.doi10.1093/bja/aep263-
dc.admin.authorfalse-
dc.admin.mappingfalse-
dc.contributor.localIdA00193-
dc.contributor.localIdA00283-
dc.contributor.localIdA00884-
dc.contributor.localIdA03893-
dc.contributor.localIdA04430-
dc.contributor.localIdA00616-
dc.relation.journalcodeJ00405-
dc.identifier.eissn1471-6771-
dc.identifier.pmid19797249-
dc.subject.keywordanaesthetic techniques-
dc.subject.keywordsubarachnoid-
dc.subject.keywordanaesthetics local-
dc.subject.keywordbupivacaine-
dc.subject.keywordanalgesics opioid-
dc.subject.keywordfentanyl-
dc.subject.keywordanalgesics opioid-
dc.subject.keywordsufentanil-
dc.subject.keywordsurgery-
dc.subject.keywordurological-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKu, Bon Nyo-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKil, Hae Keum-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, So Yeon-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameKim, Jeongmin-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameCho, Jang Eun-
dc.contributor.alternativeNameHong, Jeong Yeon-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKu, Bon Nyo-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKil, Hae Keum-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, Jeongmin-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorCho, Jang Eun-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorHong, Jeong Yeon-
dc.contributor.affiliatedAuthorKim, So Yeon-
dc.citation.volume103-
dc.citation.number5-
dc.citation.startPage750-
dc.citation.endPage754-
dc.identifier.bibliographicCitationBRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA, Vol.103(5) : 750-754, 2009-
dc.identifier.rimsid57005-
dc.type.rimsART-
Appears in Collections:
1. College of Medicine (의과대학) > Dept. of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine (마취통증의학교실) > 1. Journal Papers

qrcode

Items in DSpace are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.