FRINK Linked Data Fragments server

Matches in SemOpenAlex for { <https://semopenalex.org/work/W4320169447> ?p ?o ?g. }

• W4320169447 abstract "Objectives Epidural analgesia remains the cornerstone of pain management following laparotomy. Local anesthetics used in epidural analgesia provide good analgesia but may result in hypotension and/or motor blockade. Morphine, a long-acting opioid, can also be used epidurally to provide analgesia. Morphine used epidurally will cause fewer hemodynamic disturbances and no motor blockade. Hence, we compared the efficacy, hemodynamic parameters, and motor blockade between epidural levobupivacaine and morphine for postoperative analgesia following laparotomy. Materials and methods This is a prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled study registered in the Clinical Trials Registry of India (CTRI/2021/04/033102). Ninety patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery were randomly divided into two groups: levobupivacaine (0.125%/mL) and morphine (0.032 mg/mL) group. All patients received epidural infusion at 6 mL/hour. The visual analog scale (VAS) score at rest and during cough was observed for 24 hours. Heart rate and blood pressure were monitored continuously for 24 hours postoperatively. Additional analgesic requirements, postoperative sedation score, and motor blockade were also compared between the two groups. Statistical analysis was done using the chi-square test, unpaired T-test, and Mann-Whitney test. The sample size estimation was based on a pilot study. Results The demographic data and duration of the procedure were comparable in both groups. The initial median VAS score at rest in the levobupivacaine group was high (interquartile range (IQR): 2-4) when compared to the morphine group (IQR: 1-3) at the fourth, sixth, and eighth hour with a P value of <0.05. The initial median VAS score at coughing in the levobupivacaine group was 4 (IQR: 3-5) and in the morphine group was 3 (IQR: 3-4). The VAS score at rest and at coughing was significantly higher in the levobupivacaine group. Heart rate was stable in both groups, and a significant fall in mean arterial blood pressure was observed in the levobupivacaine group. The sedation score was significantly higher in the morphine group (IQR: 2-2) when compared to the levobupivacaine group (IQR: 1-2) at the fourth hour postoperatively with a P value of <0.05. Motor blockade was found to be stronger in the levobupivacaine group (IQR: 0-2) when compared to the morphine group (IQR: 0-0) at the fourth, sixth, and eighth hour postoperatively with a P value of <0.05. An additional dose of fentanyl was required by 6.7% of the patients in the levobupivacaine group and 8.9% of the patients in the morphine group. In the levobupivacaine group, 11.1% reported headaches, 2.2% reported vomiting, and 4.4% reported hypotension, and no pruritus was reported. In the morphine group, 11.1% reported tachycardia, 6.7% reported nausea and vomiting, 6.4% reported pruritus, and 2.2% reported hypotension. Conclusion We conclude that patients receiving epidural morphine had better pain scores with better hemodynamic stability than the epidural levobupivacaine group following laparotomy. The morphine group had less motor blockade. Sedation was observed in the morphine group. Additional analgesics were required in both groups. The adverse effects observed in the epidural morphine group were tachycardia, nausea, pruritus, and itching. The epidural levobupivacaine group reported headache, vomiting and fever, and hypotension." @default.
• W4320169447 created "2023-02-13" @default.
• W4320169447 creator A5014825608 @default.
• W4320169447 creator A5051572170 @default.
• W4320169447 creator A5052485813 @default.
• W4320169447 creator A5087323341 @default.
• W4320169447 date "2023-02-12" @default.
• W4320169447 modified "2023-09-26" @default.
• W4320169447 title "A Comparison of the Effects of Epidural Levobupivacaine and Morphine for Postoperative Analgesia Following Major Abdominal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial" @default.
• W4320169447 cites W1492346292 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W1965153349 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2068506572 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2103825186 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2128016114 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2144907203 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2265734202 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2395853730 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2409394509 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2413368014 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2917819381 @default.
• W4320169447 cites W2995854747 @default.
• W4320169447 doi "https://doi.org/10.7759/cureus.34900" @default.
• W4320169447 hasPubMedId "https://pubmed.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/36938212" @default.
• W4320169447 hasPublicationYear "2023" @default.
• W4320169447 type Work @default.
• W4320169447 citedByCount "0" @default.
• W4320169447 crossrefType "journal-article" @default.
• W4320169447 hasAuthorship W4320169447A5014825608 @default.
• W4320169447 hasAuthorship W4320169447A5051572170 @default.
• W4320169447 hasAuthorship W4320169447A5052485813 @default.
• W4320169447 hasAuthorship W4320169447A5087323341 @default.
• W4320169447 hasBestOaLocation W43201694471 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C119060515 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C141071460 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C14184104 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C168563851 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C2776572635 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C2776814716 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C2777389121 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C2780120127 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C2780778865 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C2780820201 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C42219234 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConcept C71924100 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C119060515 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C141071460 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C14184104 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C168563851 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C2776572635 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C2776814716 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C2777389121 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C2780120127 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C2780778865 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C2780820201 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C42219234 @default.
• W4320169447 hasConceptScore W4320169447C71924100 @default.
• W4320169447 hasLocation W43201694471 @default.
• W4320169447 hasLocation W43201694472 @default.
• W4320169447 hasLocation W43201694473 @default.
• W4320169447 hasOpenAccess W4320169447 @default.
• W4320169447 hasPrimaryLocation W43201694471 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W2106843805 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W2112115454 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W2149229520 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W2346167110 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W2407320659 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W3207503229 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W4226156879 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W4235011874 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W4235715371 @default.
• W4320169447 hasRelatedWork W4244948801 @default.
• W4320169447 isParatext "false" @default.
• W4320169447 isRetracted "false" @default.
• W4320169447 workType "article" @default.