analgesia Archives - Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia

  • Original Article

    Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Quadratus Lumborum Block and Intrathecal Morphine for Postcesarean Analgesia

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2022;44(12):1083-1089

    Summary

    Original Article

    Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Quadratus Lumborum Block and Intrathecal Morphine for Postcesarean Analgesia

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2022;44(12):1083-1089

    DOI 10.1055/s-0042-1759728

    Views6

    Abstract

    Objective

    To compare the efficacy of quadratus lumborum (QL) block and intrathecal morphine (M) for postcesarean delivery analgesia.

    Methods

    Thirty-one pregnant women with ≥ 37 weeks of gestation submitted to elective cesarean section were included in the study. They were randomly allocated to either the QL group (12.5 mg 0.5% bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia and 0.3 ml/kg 0.2% bupivacaine for QL block) or the M group (12.5 mg bupivacaine 0.5% and 100 mcg of morphine in spinal anesthesia). The visual analog scale of pain, consumption of morphine and tramadol for pain relief in 48 hours, and side effects were recorded.

    Results

    Median pain score and/or pain variation were higher in the morphine group than in the QL group (p = 0.02). There was no significant difference in the consumption of morphine or tramadol between groups over time. Side effects such as pruritus, nausea, and vomiting were observed only in the morphine group.

    Conclusion

    Quadratus lumborum block and intrathecal morphine are effective for analgesia after cesarean section. Patients undergoing QL block had lower postoperative pain scores without the undesirable side effects of opioids such as nausea, vomiting, and pruritus.

    See more
    Randomized Clinical Trial Comparing Quadratus Lumborum Block and Intrathecal Morphine for Postcesarean Analgesia
  • Original Article

    Effect of Closure of Anterior Abdominal Wall Layers on Early Postoperative Findings at Cesarean Section: A Prospective Cross-sectional Study

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2021;43(4):250-255

    Summary

    Original Article

    Effect of Closure of Anterior Abdominal Wall Layers on Early Postoperative Findings at Cesarean Section: A Prospective Cross-sectional Study

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2021;43(4):250-255

    DOI 10.1055/s-0041-1726057

    Views9

    Abstract

    Objective

    To investigate the effect of closure types of the anterior abdominal wall layers in cesarean section (CS) surgery on early postoperative findings.

    Methods

    The present study was designed as a prospective cross-sectional study and was conducted at a university hospital between October 2018 and February 2019. A total of 180 patients who underwent CS for various reasons were enrolled in the study. Each patient was randomly assigned to one of three groups: Both parietal peritoneum and rectus abdominis muscle left open (group 1), parietal peritoneum closure only (group 2), and closure of the parietal peritoneum and reapproximation of rectus muscle (group 3). All patients were compared in terms of postoperative pain scores (while lying down and duringmobilization), analgesia requirement, and return of bowel motility.

    Results

    The postoperative pain scores were similar at the 2nd, 6th, 12th, and 18th hours while lying down. During mobilization, the postoperative pain scores at 6 and 12 hours were significantly higher in group 2 than in group 3. Diclofenac use was significantly higher in patients in group 1 than in those in group 2. Meperidine requirements were similar among the groups. There was no difference between the groups’ first flatus and stool passage times.

    Conclusion

    In the group with only parietal peritoneum closure, the pain scores at the 6th and 12th hours were higher. Rectus abdominismuscle reapproximations were found not to increase the pain score. The closure of the anterior abdominal wall had no effect on the return of bowel motility.

    See more
    Effect of Closure of Anterior Abdominal Wall Layers on Early Postoperative Findings at Cesarean Section: A Prospective Cross-sectional Study
  • Original Article

    Pethidine in Low Doses versus Dipyrone for Pain Relief in Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2019;41(2):84-89

    Summary

    Original Article

    Pethidine in Low Doses versus Dipyrone for Pain Relief in Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

    Revista Brasileira de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia. 2019;41(2):84-89

    DOI 10.1055/s-0038-1676509

    Views11

    Abstract

    Objective

    To compare low doses of pethidine with dipyrone in labor analgesia.

    Methods

    In a randomized prospective study conducted by Universidade de Fortaleza, in the state of Ceará, Brazil, between May and December 2016, 200 full-term parturients, with very painful uterine contractions and exhibiting uterine cervix dilatation ≥ 5 cm, were selected to receive a single intravenous dose of either 0.25 mg/kg of pethidine (n = 100) or of 25 mg/kg of dipyrone (n = 100). Pain was assessed using the visual analogue scale. The data were analyzed using the Student t-test, the chi-square test and the likelihood ratio.

    Results

    There was a significant improvement in pain in 35% of the parturients. Both drugs presented a similar analgesic effect 1 hour after the intervention (p = 0.692). There was no analgesic effect during the evaluation of the second hour after the intervention with pethidine or dipyrone. There were no adverse effects, such as maternal drowsiness, nausea or vomiting, related to the drugs used.

    Conclusion

    Pethidine in low doses and dipyrone presented equivalent analgesia during labor. Public Registry of Clinical Trials.

    See more
    Pethidine in Low Doses versus Dipyrone for Pain Relief in Labor: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Search

Search in:

Article type
abstract
book-review
brief-report
case-report
case-report -
correction
editorial
editorial -
letter
letter -
other
other -
rapid-communication
research-article
research-article -
review-article
review-article -
Section
Arigos Originais
Artigo de Revisão
Original Articles
Carta ao Editor
Carta ao Editor
Cartas
Case Report
Case Reports
Caso e Tratamento
Clinical Consensus Recommendation
Corrigendum
Editoriais
Editorial
Editorial
Equipamentos e Métodos
Errata
Erratas
Erratum
Febrasgo Position Statement
Febrasgo Statement
Febrasgo Statement Position
FIGO Statement
GUIDELINES
Integrative Review
Letter to Editor
Letter to Editor
Letter to the Editor
Letter to the Editor
Métodos e Técnicas
Nota do Editor
Nota Prévia
Original Article
Original Article/Contraception
Original Article/Infertility
Original Article/Obstetrics
Original Article/Oncology
Original Article/Sexual Violence/Pediatric and Adolescent Gynecology
Original Article/Teaching and Training
Original Articles
Original Articles
Relato de Caso
Relato de Casos
Relatos de Casos
Reply to the Letter to the Editor
Resposta dos Autores
Resumo De Tese
Resumo De Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Tese
Resumos de Teses
Resumos de Teses
Resumos dos Trabalhos Premiados no 50º Congresso Brasileiro de Ginecologia e Obstetrícia
Review
Review Article
Review Articles
Revisão
Revisão
Short Communication
Special Article
Systematic Review
Técnica e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Equipamentos
Técnicas e Métodos
Trabalhos Originais
Year / Volume
2024; v.46
2023; v.45
2022; v.44
2021; v.43
2020; v.42
2019; v.41
2018; v.40
2017; v.39
2016; v.38
2015; v.37
2014; v.36
2013; v.35
2012; v.34
2011; v.33
2010; v.32
2009; v.31
2008; v.30
2007; v.29
2006; v.28
2005; v.27
2004; v.26
2003; v.25
2002; v.24
2001; v.23
2000; v.22
1999; v.21
1998; v.20
ISSUE