Safety of gabapentin versus celecoxib as a part of multimodal analgesia in patients with elective spine fixation surgery, A comparative randomized control study

A. Roushdy, Khaled Abdou, Alaa Ali M. Elzohry
{"title":"Safety of gabapentin versus celecoxib as a part of multimodal analgesia in patients with elective spine fixation surgery, A comparative randomized control study","authors":"A. Roushdy, Khaled Abdou, Alaa Ali M. Elzohry","doi":"10.33545/26648849.2020.v2.i1a.12","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: Inadequate pain control after lumbar disc herniation surgeries may increase morbidity; leading to prolonged hospital stays, and increase medical costs. The anti-epileptic drugs such as gabapentin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) such as celecoxib were used as a part of multimodal analgesia to control such pain. Aim of the study; The aim of this randomized double-blinded study was to asses and compare the efficacy of using gabapentin versus celecoxib as a part of multi modal analgesia in perioperative hemodynamic control and pain relief in patients underwent posterior approach lumbar spine disc surgery. Methods: A prospective, comparative blinded randomized study was carried out on one hundred patients of both gender, ASA I and II, aged between 21-60 years old scheduled to undergo elective posterior approach lumbar spine disc surgery. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups (50 patients each); Group (G) received gabapentin 300 mg capsule 2 hours preoperative and the same dose 6 hours postoperative and Group (C) received celecoxib 200 mg 2 hours preoperative and the same dose 6 hours postoperative. Intra operative hemodynamics and post-operative following parameters were recorded; mean arterial pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, Visual Analogue score and Patient satisfaction score: at the end of postoperative period. Results: No significant difference was found in demographic data between both groups. Gabapentin administration associated with a better control of intra and post-operative mean arterial pressure and heart rate P values were (p<0.016) (p<0.018) respectively when compared to celecoxib. Regarding VAS scores in both groups there was decrease but more significant in Group (G) especially in first 8 hours (p<0.001). the same as satisfaction score. Conclusion: We concluded that both Gabapentin and celecoxib provide pain relief and good hemodynamic control when administered perioperatively but Gabapentin provide much better patient’s satisfaction after elective spine fixation surgeries.","PeriodicalId":91883,"journal":{"name":"International journal of anesthesiology & research","volume":"36 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2020-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"International journal of anesthesiology & research","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.33545/26648849.2020.v2.i1a.12","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background: Inadequate pain control after lumbar disc herniation surgeries may increase morbidity; leading to prolonged hospital stays, and increase medical costs. The anti-epileptic drugs such as gabapentin and other non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) such as celecoxib were used as a part of multimodal analgesia to control such pain. Aim of the study; The aim of this randomized double-blinded study was to asses and compare the efficacy of using gabapentin versus celecoxib as a part of multi modal analgesia in perioperative hemodynamic control and pain relief in patients underwent posterior approach lumbar spine disc surgery. Methods: A prospective, comparative blinded randomized study was carried out on one hundred patients of both gender, ASA I and II, aged between 21-60 years old scheduled to undergo elective posterior approach lumbar spine disc surgery. Patients were randomly assigned into two groups (50 patients each); Group (G) received gabapentin 300 mg capsule 2 hours preoperative and the same dose 6 hours postoperative and Group (C) received celecoxib 200 mg 2 hours preoperative and the same dose 6 hours postoperative. Intra operative hemodynamics and post-operative following parameters were recorded; mean arterial pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, Visual Analogue score and Patient satisfaction score: at the end of postoperative period. Results: No significant difference was found in demographic data between both groups. Gabapentin administration associated with a better control of intra and post-operative mean arterial pressure and heart rate P values were (p<0.016) (p<0.018) respectively when compared to celecoxib. Regarding VAS scores in both groups there was decrease but more significant in Group (G) especially in first 8 hours (p<0.001). the same as satisfaction score. Conclusion: We concluded that both Gabapentin and celecoxib provide pain relief and good hemodynamic control when administered perioperatively but Gabapentin provide much better patient’s satisfaction after elective spine fixation surgeries.
加巴喷丁与塞来昔布作为选择性脊柱固定手术患者多模式镇痛的安全性:一项比较随机对照研究
背景:腰椎间盘突出手术后疼痛控制不足可能增加发病率;导致住院时间延长,并增加医疗费用。加巴喷丁等抗癫痫药物和塞来昔布等非甾体抗炎药(NSAID)作为多模式镇痛的一部分来控制此类疼痛。研究目的;这项随机双盲研究的目的是评估和比较加巴喷丁和塞来昔布作为多模式镇痛的一部分在围手术期控制血流动力学和缓解后路腰椎椎间盘手术患者疼痛方面的疗效。方法:采用前瞻性、比较盲法随机对照研究,对100例年龄在21-60岁的男女ASA I和II型患者进行择期后路腰椎椎间盘手术。患者随机分为两组(每组50例);G组术前2小时给予加巴喷丁300 mg胶囊,术后6小时给予同剂量;C组术前2小时给予塞来昔布200 mg,术后6小时给予同剂量。记录术中血流动力学及术后下列参数;术后结束时平均动脉压、心率、呼吸频率、视觉模拟评分及患者满意度评分。结果:两组患者人口学资料差异无统计学意义。与塞来昔布相比,加巴喷丁能更好地控制术中和术后平均动脉压和心率P值(P <0.016) (P <0.018)。两组VAS评分均有下降,但G组下降更明显,尤其是在前8小时(p<0.001)。与满意度分数相同。结论:加巴喷丁和塞来昔布在围手术期均能缓解疼痛和良好的血流动力学控制,但加巴喷丁在择期脊柱固定手术后提供了更好的患者满意度。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信