Anesthesia: Essays and Researches  Login  | Users Online: 950 Home Print this page Email this page Small font sizeDefault font sizeIncrease font size
Home | About us | Editorial board | Ahead of print | Search | Current Issue | Archives | Submit article | Instructions | Copyright form | Subscribe | Advertise | Contacts
Year : 2019  |  Volume : 13  |  Issue : 2  |  Page : 287-291

Postprocedure intravenous patient-controlled analgesia compared to epidural patient-controlled analgesia use after uterine fibroid embolization: Aclinical audit

1 Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, Lexington, KY, USA
2 Department of Anesthesiology, University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, Lexington, KY, USA
3 Department of Diagnostic and Interventional Radiology, University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, Lexington, KY, USA

Correspondence Address:
Karen N Tran-Harding
Department of Diagnostic Radiology, University of Kentucky Chandler Medical Center, 800 Rose St. HX315E, Lexington, KY
Login to access the Email id

Source of Support: None, Conflict of Interest: None

DOI: 10.4103/aer.AER_27_19

Rights and Permissions

Purpose: Postprocedure epidural analgesia has a proven benefit over intravenous(i.v.) analgesia for pain management, but has not yet been demonstrated for uterine fibroid embolization(UFE). The objectives of this clinical audit were to determine if epidural patient-controlled analgesia(PCA) was beneficial to patient outcome as compared to i.v. PCA in decreasing parenteral opioid requirements and its associated side effects and determine if there is a difference in required oral opioids after the PCA is stopped. Materials and Methods: This manuscript audited postprocedural pain management of 51patients after UFE was performed. 20patients received an i.v. PCA for post-UFE pain control and 31 received an epidural PCA for post-UFE pain control. Total hydromorphone dose, the frequency of anti-nausea medication use, the frequency of anti-pruritus medication use, and patient pain satisfaction data was collected. Results: Total hydromorphone dose administered to patients post-UFE using epidural PCA was significantly less than patients using an i.v. PCA(P=0.001). However, the frequency of nausea and pruritus between the two groups did not achieve statistical significance with(P=0.663) and(P=0.639) respectively. Conclusion: Our clinical audit found that parenteral opioid requirements administered after UFE can be significantly reduced by using epidural PCA instead of i.v. PCA. However, we found no statistically significant difference in medication related side effects or oral opioid use thereafter.

Print this article     Email this article
 Next article
 Previous article
 Table of Contents

 Similar in PUBMED
   Search Pubmed for
   Search in Google Scholar for
 Related articles
 Citation Manager
 Access Statistics
 Reader Comments
 Email Alert *
 Add to My List *
 * Requires registration (Free)

 Article Access Statistics
    PDF Downloaded68    
    Comments [Add]    

Recommend this journal