[Comparison of two different methods of analgesia. Postoperative course after colorectal cancer surgery]

Abstract

Background: The purpose of our study is to compare two methods of postoperative analgesia in colorectal cancer patients after resectional operations, and to evaluate advantages and limitations of each method on the postoperative course of these patients.

Methods: One hundred patients scheduled to undergo elective colorectal cancer surgery were randomized into two groups; after general anesthesia, one group received epidural analgesia (n=50) and the second one - intramuscular pethidine analgesia (n=50). Visual analogue scale at rest and on coughing was used to compare intensiveness of pain between the two groups during the day of surgery and first three postoperative days. Patients' mood and self-satisfaction were evaluated using self-assessment manikin scale. Side effects of both analgesia techniques were registered. All complications and postoperative hospital stay were also evaluated.

Results: Visual analogue scale pain scores at rest and on coughing were significantly better in epidural analgesia group as compared to systemic intramuscular pethidine analgesia group (p<0.05). Additional analgesics were needed for 10 (20%) and 28 (56%) patients respectively to keep visual analogue scale pain scores below 5. Adverse effects such as profound sedation, nausea and vomiting were more frequent in systemic intramuscular pethidine group, but pruritus - very uncommon to compare with epidural analgesia group (p<0.05). There were no significant differences between the two groups in respect to complications and postoperative hospital stay.

Conclusions: Epidural analgesia has demonstrated significantly better effectiveness than intramuscular pethidine analgesia after colorectal cancer surgery with fewer adverse events. Self-assessment manikin scores showed better self-satisfaction in patients of epidural analgesia group as compared to patients in systemic pethidine group.