Brief Report - A Comparison of Intravenous Ketoprofen Versus Pethidine on Peri-Operative Analgesia and Post-operative Nausea and Vomiting in Paediatric Vitreoretinal Surgery

AIM: To compare the efficacy of ketoprofen and pethidine for peri-operative analgesia and post-operative nausea and vomiting in children undergoing vitreoretinal surgery and surgery for retinal detachment. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Children aged 7 to 16 years and ASA I status, undergoing vitreo-retinal surgery were randomly allocated to receive either ketoprofen 2mg/kg or pethidine 1mg/kg intravenously for peri-operative analgesia. In all patients, general anaesthesia was induced with thiopentone and intubation was facilitated with vecuronium bromide and maintained with 33% oxygen in nitrous oxide and isoflurane. Intra-operative and post-operative monitoring was done by an observer blinded to the technique. Intra-operative rescue analgesia was used if heart rate and/ or blood pressure increased by 25% from pre-incision values. Post-operative pain and episodes of nausea and vomiting were evaluated at recovery (0 hour), 2, 6 and 24 hours intervals. Standard rescue analgesia and anti-emetic agents were administered if required. RESULTS: Eighty-six children were enrolled in the study. Forty-four received ketoprofen while 42 received pethidine. Intra-operative analgesia was comparable in both the groups and no significant difference was found in the requirement of intra-operative rescue analgesia, as well. Postoperatively 6/44 (13.6%) children in ketoprofen group had pain at recovery compared to 17 /42 (40.4%) in pethidine group. Pain at 2, 6 and 24 hours, and postoperative analgesic requirement were not significantly different among the two groups. Post-operative nausea, vomiting, and antiemetic requirement were significantly less in the ketoprofen group at all time intervals. CONCLUSION: Ketoprofen is a satisfactory alternative analgesic to pethidine for vitreoretinal surgery and results in a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting. (J Postgrad Med 2003;49:123-126)