BACKGROUND This study was conducted to compare and evaluate the efficacy and safety of prior intravenous dexmedetomidine with intravenous lignocaine as pre-treatment for prevention of propofol injection pain. METHODS In this prospective, randomised and double blinded clinical study, a total of 200 patients aged between 18 and 70 years of American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) grade I or II posted for elective surgery under general anaesthesia utilising propofol as the inducing agent, were randomly allocated into two groups of 100 patients each, using computer generated random number tables. Group I received intravenous lignocaine 0.2 mg / Kg and group II received intravenous dexmedetomidine 0.5 mcg / Kg respectively prior to administration of propofol (2 mg / Kg) for induction during general anaesthesia. Pain during propofol administration was assessed for each patient using the McCririck and Hunter scale. Peri-operative haemodynamic changes and side effects were noted. Data was analysed using chi-square test and a P-value < 0.05 was considered to be statistically significant. RESULTS A total of 200 patients (100 patients in lignocaine group and 100 patients in dexmedetomidine group) were studied. Statistically significant (P < 0.05) diminution in pain score was discovered to be higher in group II (dexmedetomidine) as compared to group I (lignocaine). 80 % in the dexmedetomidine group had no pain compared to 62 % of the patients in the lignocaine group which is statistically significant. Dexmedetomidine also had a more remarkable effect on the heart rate (10 minutes after intubation) compared to lignocaine, with P = 0.054 which is statistically significant. CONCLUSIONS Intravenous dexmedetomidine is a superior pre-medication compared to intravenous lignocaine in the prevention of pain following propofol administration. It also has additional properties of sedation, analgesia, anxiolysis and sympatholytic action making it a better alternative for the anaesthesiologist and the patient. KEY WORDS Analgesia, Anxiolysis, Pre-Treatment, General Anaesthesia, Sedation, Sympatholytic Action
Hepatic hydatid disease is very common in developing nations. Although anaphylactic shock is a rare complication during anaesthesia, it can present with severe cardiovascular shock and hypersensitive reactions during surgical removal of hydatid cyst, requiring prompt emergency management. We report a case of 43 year old female posted for elective removal of hydatid cyst in the right lobe of liver under general anaesthesia. An anaesthesist should be aware of the “tell-tale” signs of anaphylaxis and be prepared for early and prompt treatment of anaphylactic shock. Anaphylactic prophylaxis and close monitoring for early diagnosis and prompt treatment of anaphylaxis are essential to avert any complications associated with anaphylactic shock.
Patients with cervical spine injuries pose a significant challenge to an anesthesiologist. The airway management of these patients involves movements of the cervical spine that may worsen pre-existing injury resulting in poor post-operative neurological outcomes. We present a case report of a patient with cervical spine injury posted for spinal fusion under general anaesthesia. Intubation of the patient was done with C-MAC videolaryngoscope (VDL) with manual inline stabilisation (MILS) after induction with intravenous anaesthetic agents. The perioperative haemodynamic parameters were found to be stable with statistically insignificant deviation from the baseline values. All patients were examined post operatively with no post-operative adverse events including bronchospasm, dysphagia, aspiration or any neurological deficits. We concluded that VDL assisted intubation has several advantages in the care of these patients.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.