Propofol MCT/LCT and propofol LCT premixed with lignocaine are both associated with pain on injection in children; the incidence and intensity of the injection pain are similar.

Background and Aims:Utility of gabapentin for pre-operative anxiolysis as compared to commonly administered alprazolam is not evident. The aim of the present study was to compare the effects of pre-operative oral gabapentin 600 mg, alprazolam 0.5 mg or a placebo on pre-operative anxiety along with post-operative pain and morphine consumption.Methods:Seventy five patients scheduled for abdominal hysterectomy under general anaesthesia were included. Groups gabapentin, alprazolam and placebo, received oral gabapentin 600 mg, alprazolam 0.5 mg and one capsule of oral B-complex forte with Vitamin C respectively, on the night prior to surgery and 2 h prior to surgery. Visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to measure the anxiety and post-operative pain. All patients received patient-controlled analgesia. Statistical tests used were Kruskal–Wallis test, Wilcoxon signed rank test and one-way ANOVA.Results:Alprazolam provided significant anxiolysis (median [interquartile range] baseline VAS score 35 [15.5, 52] to 20 [6.5, 34.5] after drug administration; P = 0.007). Gabapentin did not provide significant decrease in anxiety (median [interquartile range] VAS score 21 [7.5, 41] to 20 [6.5, 34.5]; P = 0.782). First analgesic request time (median [interquartile range in minutes]) was longer in group gabapentin (17.5 [10, 41.25]) compared to group placebo (10 [5, 15]) (P = 0.019) but comparable to that in group alprazolam (15 [10, 30]). Cumulative morphine consumption at different time periods and total morphine consumption (mean [standard deviation]) at the end of study period (38.65 [18.04], 39.91 [15.73], 44.29 [16.02] mg in group gabapentin, alprazolam and placebo respectively) were comparable.Conclusion:Gabapentin 600 mg does not have significant anxiolytic effect compared to alprazolam 0.5 mg. Alprazolam 0.5 mg was found to be an effective anxiolytic in the pre-operative period. Neither alprazolam nor gabapentin, when compared to placebo showed any opioid sparing effects post-operatively.

Background and Aims: Inadvertent perioperative hypothermia defined as the perioperative core temperature of <36°C is a common problem in day-to-day anesthesia practice. It is not clear from the literature whether prewarming, that is, initiation of convective warming of the patient at a time point prior to induction of anesthesia is superior or comparable to cowarming, that is, initiation of convective warming simultaneously with induction of anesthesia. We conducted this study to find whether cowarming is as good as prewarming in preventing the occurrence of intraoperative hypothermia. Material and Methods: Sixty-two adult patients undergoing major abdominal surgery under general anesthesia were randomized to receive either prewarming for 60 min at 40° C or cowarming using the Level 1® Equator ® body warmer. All patients who were prewarmed also received cowarming during induction of anesthesia. In both the groups, convective warming was continued during intraoperative period. Incidence of intraoperative hypothermia, core, and peripheral body temperatures were compared between the two groups. Results: Among 27 patients in each group who completed the study core temperature decreased to <35° C toward the end of surgery in 17 patients in group prewarming [mean (SD) 34.59 (1.17° C)] and 18 patients in group cowarming [mean (SD) 34.31 (1.34° C)]. The incidence of intraoperative hypothermia and the core temperature at the end of surgery were comparable ( P = 0.42). Conclusion: Cowarming is as effective as prewarming to prevent intraoperative hypothermia.

Background and Aims:Skull pin application is intensely painful and can be accompanied by detrimental haemodynamic changes. We compared intravenous (IV) dexmedetomidine with local infiltration of lignocaine at pin application sites to attenuate haemodynamic changes associated with pin application.Methods:Fifty-two patients undergoing craniotomy were randomised to either group dexmedetomidine (received 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine over 10 min starting at induction of anaesthesia) or group lignocaine (received 3 ml of 2% lignocaine infiltration at pin application sites before pin application). Anaesthetic protocol was standardised. Heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP) were recorded at the following time intervals, pre-induction baseline, pre-infiltration, post-infiltration, pre-pin application and post-pin application at 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 10 and 15 min. Statistical analysis was done using independent samples t-test, Fisher exact test and Chi-square test.Results:HR and MAP were comparable between the groups at all the study intervals. The incidence of adverse haemodynamic effects attributable to pin application (tachycardia and/or hypertension) was comparable between the groups (2 patients in group dexmedetomidine and 5 in group lignocaine). However, the incidence of hypotension and/or bradycardia was significantly greater in the dexmedetomidine group (19 patients in group dexmedetomidine and 5 patients in group lignocaine; P = 0.0007).Conclusion:IV dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg over 10 min is comparable to local infiltration of 2% lignocaine at pin application sites to attenuate the haemodynamic response associated with skull pin application. However, use of dexmedetomidine is associated with significantly higher incidence of hypotension and bradycardia.

ConclusionThe lateral technique of insertion of the Classic TM LMA along either the right border or the left border of the tongue is comparable in terms of the fibreoptic grading and the time taken for successful insertion. However, left side technique is easier as per the operator, requires fewer number of attempts, has lesser incidence of sore throat after 2 hours.

Blunt neck trauma with an associated laryngotracheal injury is rare. We report a patient with blunt neck trauma who came to the emergency room and was sent to ward without realizing the seriousness of the situation. He presented later with respiratory distress and an anesthesiologist was called in for emergency airway management. Airway management in such a situation is described in this report.

No abstract

No abstract