BackgroundThe Anesthesia planning is an important and determining factor in the amount of intraoperative hemorrhage, which can affect the rate of intraoperative and postoperative complications.ObjectivesIn this study we used two different anesthesia techniques in functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) and compared the amount of hemorrhage in the two groups.Patients and MethodsIn a single–blind clinical trial, 44 patients with ASA class I and II candidate for FESS in Amir-Al-Momenin hospital in Rasht were entered the study and divided into two equal groups randomly. In both groups anesthesia was induced with propofol, remifentanil and cis. atracurium and then, infusion of propofol – remifentanil in the first group and isoflurane plus Remifentanil infusion in the second group was used for maintenance of anesthesia. Systolic blood pressure was maintained about 90 mmHg. Then on the basis of maximum allowable blood loss (MABL) formula, we calculated the percentage of hemorrhage. Finally the patients' hemorrhage was categorized into three groups (< 10%, 10-20%, > 20%). The surgeon's satisfaction from surgical field was calculated according to the Visual Analogue Scale. Then the data was statistically analyzed with T- test.ResultsThere were meaningful differences between average of hemorrhage (propofol group = 155cc, and Isoflurane group = 291.3cc; P = 0.003), and surgeon’s satisfaction (propofol group = 1.9 and Isoflurane group = 2.95; P = 0.007).ConclusionsThe amount of hemorrhage in propofol group was less than Isoflurane group and the field condition was better in propofol group than the Isoflurane group.

OBJECTIVES To report a novel approach to overcome the problems associated with a short right renal vein harvested by clipping the vein during right laparoscopic donor nephrectomy (RLDN). PATIENTS AND METHODS This prospective study included 32 donors and their recipients; all donors had transperitoneal RLDN. The right renal artery and vein were ligated by Hem‐o‐lok and titanium clips, which resulted in a very short renal vein (<1.5 cm). When the kidney was positioned inverted in the recipient, the renal vein was placed posteriorly, adjacent to the external iliac vein, making a safe and simple venous anastomosis possible. RESULTS All RLDN were completed with no conversion or re‐operation. The mean (range) warm ischaemia time was 9.59 (3–17) min and there was no malfunction of the vascular clips on the major vessels. After a mean follow‐up of 14 months the recipient survival rate was 97%. Graft function was excellent, with a mean (sd) serum creatinine level of 1.35 (0.31) mg/dL at 3 months after surgery, and there was no renal artery or vein thrombosis in any of the grafts. There were two ureteric complications (6%), i.e. one ureterocutaneous fistula resolved by secondary ureteroureterostomy, and one stricture at the site of ureteric anastomosis, which was managed by ureteroneocystostomy. CONCLUSION The right renal vein obtained by LDN, after clipping the renal vein, is quite short, but by placing the kidney upside‐down in the right iliac fossa transplantation is possible with no increased incidence of vascular thrombosis. This simple modification might obviate the need for removing a patch from the inferior vena cava, which is a challenging procedure for laparoscopic surgeons during RLDN.

Background: Urinary retention is a common postoperative complication that mandates urinary catheterization. Urinary catheterization is associated with different physical, mental, and financial problems for both patients and healthcare systems. The patient inconvenience, urinary tract infections, and increase in hospital stay and expenses are common problems of urinary retention and urinary catheterization. Therefore, alternative ways of relieving urinary retention, preferably noninvasive interventions, are of great interest. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the effects of placing hot pack and lukewarm-water-soaked gauze on the suprapubic region on male patients with postoperative urinary retention. Patients and Methods:This was a three-group, randomized, controlled trial. A convenience sample of 126 male patients who had undergone general, orthopedic, or urologic surgeries were recruited. The block randomization method was used for allocating patients to either the two experimental groups (the hot pack and the lukewarm-water-soaked gauze groups) or the control one. Patients in the experimental groups were treated by placing either hot pack or lukewarm-water-soaked gauze on the suprapubic region. All patients were monitored for 20 minutes for urinary retention relief. If they did not experience urinary retention relief (starting urine flow and bladder evacuate), urinary catheterization would be performed. The data was collected using information sheet. Elimination of urinary retention was compared among study groups. The one-way analysis of variance and the Chi-square tests were used for analyzing data. Results: Respectively, 59.5%, 71.4%, and 7.1% of patients in the hot pack, the soaked gauze, and the control groups experienced relief from urinary retention and the bladder was emptied. There was a significant difference among study groups in percentage of patients who experienced urinary retention relief. However, the difference between the two experimental groups was not significant. The time to urinary retention relief in hot pack, soaked gauze, and control groups was 15.45 ± 3.15, 13.83 ± 3.80, and 14.59 ± 3.29 minutes, respectively. The difference among the study groups in time to urinary retention relief was not statistically significant. Conclusions: Both the lukewarm-water-soaked gauze and the hot pack techniques had significant effects on postoperative urinary retention and significantly reduced the need for urinary catheterization. Using these two simple and cost-effective techniques for managing postoperative urinary retention is recommended.