Acellular dermal matrix (ADM) is frequently used in tissue expander breast reconstruction (TEBR) for coverage of the inferior pole. Several published studies have suggested increased rates of complications with the use of ADM. It is unknown, however, if the type of ADM used for TEBR impacts complication rates. The aim of this study is to compare 3 different types of ADM for TEBR in regard to clinically significant complications, specifically infection. We performed a retrospective analysis of primary breast cancer-related TEBR with or without ADM. Exclusion criteria consisted of prior major breast surgery, inadequate data, or loss to follow-up. Reconstructions were grouped by dermal sling type, AlloDerm, DermaMatrix (DM), FlexHD (FHD), or no ADM. Complications included cellulitis, abscess, seroma, expander leak or puncture, skin necrosis, wound dehiscence, or hematoma. Those requiring admission to hospital or reoperation were considered significant. Of 284 breasts reconstructed, 49 used AlloDerm, 110 used DM, 62 used FHD, and 64 used no ADM. The total complication rate with AlloDerm was 22% [95% confidence interval (CI), 11-34], with DM was 15% (95% CI, 8-21), and with FHD was 18% (95% CI, 8-28) (P=0.47). Infectious complication rates for AlloDerm, DM, and FHD were equal at 10% (P=0.97). The total complication rate of all ADM reconstructions as a grouped cohort was 17% compared to 11% without ADM (P=0.48). The overall incidence of infectious complications with ADM was 10% compared to 2% without ADM (P=0.09). There is no difference in the clinically significant overall complication rate or incidence of infection between AlloDerm, DM, and FHD. Isolating infectious complications, there is a trend toward increased incidence with ADM compared to reconstructions without.

Background:Anxiety is a common preprocedural problem and during processing especially in interventional medical processes.Aim:Aim of this study was to assess the level of anxiety in patients who will undergo upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and coloscopy.Methods:Five hundred patients scheduled to undergo sedation for elective upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and colonoscopy were studied. Beck Anxiety Inventory (BAI) was administered to each patient before brought to the endoscopy room. Demographic data of patients were collected.Results:BAI scores and anxiety levels were significantly lower in; males compared to females, patients with no comorbidity compared to patients with comorbidity (both P values < 0.001). BAI scores were significantly lower in patients educational status university and upper compared to patients educational status primary-high school (p=0.026). There were no significant difference between BAI and anxiety levels compared to procedures (Respectively, P=0.144 P=0.054). There were no significant difference between BAI scores and anxiety levels compared to age groups (Respectively, P=0.301 P=0.214).Conclusions:We think that level of anxiety in patients who will undergo upper gastrointestinal endoscopy and colonoscopy was effected by presence of comorbidities and gender but was not effected by features such as age, procedure type and educational status.

BACKGROUND: Bispectral index (BIS) monitoring can positively affect cognitive performance through decreasing the use of sedative agents. We aimed to evaluate the effect of BIS monitoring on early cognitive performance among patients undergoing sedation for colonoscopy. DESIGN AND SETTING: Randomized, controlled trial in a university hospital. METHODS: 100 patients were randomized into two groups. In the monitored group (n = 50), the depth of anesthesia was monitored using the BIS, and BIS scores were maintained between 60 and 80. In the usual care group (n = 50), BIS monitoring was not performed. To determine the patients' baseline cognitive performance levels, the mini-mental state examination (MMSE), Trieger dot test (TDT) and clock drawing test (CDT) were used. The patients' post-procedure cognitive performance levels were determined when they were classified as ready for discharge. RESULTS: The total volume (mg) of propofol used [median (range) IQR] in the sedation procedure was lower in the monitored group [100 (50-200) 100-140] than in the usual care group [150 (75-200) 100-200] (P < 0.001). The discharge scores [mean (SD)] using MMSE and CDT were higher in the monitored group [26 (3) and 3 (1), respectively] than in the usual care group [23 (3) and 2 (1), respectively] (P = 0.002 and P = 0.002, respectively). The discharge scores using TDT [mean (SD)] were lower in the monitored group [11 (7)] than in the usual care group [15 (11)] (P = 0.033). CONCLUSION: BIS monitoring among sedated patients was associated with lower propofol use and smaller decline in cognitive performance. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This trial was registered in the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trial Registry (ACTRN12617000134325).

Background: The pain on propofol injection is considered to be a common and difficult to eliminate problem in children. In this study, we aimed to compare the efficacy of pretreatment with tramadol 1 mg.kg-1and propofol-lidocaine 20 mg mixture for prevention of propofol induced pain in children.Methods: One hundred and twenty ASA I-II patients undergoing orthopedic and otolaryngological surgery were included in this study and were divided into three groups with random table numbers. Group C (n=39) received normal saline placebo and Group T (n=40) received 1 mg.kg-1 tramadol 60 sec before propofol (180 mg 1% propofol with 2 ml normal saline) whereas Group L (n=40) received normal saline placebo before propofol-lidocaine mixture (180 mg 1% propofol with 2 ml %1 lidocaine). One patient in Group C was dropped out from the study because of difficulty in inserting an iv cannula. Thus, one hundred and nineteen patients were analyzed for the study. After given the calculated dose of propofol, a blinded observer assessed the pain with a four-point behavioral scale.Results: There were no significant differences in patient characteristics and intraoperative variables (p>0.05) except intraoperative fentanyl consumption and analgesic requirement one hr after surgery among the groups (p<0.05). Both tramadol 1 mg.kg-1 and lidocaine 20 mg mixture significantly reduced propofol pain when compared with control group. Moderate and severe pain were found higher in control group (p<0.05). The incidence of overall pain was 79.4% in the control group, 35% in tramadol group, 25% in lidocaine group respectively (p<0.001).Conclusions: Pretreatment with tramadol 60 sec before propofol injection and propofol-lidocaine mixture were significantly reduced propofol injection pain when compared to placebo in children.