We studied 45 ASA I/II children aged between 2 and 13 years scheduled for elective strabismus surgery, randomly allocated to receive either a peribulbar block or topical lidocaine 2% combined with general anaesthesia, or general anaesthesia alone. The incidence and severity of the occulocardiac reflex, the requirement for atropine, the occurrence of arrhythmias and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting following surgery at 1, 2 and 4 h were studied. We found the incidence and severity of occulocardiac reflex intra-operatively was significantly reduced in children who received a peribulbar block. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was significantly reduced in patients receiving either peribulbar block or topical local anaesthesia combined with general anaesthesia, compared to general anaesthesia alone (p = 0.008).
Context:Morbidly obese patients are prone for intraoperative hemodynamic disturbances and postoperative airway complications.Aim:Comparison of intraoperative hemodynamics and postoperative recovery characteristics of desflurane versus sevoflurane in morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery.Settings and Design:Randomized controlled trialMaterials and Methods:After institutional ethics committee approval and written informed consent, 40 morbidly obese patients (BMI > 35 kg/m2) were randomized to receive desflurane or sevoflurane as part of a standardized general anesthesia technique. Volatile anesthetic concentration was titrated to maintain electroencephalographic bispectral index score (BIS) in the range of 40-60. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded preoperatively, at induction and intubation, then at regular intervals. After extubation, early recovery was recorded by time to emergence and orientation to time and place. In post anesthesia care unit, intermediate recovery was assessed by modified Aldrete Score and Digit Symbol Substitution Test (DSST).Results:Intraoperative MAP and HR did not differ between the two groups (P > 0.05). The time to response to painful stimuli, obeying verbal commands and spontaneous eye opening was shorter (P = 0.001) and modified Aldrete Score was higher after desflurane anesthesia than after sevoflurane anesthesia (P = 0.049). DSST also returned towards normal faster after desflurane (28.50 ± 6.30 min vs. 35.0 ± 5.62 min, P = 0.03).Conclusions:Both desflurane and sevoflurane produce similar hemodynamic changes but the immediate and intermediate recovery was significantly faster after desflurane thus contributing to fast tracking and early discharge of patients.
Both hypervolemic hemodilution (HVH) and isovolemic hemodilution (IVH) claim to reduce red blood cell loss during surgery by diluting the patient's blood. This study found both comparable in significantly reducing the exposure to bank blood in the perioperative period, the time needed, and the cost incurred. HVH, being simpler, because it does not involve blood withdrawal, appeared superior to IVH in the healthy adults studied. Larger studies are needed to substantiate the results.
Background:Positioning an anesthetized patient prone is challenging with regard to manpower requirement, time to surgical readiness and airway management. The ProSeal laryngeal mask airway™ (PLMA) is emerging as a suitable alternative, both as a primary and a rescue airway device to the tracheal tube (TT) for patients undergoing surgery in the prone position.Materials and Methods:In this prospective randomized study, 70 patients scheduled to undergo pilonidal sinus excision in prone position were allocated to two groups of 35 patients each, depending on the position of the patient at induction and device placement: Group S (device placed while supine) and Group P (device placed while prone). We compared the manpower requirement, time to surgical readiness, efficacy and safety of the PLMA for airway management in the two groups.Results:The number of personnel [5 (4-6) vs. 3 (3-3); P < 0.001] required for positioning the patient and surgical readiness time (22.1 ± 3 vs. 5.9 ± 0.9 min; P < 0.001) was higher in group S. There was no difference between the two groups with regard to efficacy and safety of the PLMA. Incidence of blood on the PLMA cuff and sore throat was comparable in the two groups (P = 1.000).Conclusion:We conclude that induction and placing the PLMA in the prone position by experienced users require fewer personnel and reduces surgical readiness time.
Background and Aims:Anaphylaxis during anaesthesia is a rare but serious problem. In contrast to the developed countries where databases of perianaesthetic anaphylaxis are preserved, none exist in India. We conducted a survey amongst Indian anaesthesiologists to study the incidence and aetiology of anaphylaxis during anaesthesia in India.Methods:A written questionnaire comprising 20 items was mailed electronically or distributed personally to 600 randomly selected Indian anaesthesiologists. The responses were compiled and analysed.Results:We received responses from 242 anaesthesiologists. One hundred and sixty-two (67%) anaesthesiologists had encountered anaphylaxis during anaesthesia. Anaesthetic drugs led to 40% of reactions, and 60% of reactions were attributed to non-anaesthetic drugs. Opioids were the most common anaesthetic drugs implicated in anaphylaxis during anaesthesia, and non-depolarising muscle relaxants were the second most commonly implicated agents. Colloids, antibiotics and blood transfusion were the common non-anaesthetic agents thought to be responsible for anaphylactic reactions during anaesthesia. There were five deaths due to anaphylaxis during anaesthesia. Only 10% of anaesthesiologists ordered for allergy testing subsequently though 38% of anaesthesiologists had access to allergy testing facilities.Conclusions:Our survey reveals that two-thirds of participating Indian anaesthesiologists had witnessed anaphylaxis during anaesthesia. Commonly implicated anaesthetic drugs were opioids and non-depolarising muscle relaxants while colloids, antibiotics and blood transfusion were the common non-anaesthetic agents causing anaphylactic reactions during anaesthesia. Further, our survey reveals low utilisation and paucity of referral allergy centres to investigate suspected cases of anaphylaxis during anaesthesia.
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.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.