BackgroundArrhythmia occurring during and after surgery is one of the major complications in open-heart surgery. Dexmedetomidine is an intravenous alpha-2 agonist and very specific short-acting drug to protect the various organs against ischemic injuries and blood reflow. However, the effect of dexmedetomidine for preventing intraoperative heart arrhythmias has not been recognized.ObjectiveThis study aimed to determine the effect of dexmedetomidine on the incidence rate of heart arrhythmias and anesthetic required in off-pump coronary artery bypass surgery.MethodsThis randomized clinical trial was conducted on patients who were candidates for off-pump coronary artery bypass referring to Imam Reza Hospital of Mashhad, Iran, from July 2016 through January 2017. The patients were randomly assigned to two groups of intervention (infusion of 0.5 mcg/kg/h dexmedetomidine together with induction followed by infusion of 0.5 mcg/kg/h by the end of the surgery) or control (saline infusion). Mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were measured before induction, during surgery operation and ICU admission. Data were analyzed by SPSS version 18 using Chi Square and independent-samples t-test.ResultsA total of 76 patients with a mean age of 59.8 ± 8.2 years (in two groups of 38) were studied. The two groups had no statistically significant difference in terms of background variables. The MAP and HR values before induction, during surgery and ICU admission were significantly higher in the control group than in the intervention group (p=0.001). Out of the studied arrhythmias, the values of PAC (55.2% vs. 15.7%), PVC (81.5% vs. 21.0%), AF (26.3% vs. 7.8%), VTAC (21.0% vs. 2.6%) were significantly lower in dexmedetomidine group (p=0.001).ConclusionIt seems that dexmedetomidine administration during induction and surgery can cause significant reduction in most of the common arrhythmias in off-pump coronary bypass surgery. The use of dexmedetomidine maintains MAP and HR at significantly lower values, and changes compared to the control group as well as reduces the need for anesthetic compounds.Trial RegistrationThe present study has been registered at the Iranian Registry of Clinical Trials (www.IRCT.IR) with a code of IRCT2016072413159N9 before starting the study.FoundingThis study was fully sponsored by the Research Deputy at Mashhad University of Medical Sciences, Iran (grant number 941413).
Introduction:Central venous catheter placement is a routine procedure for the management of critically ill patients; however, it is important to ensure its proper placement. A central venous catheter malposition may cause various complications, some of which can be fatal.Case Presentation:We report an unexpected malposition of a catheter in the left internal jugular vein, where it entered into the left internal mammary vein.Conclusions:We think one of the influential factors for leading a guidewire and catheter into a nominated vein may be the left sided bevel of the needle at the time of internal jugular vein needle and catheter insertion. We were required to continue going towards the subclavian vein and accidentally turned into the left internal mammary vein.
Background: Selection of anesthetic approach for lower extremity operations is often a controversial issue for anesthesiologists. Objectives: The aim of this study was to compare the incidence and severity of back pain between general and spinal anesthesia, and to find effective factors in developing postoperative back pain. Patients and Methods: In a randomized clinical trail, 148 patients with elective lower extremity surgeries were randomly allocated into two groups of 74. The first group received general anesthesia and the second group underwent spinal anesthesia. The incidence of back pain was observed and documented. The severity of back pain was assessed at the first, fourth and eighth postoperative weeks by visual analogue scale. Results: The mean of patients' age was 35.50 ± 13.34 years. The incidence and mean of back pain severity among all participants were respectively 35.80% and 15.95% at the first week, 7.40% and 2.43% at the fourth week, and 1.4% and 0.27% at the eighth postoperative week. The incidence and mean of back pain severity in spinal group were respectively 39.2% and 18.11% at the first, 12.2% and 3.92% at the fourth, and 2.7% and 0.54% eighth postoperative weeks. In general anesthesia group, these figures were respectively 32.4% and 13.78% at the first week and 2.7% and 0.95% at the fourth postoperative week. No back pain was reported at the eighth postoperative week. The incidence and severity of back pain in the first week showed significant difference between the two groups, while the mean severity of back pain showed significant difference at the fourth week after operation. Conclusions: Spinal anesthesia could be probably considered as the sole effective factor in the development of back pain after operation.
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.