SummaryBackgroundPost-partum haemorrhage is the leading cause of maternal death worldwide. Early administration of tranexamic acid reduces deaths due to bleeding in trauma patients. We aimed to assess the effects of early administration of tranexamic acid on death, hysterectomy, and other relevant outcomes in women with post-partum haemorrhage.MethodsIn this randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, we recruited women aged 16 years and older with a clinical diagnosis of post-partum haemorrhage after a vaginal birth or caesarean section from 193 hospitals in 21 countries. We randomly assigned women to receive either 1 g intravenous tranexamic acid or matching placebo in addition to usual care. If bleeding continued after 30 min, or stopped and restarted within 24 h of the first dose, a second dose of 1 g of tranexamic acid or placebo could be given. Patients were assigned by selection of a numbered treatment pack from a box containing eight numbered packs that were identical apart from the pack number. Participants, care givers, and those assessing outcomes were masked to allocation. We originally planned to enrol 15 000 women with a composite primary endpoint of death from all-causes or hysterectomy within 42 days of giving birth. However, during the trial it became apparent that the decision to conduct a hysterectomy was often made at the same time as randomisation. Although tranexamic acid could influence the risk of death in these cases, it could not affect the risk of hysterectomy. We therefore increased the sample size from 15 000 to 20 000 women in order to estimate the effect of tranexamic acid on the risk of death from post-partum haemorrhage. All analyses were done on an intention-to-treat basis. This trial is registered with ISRCTN76912190 (Dec 8, 2008); ClinicalTrials.gov, number NCT00872469; and PACTR201007000192283.FindingsBetween March, 2010, and April, 2016, 20 060 women were enrolled and randomly assigned to receive tranexamic acid (n=10 051) or placebo (n=10 009), of whom 10 036 and 9985, respectively, were included in the analysis. Death due to bleeding was significantly reduced in women given tranexamic acid (155 [1·5%] of 10 036 patients vs 191 [1·9%] of 9985 in the placebo group, risk ratio [RR] 0·81, 95% CI 0·65–1·00; p=0·045), especially in women given treatment within 3 h of giving birth (89 [1·2%] in the tranexamic acid group vs 127 [1·7%] in the placebo group, RR 0·69, 95% CI 0·52–0·91; p=0·008). All other causes of death did not differ significantly by group. Hysterectomy was not reduced with tranexamic acid (358 [3·6%] patients in the tranexamic acid group vs 351 [3·5%] in the placebo group, RR 1·02, 95% CI 0·88–1·07; p=0·84). The composite primary endpoint of death from all causes or hysterectomy was not reduced with tranexamic acid (534 [5·3%] deaths or hysterectomies in the tranexamic acid group vs 546 [5·5%] in the placebo group, RR 0·97, 95% CI 0·87-1·09; p=0·65). Adverse events (including thromboembolic events) did not differ significantly in the tranexamic acid versus ...
Background: Major lumbar spine surgery causes severe postoperative pain. The primary objective of this randomized controlled study was to compare the effect of ultrasound (US)-guided erector spinae plane (ESP) block on 24-hour postoperative cumulative opioid requirements with standard (opioid-based) analgesia. Postoperative pain control and patient satisfaction were also assessed. Materials and Methods: Adults scheduled for elective lumbar spine surgery under general anesthesia were randomly assigned to the following (and they are): Control group-no preoperative ESP block, or ESP block group-preoperative bilateral US-guided ESP block. Both groups received standard general anesthesia during surgery. Postoperative pain score, number of patients requiring rescue analgesia, and total morphine consumption during the first 24 postoperative hours were recorded. Patient satisfaction was assessed 24 hours after surgery. Results: Postoperative morphine consumption was significantly lower in patients in the ESP group compared with those in the control group (1.4±1.5 vs. 7.2±2.0 mg, respectively; P<0.001). All patients in the control group required supplemental morphine compared with only 9 (45%) in the ESP block group (P=0.002). Pain scores immediately after surgery (P=0.002) and at 6 hours after surgery (P=0.040) were lower in the ESP block group compared with the control group. Patient satisfaction scores were more favorable in the block group (P<0.0001). Conclusions: US-guided ESP block reduces postoperative opioid requirement and improves patient satisfaction compared with standard analgesia in lumbar spine surgery patients.
Background and Aims:Several locoregional techniques have been described for providing postoperative analgesia after breast surgery. The optimal technique should be easy to perform, reproducible and provide good analgesia. This randomised control study was designed to evaluate the postoperative analgesic effect of ultrasound-guided erector spinae plane (US-guided ESP) block for modified radical mastectomy (MRM) surgery.Methods:A total of 40 females belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists' 1 or 2 posted for MRM were randomly allocated into Group 1 (control group) and group 2 (ESP group). Patients in Group 1 received only general anaesthesia (GA) and were managed for pain postoperatively according to routine protocol, while group 2 (ESP group) patients received unilateral US-guided ESP block preoperatively (20 mL 0.5% bupivacaine to the operating side) followed by GA. The primary objective of study was to record postoperative 24 h cumulative morphine requirement. Differences between the two groups were analyzed using the Mann–Whitney U-test or a two-tailed Student's t-test.Results:Postoperative morphine consumption was found to be significantly less in patients receiving US-guided ESP block compared to control group (1.95 ± 2.01 mg required in ESP group vs 9.3 ± 2. 36 mg required in control group, P value = 0.01)). All the patients in control group required supplemental morphine postoperatively compared to only two patients requiring that in US-guided ESP block group (P < 0.01).Conclusion:US-guided ESP block when given prior to MRM surgery provided effective postoperative analgesia. CTRI registration no. - CTRI/2018/03/012712 registered in the clinical trial registry, India.
Purpose: To provide a systematic review of the literature on congenital dacryocystoceles (CDCs) and summarize their presentations, investigations, management, and outcomes. Methods: The authors performed a PubMed search of all articles published in English on CDCs. Data captured include demographics, clinical presentations, investigations, management modalities, complications, and outcomes. Fourteen major series (10 or more than 10 cases) and 89 isolated case reports/series on CDCs with a collective patient pool of 1,063 were studied in detail. Specific emphasis was laid on addressing the controversial issues including initial conservative versus surgical management and the role of endoscopic evaluation. Results: Numerous terminologies have been used to describe CDC. Congenital dacryocystoceles are rare variants of congenital nasolacrimal duct obstructions and comprise of 0.1% to 0.3% of all such cases. There is a female predilection (64.2%, 683/1,063) and the mean age at presentation is at 7 days of birth. Initial conservative treatment can be a viable option in the absence of an acute dacryocystitis or a respiratory distress. Endoscopy-assisted probing appears to have better outcomes as compared with the in-office probing. Congenital dacryocystoceles with acute dacryocystitis are preferably managed with intravenous antibiotics and an early probing under endoscopy guidance to avoid missing intranasal cysts. Marsupialization is the preferred technique in the management of intranasal cysts. Silicone intubation was rarely used and has no definitive indications. Dacryocystorhinostomy is very rarely needed in the management of CDC. Conclusions: Congenital dacryocystocele is a commonly accepted term and its use should be advocated to enhance uniformity in reporting. Endoscopic evaluation of CDC is useful in the diagnosis and treatment of associated intranasal cysts and enhances the rates of successful outcomes.
Background and Aims:Local infiltration of the surgical wound is one of the important components of multimodal analgesia for post-operative pain relief. This study determines the post-operative analgesic effect of addition of dexmedetomidine to bupivacaine for local infiltration of the surgical wound.Methods:Sixty women belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists’ Grade 1 or 2 posted for abdominal hysterectomy were randomly allocated to Group I (control group) where patients received wound infiltration with 30 mL 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery, or Group II, where patients received wound infiltration with 1.0 μg/kg dexmedetomidine diluted in 30 mL 0.25% bupivacaine. The primary objective of the study was to assess post-operative pain scores. Number of patients requiring rescue analgesia and total morphine consumption during 24 h after surgery were also recorded. Statistical significance for analgesic requirement was determined by one-way analysis of variance.Results:Pain scores were lower at rest for 12 h and on cough for 6 h in Group II (<0.01). All patients in Group I required supplemental morphine compared to only 3 patients in Group II (P < 0.003). Post-operative analgesia requirement was significantly less in patients receiving dexmedetomidine in wound infiltration compared to patients receiving bupivacaine alone (P < 0.001).Conclusions:Wound infiltration of dexmedetomidine with bupivacaine provides superior pain relief compared to bupivacaine alone.
Primary NEN-DCR leads to faster resolution facilitating earlier rehabilitation with comparable anatomical and functional outcomes compared with conventional delayed EXT-DCR in acute dacryocystitis.
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
334 Leonard St
Brooklyn, NY 11211
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.