Seventy-five patients of both sexes with clinically suspected contact dermatitis were patch tested with the Indian Standard Series and indigenous antigens. The results were compared with the data from other centers. Most of these patients were young adults between 20 and 39 yrs old with the mean age of 36.63 +/- 5.6 yrs. Their occupational profiles included household workers (17.33%), masons (10.66%), farmers (6.66%), factory workers (4%), medical personnel (4%), lab workers (2.66%), and miscellaneous (17.33%). Itching and burning were two of the most common complaints, and chronic dermatitis was the predominant morphologic pattern of the lesions observed. Frequent sites involved included the hands (40.83%), airborne type (22.44%), hands and feet (12.24%), feet (12.24%), face (10.2%), and neck (2.04%). Patch test analysis of these patients revealed that, out of 75 subjects tested, 49 (65.3%) reacted to one or more allergens. Parthenium (20%) is the most common contact sensitizer followed by potassium dichromate (16%), xanthium (13.33%), nickel sulphate (12%), chrysanthemum (8%), mercaptobenzothiazole, and garlic (6.66% each). These findings are in broad conformity with those in other reports. We concluded that the Indian Standard Series of antigens with the addition of a few more (such as garlic, onion and chlorheximide of local relevance) is suitable for detecting the allergens responsible for the contact dermatitis prevailing in this region.

Background: Intradermal administration of QR678 Neo ® hair re-growth factor formulation has already proven its effectiveness and safety in treating androgenetic alopecia and female pattern hair loss.Aim: This study aims to evaluate effectiveness and safety of hair re-growth factor formulation at multiple centers for reduction of hair fall and regrowth of hair in androgenetic alopecia and female pattern hair loss. Materials and methods:An open-label, prospective, and interventional study was carried out at multiple centers of different countries. A total of 2428 patients with androgenetic alopecia and female pattern hair loss within the age range of 18-65 years were included in the study. Hair pull test, global photographic assessment, videomicroscopic assessment tests were performed at the beginning, after fourth and eighth sessions, and self-assessment through questionnaire related to satisfaction and side effects was carried out at beginning and at after eight session.Results: Hair pull test was positive in only 12% of the patients after eight sessions.Beneficial results were noted in the global assessment score (mean-6) after fourth session and eighth session (mean-8). Huge improvement was noted in terminal hair count, vellus hair count, and hair density after eighth sessions. Also, with self-assessment score, a higher satisfaction score was noted. On long-term follow-up as well, no side effects were noted. Conclusion:Intradermal administration of QR678 Neo ® is an innovative, efficacious, and safe technique for the treatment of androgenetic alopecia and female pattern hair loss.

No abstract

SummarySixty adult patients undergoing minor peripheral surgery under general anaesthesia were randomly allocated to receive either the laryngeal mask airway (laryngeal mask airway; size 4 for females and size 5 for males) or the PA Xpress TM (adult size), inserted by a single operator with experience of > 50 insertions of each device. The laryngeal mask airway was correctly placed on the first attempt in 27 patients (90%) compared with 20 patients (67%) when using the PA Xpress (p < 0.01). No patient required more than two attempts at insertion and there were no failures with the laryngeal mask airway, compared with four (13%) who needed three attempts and two failures (7%) with the PA Xpress (p < 0.001 and p < 0.01, respectively). Mean (SD) total placement time was shorter with the laryngeal mask airway [24.6 (3.1) s] than with the PA Xpress [35.4 (2.5) s; p < 0.01]. The most common complication was sore throat, which occurred less frequently with the laryngeal mask airway (8 patients; 26%) than with the PA Xpress (15 patients; 53.5%; p < 0.001).

INTRODUCTIONToday, the LMA has a clearly established role as an airway device in elective setting when tracheal intubation is difficult or does not required like day care anaesthesia. It is a simple, well tolerated, safe, reusable, cost effective method for airway management. It ensures a better control of airway than the facemask, laryngoscopy is avoided and haemodynamic changes are minimized during insertion.1 It avoids the disadvantages of endotracheal tube like pressure response during intubation and sore throat, croup, hoarseness postoperatively. LMA has also been included in ASA difficult airway algorithm. Satisfactory insertion of the Laryngeal Mask Airway requires sufficient depth of anaesthesia to provide loss of consciousness, jaw relaxation, absence of upper airway reflexes rapidly without cardio respiratory compromise. 2Propofol with or without opioid is the induction agent of choice for laryngeal mask airway insertion having rapid induction and upper airway reflexes depressing properties but pain on injection and cardiovascular depression are the major limiting factors. Sevoflurane, a halogenated, volatile anaesthetic agent with pleasant odour and low blood: gas solubility allows a fast, smooth induction and ABSTRACT Background: Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is an accepted airway device for spontaneous and modest positive pressure ventilation. Propofol is widely used Induction agent. Sevoflurane is a newer pleasant volatile anaesthetic with rapid induction and recovery with stable haemodynamics. The aim of this study was to compare propofol and sevoflurane with respect of haemodynamic changes and conditions for LMA insertion. Methods: This study was done on 60 female patients of ASA I, II grade between 20-60 years of age. Patients were randomized into two groups (n=30). All patients were preoxygenated and received inj. fentanyl 2µg/kg. Induction agent was propofol 2.5mg/kg (group P) or sevoflurane 8% with vital capacity breath (group S). Loss of eyelash reflex was the end point of induction. Induction time, conditions for LMA insertion, number of attempts, time of successful LMA insertion and haemodynamic parameters were noted. Results: time for induction and LMA insertion was significantly faster in propofol group than group S (p<0.05). Successful LMA insertion in first attempt was 100% in group P with excellent conditions (score 18) while in group S, it was 86.7% with excellent to satisfactory conditions (score 16-17). A significant fall in mean arterial pressure (p<0.05) was noted in group P while pulse rates were comparable in both groups. Conclusions: Sevoflurane vital capacity breath inhalational induction can be used as an effective alternative to propofol though it requires greater time for LMA insertion but with better haemodynamic stability.