IMPORTANCE An intraoperative higher level of positive end-expiratory positive pressure (PEEP) with alveolar recruitment maneuvers improves respiratory function in obese patients undergoing surgery, but the effect on clinical outcomes is uncertain. OBJECTIVE To determine whether a higher level of PEEP with alveolar recruitment maneuvers decreases postoperative pulmonary complications in obese patients undergoing surgery compared with a lower level of PEEP. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS Randomized clinical trial of 2013 adults with body mass indices of 35 or greater and substantial risk for postoperative pulmonary complications who were undergoing noncardiac, nonneurological surgery under general anesthesia. The trial was conducted at 77 sites in 23 countries from July 2014-February 2018; final follow-up: May 2018. INTERVENTIONS Patients were randomized to the high level of PEEP group (n = 989), consisting of a PEEP level of 12 cm H 2 O with alveolar recruitment maneuvers (a stepwise increase of tidal volume and eventually PEEP) or to the low level of PEEP group (n = 987), consisting of a PEEP level of 4 cm H 2 O. All patients received volume-controlled ventilation with a tidal volume of 7 mL/kg of predicted body weight. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES The primary outcome was a composite of pulmonary complications within the first 5 postoperative days, including respiratory failure, acute respiratory distress syndrome, bronchospasm, new pulmonary infiltrates, pulmonary infection, aspiration pneumonitis, pleural effusion, atelectasis, cardiopulmonary edema, and pneumothorax. Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 3 were intraoperative complications, including hypoxemia (oxygen desaturation with SpO 2 Յ92% for >1 minute). RESULTS Among 2013 adults who were randomized, 1976 (98.2%) completed the trial (mean age, 48.8 years; 1381 [69.9%] women; 1778 [90.1%] underwent abdominal operations). In the intention-to-treat analysis, the primary outcome occurred in 211 of 989 patients (21.3%) in the high level of PEEP group compared with 233 of 987 patients (23.6%) in the low level of PEEP group (difference, −2.3% [95% CI, −5.9% to 1.4%]; risk ratio, 0.93 [95% CI, 0.83 to 1.04]; P = .23). Among the 9 prespecified secondary outcomes, 6 were not significantly different between the high and low level of PEEP groups, and 3 were significantly different, including fewer patients with hypoxemia (5.0% in the high level of PEEP group vs 13.6% in the low level of PEEP group; difference, −8.6% [95% CI, −11.1% to 6.1%]; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE Among obese patients undergoing surgery under general anesthesia, an intraoperative mechanical ventilation strategy with a higher level of PEEP and alveolar recruitment maneuvers, compared with a strategy with a lower level of PEEP, did not reduce postoperative pulmonary complications.
SUMMARYGrowth of 13 F. graminearum isolates, 6 F. avenaceum isolates and 6 F. verticillioides isolates was analysed on potato-dextrose agar amended with 0.1, 0.33, 1, 3.3 and 10 mg l -1 of carbendazim, tebuconazole, flutriafol, metconazole, and prochloraz. Average concentration which reduced mycelial growth by 50% comparing it to control (EC 50 ) was calculated for each isolate. Among fungicides tested, prochloraz was shown to be the most effective in growth inhibition of all three species, while flutirafol was proven to be the least effective. Metocnazole was more efficient in comparison with carbendazim and tebuconazole. EC 50 values of all isolates on prochloraz were lower than 0.1 mg l -1 , while on flutirafol they ranged between 1.66 and 8.51 mg l -1 for 18 isolates, or were higher than 10 mg l -1 for 7 isolates. EC 50 values on carbendazim were 0.39-1.41 mg l -1 for F. graminearum isolates, 0.91-1.35 mg l -1 for F. avenaceum, and 0.47-0.6 mg l -1 for F. verticillioides. EC 50 values on tebuconazole were 0.85-2.57 mg l -1 for F. graminearum, 0.85-1.58 mg l -1 for F. avenaceum and 0.22-0.85 mg l -1 for F. verticillioides, while on metconazole EC 50 values ranged between less than 0.1 mg l -1 to 1.66, 0.56, and 0.17 mg l -1 for F. graminearum, F. avenaceum and F. verticillioides, respectively. Average growth inhibitions of different Fusarium species and all Fusarium isolates together on different concentrations of fungicides tested were significantly different. Significant differences in growth were not determined among isolates of the same species on neither one of fungicides tested, indicating that no decreased sensitivity to the fungicides exists among isolates included in the study.
Background: The transverses abdominals plane block (TAP) is a regional anesthesia technique that provided analgesia to the parietal peritoneum, skin and muscles of the anterior abdominal wall. The aim of this randomized double-blind study was to evaluate postoperative analgesia on patients undergoing open inguinal hernia repair under general anesthesia (GA), (GA + TAP) block preformed with ropivacaine and (GA + TAP-D) block preformed with ropivacaine and 4 mg dexamethasone. Methods: 90 (ASA I-II) adult patients for unilateral open inguinal hernia repair were included in this study. In group I (n = 30) patents received only general anesthesia (GA). Patients in group II (n = 30) received GA and unilateral TAP block with 25 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine and the patients in group III (n = 30) received GA and unilateral TAP-D block with 25 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine + 4 mg Dexamethadsone. In this study we assessed the pain score -VAS at rest at 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 hours after the operation and the total analgesic consumption of morphine over 24 hours. Results: There were statistically significant differences in the VAS scores between group I, group II and group III at all postoperative time points -2 hr , 4 hr , 6 hr , 12 hr and 24 hr. (p < 0.00001). The cumulative 24 hours morphine consumption after the operation was significantly lower in group III (5.53 1.21 mg) than in group II (6.16 2.41 mg) and group I (9.26 2.41 mg). This difference is statistically significant (p < 0.00001). Conclusion: Concerning the inguinal hernia repair we found better postoperative pain scores and 24 hours reduction of the morphine consumption in group III (GA and TAP-D block) compared with group I (GA) and group II (GA + TAP block).
Introduction: Epidural analgesia is considered a gold standard in obstetric anaesthesia and analgesia. However, in situation when it is contraindicated, unwanted by the patient or simply unavailable, remifentanil can be an excellent alternative. The goal of our study is to analyse the side effects of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV PCA) with remifentanil compared with epidural analgesia during delivery. Material and methods: This study included 155 pregnant women in term for birth, divided into 2 groups: a remifentanil group (RG), and an epidural group (EG). Patients in the RG received intravenous PCA with remifentanil, while patients in the ЕG received epidural analgesia with programmed intermittent bolus dosing. Our primary outcome was maternal safety; the secondary outcome was neonatal safety. Results: The results present a significantly lower SaO2 value of the parturients in the RG (96.95 ± 1.4 vs 98.22 ± 0.6), and a significantly higher respiratory rate per minute in the EG at all time points after the onset of analgesia (20.85 ± 1.4 vs 18.67 ± 0.9). There was more frequent sedation, nausea and vomiting in the RG, while in the EG there was a more elevated temperature, itching and irregularities in the CTG record. Regarding the newborn, there was no significant difference between the two groups in the Apgar scores, pH, pCO2, pO2, and bicarbonate, while there was a significantly lower value of the base excess in the RG group. Conclusion: PCA with remifentanil is safe for the mother, foetus and the newborn, with minimal side effects. Continuous respiratory monitoring, oxygen supply and following of all consensus recommendations are mandatory.
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.