Long-term outcome after pneumonectomy at Siriraj Hospital.

Objective: The purpose of this study is to identify predictors of long term survival following pneumonectomy and compare New York Heart Association (NYHA) functional classification and ECOG performance status before and after surgery at Siriraj Hospital. Methods: All fifty three patients having a pneumonectomy between 1998 and 2009 were retrospectively studied. We compared each patient’s status before and after surgery. The parameters of survival were tested by univariate analysis, the Kaplan-Meier method, and differences in survival were determined by log-rank analysis. Results: There were 35 males (66%) and 18 females (34%) with a mean age (standard deviation) of 51±17 years (range 0.7-82 years). The majority of patients were lung cancer (77%) and destroyed lungs from infectious (12%) diseases. The mean follow-up time was 33 months, median 22 months, standard deviation 24 months, ranging between 0 and 131 months. Post-operative complication occurred in 11% of patients (bronchopleural fistula, bleeding, cardiac herniation and recurrent laryngeal nerve injury). Hospital mortality occurred in 7.5% (4 deaths). Late death occurred in 52.8% (28 deaths) including metastasis 30% (16 patients), pneumonia 19% (10 patients), and miscellaneous causes 3.7% (2 patients). Using univariate analysis, non lung cancer (P = 0.035) and the slow growing lung cancer (P = 0.007) were independent predictors of long term survival. The decrease in NYHA functional classification and ECOG performance status after surgery was not significant. Conclusion: Long-term survival after pneumonectomy for lung cancer occurred in 20% and non lung cancer in 60% of patients. Non lung cancer and the slow growing lung cancer were independent predictors of long term survival. Decreases in NYHA functional classification and ECOG performance status after pneumonectomy were not significant.

Primary percutaneous coronary intervention in acute myocardial infarction at Siriraj Hospital: the improvement over time.

OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the efficacy of the acute ST segment elevation treatment guidelines in reducing the door-to-balloon time at Siriraj Hospital. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Retrospective analysis of the data and records obtained from one hundred and twenty eight patients who underwent primary percutaneous intervention for acute ST segment elevation myocardial infarction at Siriraj Hospital between June 2002 and February 2006. Control chart analysis was applied to evaluate the efficacy of the guidelines. RESULTS: The mean door-to-balloon time was consistently reduced from 243.23 minutes before to 137.13 minutes after the guidelines implementation. Control chart analysis showed that this reduction in door-to-balloon time reached statistical significance. CONCLUSION: The guidelines developed by a multidisciplinary approach could effectively reduce the door-to-balloon time.

Comparison of the efficacy between lidocaine spray plus lidocaine jelly lubrication and lidocaine jelly lubrication alone prior to nasogastric intubation: a prospective double-blind randomized controlled study.

OBJECTIVE: Although a common procedure, nasogastric (NG) intubation is also painful and unsatisfactory. Previous studies showed the benefits of local anesthesia in various forms over lubricant jelly alone, but they are rarely used due to their inconvenience and unavailability. The authors conducted a double-blind randomized controlled study to compare a commercial-available 10% lidocaine spray plus 2% lidocaine jelly lubrication and 2% lidocaine jelly lubrication alone prior to NG intubation. MATERIAL AND METHOD: Patients who fulfilled the indications for NG intubation were randomized to receive either 10% lidocaine spray or placebo (normal saline) spray to the nostril and throat prior to NG intubation. NG tubes lubricated with 2% lidocaine jelly were then inserted by experienced physicians. Physician, who sprayed, inserted the NG tubes and collected the patient's data, did not know the content of the spray, while patients were also blinded against the information of the spray. RESULTS: Sixty patients were included in the present study. Thirty one randomly received lidocaine spray and 29 received placebo spray. There were more female patients in the lidocaine group (65% vs. 28%, p=0.04), but ages, indications for NG intubation, size of NG tube, and physicians' experience in the procedure were similar in both groups. Patients' discomfort after being sprayed was also similar in both groups. However during the NG intubation, the patients in the lidocaine group experienced less pain as measured by visual analog scale (23.6 +/- 16.6 vs. 43.1 +/- 31.4 mm, p=0.005) and less discomfort (30.0 +/- 24.4 vs. 51.4 +/- 30.0 mm, p=0.004) than the placebo group. Ninety-three percent of the patients in the lidocaine group favored the same spray for their next intubations, while 65% of the placebo group did (p = 0.009). In addition, there was more physicians' satisfaction in the lidocaine group as measured by 5-point Likert scale (p=0.041). Likewise, 61% of the physicians favored lidocaine spray compared to 34.5% of the placebo spray (p=0.038). Degree of difficulty, duration of intubation, number of attempts and success rates of NG intubations were as well similar in both groups. No complications were found in the present study. CONCLUSION: 10% lidocaine spray plus 2% lidocaine jelly lubrication was more effective in relieving patients' pain, discomfort, and resulted in higher physicians' satisfaction. There were also no additional side effects as compared to 2% lidocaine jelly lubrication alone. Therefore, it should be recommended for routine application.