ABSTRACT
Methods@#The study included 60 patients graded American Society of Anesthesiologists I and II and scheduled for thoracolumbar spine surgery involving >3 vertebral levels. The patients were divided into two groups: group KD (ketodex) and group F (fentanyl). The primary objective was to compare the postoperative analgesic requirements among the groups. The secondary objectives included a comparison of the intraoperative anesthetic requirements, postoperative pain scores, hemodynamic parameters, side effects of the study drugs, and the duration of post-anesthesia care unit stay of both the groups. @*Results@#Ketodex use prolonged the mean time to first rescue analgesia (22.00±2.30 hours vs. 11.69±3.02 hours, p 0.05). The postoperative pain scores were significantly lower in the group KD than in group F at most timepoints (p 3 vertebral levels to achieve prolonged analgesia without any opioidrelated side effects.
ABSTRACT
India is one of the world抯 worst affected countries due to COVID-19 pandemic. The world is struglling to fight agaisnt centuries pandmemic. Globally goverments have been imposed lockdown and restrictions to control situation and minimise spread of infection. Social media was found the most practical and efficiant mediam to share information and opnions about pandmemic. At time of social distancing, social media helped people to share their feelings and find support. Same time overuse of social media palteform created panic and misinformation across countries. People sharing unconfirmed information about covid pandmemic and goverments were found it difficult to handle
ABSTRACT
Study DesignThis was a prospective, randomized, and double-blind study.PurposeThoraco-lumbar spine surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain and can cause chronic pain. We aimed to compare the impact of epidural ropivacaine with and without dexmedetomidine on postoperative analgesia after thoracolumbar spine instrumentation wherein an epidural catheter was placed by the surgeon intraoperatively.Overview of LiteratureVery few studies have reported the use of epidural dexmedetomidine in spine surgeries. When used via the epidural route, dexmedetomidine is safe and efficacious and is associated with reduced rescue analgesia consumption, increased duration of analgesia, reduced pain scores, but not with major hemodynamic adverse effects.MethodsTotal 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists I–III adult patients aged 18–65 years who were scheduled to undergo thoraco-lumbar spine instrumentation were randomly allocated into group RD (epidural ropivacaine+dexmedetomidine) or group R (epidural ropivacaine plus saline). We aimed to compare the total rescue analgesic consumption on postoperative day 0, 1, and 2. Moreover, we studied the time to first rescue analgesia with visual analogue scale score ResultsThere was no difference between the demographic characteristics of the two groups. The mean value of total rescue analgesia consumption was 162.5±68.4 mg in the RD group and 247.5±48.8 mg in the R group. The mean time to first rescue analgesia was 594.6±83.0 minutes in the RD group and 103.6±53.2 minutes in the R group. The mean patient satisfaction score was 4.2±0.7 in the RD group and 3.2±0.6 in the R group. No patient had any respiratory depression or prolonged motor blockade during the postoperative period.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated the superior efficacy, in terms of postoperative analgesia and patient satisfaction scores, of epidural ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine over that of ropivacaine alone in patients undergoing surgery for thoraco-lumbar spine.
ABSTRACT
Study DesignThis was a prospective, randomized, and double-blind study.PurposeThoraco-lumbar spine surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain and can cause chronic pain. We aimed to compare the impact of epidural ropivacaine with and without dexmedetomidine on postoperative analgesia after thoracolumbar spine instrumentation wherein an epidural catheter was placed by the surgeon intraoperatively.Overview of LiteratureVery few studies have reported the use of epidural dexmedetomidine in spine surgeries. When used via the epidural route, dexmedetomidine is safe and efficacious and is associated with reduced rescue analgesia consumption, increased duration of analgesia, reduced pain scores, but not with major hemodynamic adverse effects.MethodsTotal 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists I–III adult patients aged 18–65 years who were scheduled to undergo thoraco-lumbar spine instrumentation were randomly allocated into group RD (epidural ropivacaine+dexmedetomidine) or group R (epidural ropivacaine plus saline). We aimed to compare the total rescue analgesic consumption on postoperative day 0, 1, and 2. Moreover, we studied the time to first rescue analgesia with visual analogue scale score ResultsThere was no difference between the demographic characteristics of the two groups. The mean value of total rescue analgesia consumption was 162.5±68.4 mg in the RD group and 247.5±48.8 mg in the R group. The mean time to first rescue analgesia was 594.6±83.0 minutes in the RD group and 103.6±53.2 minutes in the R group. The mean patient satisfaction score was 4.2±0.7 in the RD group and 3.2±0.6 in the R group. No patient had any respiratory depression or prolonged motor blockade during the postoperative period.ConclusionsThis study demonstrated the superior efficacy, in terms of postoperative analgesia and patient satisfaction scores, of epidural ropivacaine plus dexmedetomidine over that of ropivacaine alone in patients undergoing surgery for thoraco-lumbar spine.
ABSTRACT
Objectives: Hypotensive anesthesia is necessary during endoscopic sinus surgery to achieve a bloodless surgical field. The aim of this study was to compare the quality of surgical field using propofol or desflurane anesthesia
Methodology: 40 patients of either sex, belonging to ASA physical status I and II, and age group of 18 - 60 years were randomized into two groups to receive either propofol and morphine or desflurane and morphine anesthesia. The target mean arterial pressure [MAP] was kept in a range of 65-75 mmHg. The quality of surgical field was assessed by using a validated scoring system [Fromme category scale] at every 15 min by the same surgeon in all the cases to avoid surgeon's bias
Results: The mean category scale value was 2.665 +/- 0.243 in propofol group and 2.200 +/- 0.410 in desflurane group [p=0.000]. The time to emergence was significantly less in desflurane group [9.35 +/- 1.27] as compared to propofol group [14.60 +/- 2.06 min]
Conclusion: We conclude that both the propofol and desflurane can be used to achieve a satisfactory surgical field quality but desflurane provides a rapid emergence as compared to propofol