Fentanyl supplement expedites the onset time of sensory and motor blocking in interscalene lidocaine anesthesia

Opioids are usually used in regional anesthesia, with or without local anesthetics to improve the regional block or postoperative pain control. Since no data are available on fentanyl's effect on the onset time of lidocaine interscalene anesthesia, the purpose of this study was to examine its effect on the onset time of sensory and motor blockade during interscalene anesthesia. In a prospective, randomized, double-blind study, ninety patients scheduled for elective shoulder, arm and forearm surgeries under an interscalene brachial plexus block .They were randomly allocated to receive either 30 ml of 1.5% lidocaine with 1.5 ml of isotonic saline [control group, n = 39] or 30 ml of 1.5% lidocaine with 1.5 ml [75 micro g] of fentanyl [fentanyl group, n = 41]. Then the onset time of sensory and motor blockades of the shoulder, arm and forearm were evaluated every 60 sec. The onset time of the sensory and motor blockades was defined as the time between the last injection and the total abolition of the pinprick response and complete paralysis. The duration of sensory blocks were considered as the time interval between the administration of the local anesthetic and the first postoperative pain sensation. Ten patients were excluded because of unsuccessful blockade or unbearable pain during the surgery. The onset time of the sensory block was significantly faster in the fentanyl group [186.54 +/- 62.71sec] compared with the control group [289.51 +/- 81.22, P < 0.01]. The onset times of the motor block up to complete paralysis in forearm flexion was significantly faster in the fentanyl group [260.61 +/- 119.91sec] than the control group [367.08 +/- 162.43sec, P < 0.01]. There was no difference in the duration of the sensory block between two groups. Results of the study showed that the combination of 75 micro g fentanyl and 1.5% lidocaine solution accelerated the onset of sensory and motor blockade during interscalene anesthesia

Recycling of used bottle grade poly ethyleneterephthalate to nanofibers by Melt-electrospinnig method

Used PET bottles disposal is an unsolved environmental problem, and there are many efforts for finding an applicable solution for it. Many researches have showed that the degradation rate of the polymers increase with the smaller size of fibers. This work was carried out to convert used PET bottles into nanofibers by melt-electrospinning method. Uncolored, washed and chipped PET bottles and the PET granule was used for experiments. The temperature of melted PET at extruder nozzle and spinning area were set in the range of 245-255 [degree sign] C and 200-235 [degree sign] C respectively. The melting point of the polymer was determined by DSC. The potential difference was fixed at 25 kV and the distance between the nozzle and the collector were 3-9 cm. the morphology and fineness of produced fibers investigated by SEM. Although the producing fibers were not completely in the rang of nano-size fibers, but the results have showed that the nanofibers with diameter between 61-93 nm can be achieved by the melt-electro spinning method. Comparing the effects of different flow rates of melting polymer as well as the distance between the nozzle to the collector have shown more proportion of finer fibers in flow rate less than 0.1 mL/min and the distance in the range of 3-5 cm. it was concluded however the melt electrospinning production of nanofibers has some difficulties but it can be considered as an applicable and environmental friendly way to recycling the used PET bottles so it can prevent more pollution of the environment

Comparison of the analgesic profile and side effectts of tramadol vs pethidine followingurological surgery

The optimization of pain management following surgery with minimal side effects, is one the major goals of surgical and medical teams. In this randomized double blind study, sixty ASA [American Society of Anesthesiologist] class I or II patients, undergoing urological surgery, were assessed to receive either pethidine or tramadol using a standard method for general anesthesia. Pain intensity was assessed by verbal rating, through a 4-step scaling system. Results of this investigation have revealed that the mean total drug administered in tramadol group were 244.53 + 56.95 mg and in pethidine group 176.78+42.99 mg respectively. There were no significant differences in analgesic effect, observed in either group during early hours following surgery, but after 8,12 and 16 hours significant differences were observed. Analgesic properties of tramadol were almost comparable with pethidine nevertheless; pethidine was superior in some extent. No significant differences in patient's PaO2 were found, but PaCO2 at 1 and 4 hours after surgery had a greater retention in pethidine group. [P<0.001]. There was a significant reduction in respiratory rate in pethidine group at 4,8,12 and 16 hours following surgery, compared with tramadol group [P<0.001]. Incidence of dizziness was greater in patients who received pethidine [P<0.001], and sweating was higher in tramadol group [P<0.01]. Also there was a greater need for metoclopramide to overcome nausea in tramadol group [P<0.05]. Results of this study may suggest that tramadol could be considered as a safe and effective analgesic, following urological surgery as compared with pethidine