RÉSUMÉ
Regional analgesia features a prime role within the multimodal analgesia approach for surgical pain management. currently each day it's common apply of using transverses abdominis plane block (TAP Block) with numerous sorts of native anaesthetics and adjuvants, as a multimodal pain relieving remedy used worldwide for intra and postoperative pain management in several surgeries. However, only a few studies are done wherever hemodyanamics effects when bupivacaine versus levobupivacaine have compared. Aim of this study to examine the consequences of bupivacaine vs levobupivacaine in patients undergoing lower abdominal surgeries and their effects on hemodynamics ( the blood pressure, HR, and SpO2). Method: A randomised double-blind management study conducted when approval from IEC Ref. code-92nd IIB Thesis / P4 . The study has fifty patients, with ASA I – II physical status, as well as each sex and 2-10 years cluster age and who set up for abdominal surgery notably lower abdominal . 25 patients set in every group and every which way allotted: cluster Bupiva and Levobupiva . All patients were well well-read regarding the procedure, drugs, and effects of drugs, and untoward complications. well-read written consent was taken from each patient before involving them within the study. primary objective is to examine the impact of those medicine on Blood pressure, HR, and SPO2 & Secondary objective was to check rescue physiological condition reduction within the surgical period. After the comparison between these 2 clusters, The mean SBP of group Bupiva was found below that of group Levobupiva . and located to be important at fifteen min, one hour, a pair of hr, and four hr and insignificant at baseline zero min, thirty min, half dozen hr (p=0.092), twelve hr, eighteen hr, and twenty four h.differences is insignificant in comparison the DBP at any purpose of your time from baseline to 24 hr. On comparing the center rate, variations were found insignificant from baseline (p = 0.897), 0 min (p = 0.651), 30 min (p = 0.096), 1hr (p = 0.192), 2 hr (p=0.390), four hour (p=0.525), half dozen hr (p=0.469), twelve hr (p=0.443), eighteen hr (p=0.288) to twenty four hr (p=0. 390) except at fifteen min (p=0.010) that was the mean pulse rate of cluster Bupiva is over that of group Levobupiva at one,5 min. On comparison the SPO2differences were insignificant at baseline (p = 0.620), 15 min (p = 0.108), thirty min (p=0.353), 1 hr (p = 0.789), 2 hr (p = 0.364), 4 hr (p = 0.292) and 6 hr (p = 0. 198) however important at 0 min (p = 0.002), 12hr (p = 0.012), 18hr (p = 0.002) and24 hr (p = 0.028) wherever the mean SPO2 of cluster Bupiva was abundant below the group Levobupiva. Stable hemodynamics for a extended period were provided by Levobupivacaine as compared to Bupivacaine.
RÉSUMÉ
Background: Appendicitis is the most commonly performed emergency abdominal surgery. An accurate and timely diagnosis of acute appendicitis remains a challenge. Objective: This study was performed to determine and correlate between the clinical patterns of acute appendicitis, laboratory and ultrasound findings and pathology found in appendicectomy specimens to help timely diagnosis and reduce negative appendicectomy rate. Methods: This is a cross sectional study, detailed history and clinical examination of the patient was carried out at the time of admission. Operative findings along with any complications as well as histopathological findings were recorded. Patients were followed up for one month for any complications. Results: A total of 125 patients were treated for appendicitis during this period with a male female ratio of 1:1.36. Most common age group was the 2nd decade with mean age being 20 years, while most common symptom was abdominal pain. Ultrasonography showed evidence of acute appendicitis in 85.6% and leucocytosis in 66.4% cases. Although only 5.6% of appendices grossly appeared normal during surgery, histopathology showed 14.4% to be normal. Wound sepsis (24.8%) was the most common post-operative complication. Conclusion: Diagnosis of acute appendicitis in our setting is still based on high index of suspicion following clinical evaluation. Combining this with laboratory findings and ultrasound scan has yielded an acceptable negative appendicectomy rate. We advocate routine use of ultrasound along with clinical evaluation and laboratory tests for the timely diagnosis of acute appendicitis and an early surgical intervention to prevent complications.