BIS-guided sedation prevents the cough reaction of patients under general anaesthesia caused by extubation: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The multiple modes of SARS-CoV-2 transmission including airborne, droplet, contact and faecal-oral transmissions that cause coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) contribute to a public threat to the lives of people worldwide. Heavy aerosol production by coughing and the big peak expiratory flow in patients with respiratory infections (especially SARS-CoV-2) during recovery from general anaesthesia are the highest risk factors for infection in healthcare workers. To perform sedation before extubation significantly reduced the incidence of coughing during recovery from general anaesthesia. However, there are few studies on endotracheal tube removal under BIS-guided sedation in postanaesthesia care unit (PACU). We speculated that the BIS-guided sedation with dexmedetomidine and propofol would better prevent coughing caused by tracheal extubation and reducing peak expiratory flow. METHODS: Patients with general anaesthesia were randomly assigned to Group S (dexmedetomidine was infused in the operating room for 30 min, and the bispectral index (BIS) value was maintained 60-70 by infusion propofol at 0.5~1.5 µg/ml in the PACU until the endotracheal tubes were pulled out) and Group C (no dexmedetomidine and propofol treatment, replaced with the saline treatment). The incidence of coughing, agitation and active extubation, endotracheal tube tolerance and the peak expiratory flow at spontaneous breathing and at extubation were assessed. RESULTS: A total of 101 patients were randomly assigned to Group S (51 cases) and Group C (50 cases). The incidence of coughing, agitation and active extubation was significantly lower (1(51), 0(51) and 0(51), respectively) in Group S than (11(50), 8(50) and 5(50), respectively) in Group C (p < 0.05 or p < 0.01, respectively); the scores of cough were significantly reduced (1(1, 1)) in Group S than (1(1, 2)) in Group C (p < 0.01); and the endotracheal tube tolerance was significantly improved (0(0, 1)) in Group S than (1(1, 3)) in Group C (p < 0.001). The peak expiratory flow at spontaneous breathing and at extubation was significantly reduced (5(5, 7) and 6.5(6, 8), respectively) in Group S than (8(5, 10) and 21(9, 32)) in Group C (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: BIS-guided sedation with dexmedetomidine and propofol significantly prevented coughing and reduced peak expiratory flow during recovery from general anaesthesia, which may play an important role in preventing medical staff from contracting COVID-19. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200058429 (registration date: 09-04-2022) "retrospectively registered".

Compound lidocaine/prilocaine cream combined with tetracaine prevents cough caused by extubation after general anaesthesia: a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Coughing caused by tracheal extubation is common following general anaesthesia. Heavy aerosol production by coughing during recovery from general anaesthesia in patients with respiratory infections (especially COVID-19) may be one of the highest risk factors for infection in healthcare workers. The application of local anaesthetics to the endotracheal tube is an effective method to reduce coughing. The most commonly used anaesthetics are compound lidocaine/prilocaine cream and tetracaine spray. However, coughing still occurs when the two anaesthetics are used alone. We speculated that the application of compound lidocaine/prilocaine combined with tetracaine spray would better prevent coughing caused by tracheal extubation. METHODS: Patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy or cholecystectomy combined with common bile duct exploration under general anaesthesia were randomly assigned to Group C (saline spray), Group L (2 g compound lidocaine/prilocaine cream contains 5 mg of lidocaine and 5 mg prilocaine)), Group T (tetracaine) and Group F (compound lidocaine/prilocaine cream combined with tetracaine). The incidence of coughing, the endotracheal tube tolerance assessment, the incidence of agitation, the active extubation rate, the incidence of postoperative pharyngeal pain and the incidence of postoperative cough were recorded and analysed. Systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), heart rate (HR), and the plasma concentrations of epinephrine and norepinephrine were measured immediately before extubation and 1 min after extubation. RESULTS: A total of 211 patients were randomly assigned to Group C (53 cases), Group L (52 cases), Group T (52 cases) and Group F (54 cases). The primary result is assessment of the incidence of cough. The patients emerged from general anaesthesia, 96% of Group C had cough, which was significantly reduced in Group L (61.5%, P < 0.001), Group T (75%, P < 0.05) and Group F (22.2%, P < 0.001). Group F had a significantly reduced incidence of cough compared to Group L and Group T (P < 0.05 or P < 0.01, respectively). The secondary results were assessed. The endotracheal tube tolerance score in Group C ((1, 3) 4, P < 0.001) was higher than Group L ((0, 1) 2), Group T ((0, 1.25) 3) and Group F ((0, 0) 1). Group F had a significantly lower score than Group L and Group T (P < 0.05, P < 0.01, respectively). The incidence of agitation and the active extubation rate were also higher in Group C (96.2% and 71.7%, respectively, P < 0.001) than Group L (48.1% and 15.4%, respectively), Group T (61.5% and 26.9%, respectively) and Group F (17.3% and 7.7%, respectively). Blood pressure, HR and plasma concentrations of epinephrine and norepinephrine were significantly higher in Group C than in all other groups at the time of extubation and 1 min after extubation (P < 0.001). Group F exhibited significantly reduced blood pressure, heart rate and plasma concentrations of epinephrine and norepinephrine compared to Group L and Group T (P < 0.05, P < 0.01 or P < 0.001, respectively). The incidence of postoperative pharyngeal pain and the incidence of postoperative cough were not significantly different among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Compound lidocaine/prilocaine cream combined with tetracaine may be a more effective approach for preventing coughing and stabilising circulation during extubation following general anaesthesia. This may play an important role in preventing medical staff from contracting respiratory infectious diseases. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Chinese Clinical Trial Registry: ChiCTR2200058429 (registration date: 09-04-2022) "retrospectively registered".

Application of Internet-based multidisciplinary management in patients with genitourinary cancers in China: A brief introduction to a new model of healthcare service for cancer survivors during COVID-19 pandemic.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has triggered multiple global healthcare system crises. Apart from the pandemic itself, the travel restriction and social distance policy for the purpose of epidemic control has cast a shadow on the management of cancer survivors. Cancer survivors suffered a double blow from both the epidemic and cancer. To deal with the challenge, we explored a new Internet-based patient management model. This model has overcome the limitation of time and space and thus can help oncologists to provide remote multidisciplinary healthcare services for cancer survivors. These patients can get high-quality cancer management from multidisciplinary experts without too much transportation. This model has been applied in patients with genitourinary cancers and proved to be effective and efficient. Our study demonstrated that more patients benefited from this model during the pandemic of COVID-19, especially in those affected heavily by COVID-19. These results suggested that it can also give insight into the management of other cancer survivors in China. Given the long-term impact of the COVID-19 pandemic, we would like to introduce our new model of healthcare service and the application of Internet-based multidisciplinary management to our global peers and medical industries to help their cancer survivors who are delayed in treatment due to the COVID-19 pandemic.

Prediction of drug-likeness using graph convolutional attention network.

MOTIVATION: The drug-likeness has been widely used as a criterion to distinguish drug-like molecules from non-drugs. Developing reliable computational methods to predict the drug-likeness of compounds is crucial to triage unpromising molecules and accelerate the drug discovery process. RESULTS: In this study, a deep learning method was developed to predict the drug-likeness based on the graph convolutional attention network (D-GCAN) directly from molecular structures. Results showed that the D-GCAN model outperformed other state-of-the-art models for drug-likeness prediction. The combination of graph convolution and attention mechanism made an important contribution to the performance of the model. Specifically, the application of the attention mechanism improved accuracy by 4.0%. The utilization of graph convolution improved the accuracy by 6.1%. Results on the dataset beyond Lipinski's rule of five space and the non-US dataset showed that the model had good versatility. Then, the billion-scale GDB-13 database was used as a case study to screen SARS-CoV-2 3C-like protease inhibitors. Sixty-five drug candidates were screened out, most substructures of which are similar to these of existing oral drugs. Candidates screened from S-GDB13 have higher similarity to existing drugs and better molecular docking performance than those from the rest of GDB-13. The screening speed on S-GDB13 is significantly faster than screening directly on GDB-13. In general, D-GCAN is a promising tool to predict the drug-likeness for selecting potential candidates and accelerating drug discovery by excluding unpromising candidates and avoiding unnecessary biological and clinical testing. AVAILABILITY AND IMPLEMENTATION: The source code, model and tutorials are available at https://github.com/JinYSun/D-GCAN. The S-GDB13 database is available at https://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.7054367. SUPPLEMENTARY INFORMATION: Supplementary data are available at Bioinformatics online.

Bibliometric Analysis on COVID-19: A Comparison of Research Between English and Chinese Studies.

Background: As an emerging infectious disease, COVID-19 has garnered great research interest. We aimed to explore the differences between English language and Chinese language Medical/Scientific journals publications, particularly aiming to explore the efficacy/contents of the literature published in English and Chinese in relation to the outcomes of management and characterization of COVID-19 during the early stage of COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: Publications on COVID-19 research were retrieved from both English and Chinese databases. Bibliometric analyses were performed using VOSviewer 1.6.14, and CiteSpace V software. Network maps were generated to evaluate the collaborations between different authors, countries/provinces, and institutions. Results: A total of 143 English and 721 Chinese original research articles and reviews on COVID-19 were included in our study. Most of the authors and institutions of the papers were from China before March 1st, 2020, however, the distribution of authors and institutions were mainly in developed countries or more wealthy areas of China. The range of the keywords in English publications was more extensive than those in Chinese. Traditional Chinese Medicine was seen more frequently in Chinese papers than in English. Of the 143 articles published in English, 54 articles were published by Chinese authors only and 21 articles were published jointly by Chinese and other overseas authors. Conclusions: The publications in English have enabled medical practitioners and scientists to share/exchange information, while on the other hand, the publications in the Chinese language have provided complementary educational approaches for the local medical practitioners to understand the essential and key information to manage COVID-19 in the relatively remote regions of China, for the general population with a general level of education.