Comparison of the Success Rate of Laryngeal Mask Air Way Insertion in Classic & Rotatory Methods in Pediatric Patients Undergoing General Anesthesia.

BACKGROUND: Laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is frequently used as a replacement method for endotracheal intubation. Few studies have investigated placement of laryngeal mask airway in pediatric surgical patients. In the present study, we aimed at comparing the success rate of 2 techniques, classic versus rotational, in the correct placement of laryngeal mask airway in pediatric patients. METHODS: After obtaining approval from the research committee of Faculty of Medicine, and receiving clearance from the ethics board of the University, this randomized controlled clinical trial (RCT) was administered on children of 2 months to 8 years with ASA class I & II undergoing lower abdominal surgical procedures in Motahari hospital in Urmia. General anesthesia using muscle relaxant was the preferred anesthesia technique for all the patients. Demographic data were recorded. Success rate, number of trials for correct placement, cuff leak pressure, and blood stain on the cuff of the laryngeal mask airway after its removal were all recorded. RESULTS: In the present study, 116 children were evaluated and placed into 2 groups. According to the results of the t test, no significant effect of age, weight, or average number of trials in mask placement was observed between the 2 groups (P > 0.05). According to the results of the Fisher's exact test, no significant difference was detected between the 2 groups in blood staining on the cuff (P > 0.05); no leak was recorded in any of the LMA placement methods (classic or rotational). CONCLUSIONS: Both insertion techniques work well in pediatric surgical patients. Success rate and complications were comparable between the 2 groups.

Evaluating the quality of intravenous regional anesthesia following adding dexamethasone to lidocaine.

OBJECTIVES: The quality of anesthesia in intravenous regional anesthesia (IVRA) has been evaluated in many studies so far. This study was designed to evaluate the effects of adding the dexamethasone to lidocaine on the quality of IVRA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A double-blind clinical trial was set up involving 50 hand surgery candidates, 20 to 55 years old, and with American Society of Anesthesiologists class of I and II. Patients were randomly allocated into two groups of 25 cases and received either 3 mg/kg of lidocaine (control group) or 3 mg/kg of lidocaine plus 8 mg of dexamethasone (study group). The onset and recovery times from sensory and motor blocks, the starting time of tourniquet pain, the amount of narcotics needed during patients' recovery, and probable side-effects were all compared between the two groups. RESULTS: No significant differences were detected concerning age, gender, length of surgery and the mean time of starting of tourniquet pain between the two groups. The mean times of both sensory (P = 0.002) and motor (P = 0.004) blocks onset were significantly shorter in the study group. The mean time of recovery from sensory block was significantly longer in the study group (P = 0.01). The average amount of narcotics needed during the recovery was significantly lower in the study group (P = 0.01). No side-effect was detected. CONCLUSION: We conclude that adding the dexamethasone to lidocaine can improve the quality of anesthesia in IVRA.