Effect of Radiofrequency on Dorsal Root Ganglion Versus Transforaminal Steroids Injection on Tumor Necrosis Factor-Alpha Level in Lumbar Radicular Pain.

BACKGROUND: The mechanism of pain control with pulsed radiofrequency (PRF) is unclear. OBJECTIVES: We aimed to compare the efficacy of combined PRF on dorsal root ganglion (DRG) with transforaminal epidural steroid injection (TFESI) vs TFESI-alone on pain improvement and serum tumor necrosis factor-alpha (TNF-a) level in lumbar disc-related radicular pain. STUDY DESIGN: Prospective, randomized, controlled trial. SETTING: Neurology and Pain Management clinics. METHODS: A total of 80 patients with lumbar disc prolapse were divided into 2 groups: combined PRF on DRG with TFESI group and TFESI-alone group. The Numeric Rating Scale (NRS-11), Oswestry Disability Index (ODI), and Functional Rating Index (FRI) before intervention and at 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months after the intervention were observed. Serum TNF-a level was assessed pre- and post-intervention at 3 months. RESULTS: The scores of NRS-11, ODI, and FRI showed a significant improvement at 2 weeks, 1 month, and 3 months following intervention in both combined PRF & TFESI group and TFESI-alone group (P < 0.001 in all comparisons), with no significant difference between the 2 groups. Serum TNF-a levels showed a statistically significant reduction, 3 months following intervention in the combined PRF & TFESI group (P < 0.001), but not in the TFESI-alone group (P = 0.297) (P between groups < 0.001). LIMITATIONS: The main limitation of this study is that TNF-a level was not assessed earlier to see how long the steroids might reduce TNF-a. On the other hand, further study with extended follow-up periods is needed to confirm the long-term lowering effect of TNF-a provided by PRF. CONCLUSIONS: Combined PRF on DRG with TFESI showed similar outcomes to TFESI-alone in relieving pain in patients with lumbar disc prolapse. However, PRF on DRG caused a significant decrease in TNF-a serum levels at 3 months.

Comparative effect of deliberate hypotensive anesthesia using nitroglycerine vs. phentolamine on event related potentials and cognitive functions in patients undergoing septoplasty: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative cognitive dysfunction is a noteworthy complication of deliberate hypotensive anesthesia. The aim of this work was to compare the effect of deliberate hypotensive anesthesia using nitroglycerine versus phentolamine on event-related potentials and cognitive function in patients undergoing septoplasty surgery. METHODS: This prospective randomized controlled trial was conducted on 80 patients indicated for septoplasty under general anesthesia; 40 patients received intra-operative Nitroglycerine and 40 patients received intra-operative Phentolamine. Cognitive assessment (using Paired Associate Learning test (PALT) and Benton Visual Retention test (BVRT)) and P300 recording were done for all included patients pre-operatively and one week postoperatively. RESULTS: The scores of PALT and Benton BVRT significantly declined one week following surgery in both Nitroglycerine and Phentolamine groups. There was no statistically significant difference between Nitroglycerine and Phentolamine groups in the postoperative decline in either PALT or BVRT (P-value = 0.342, 0.662 respectively). The values of P300 latency showed a significant delay one week following surgery in both Nitroglycerine and Phentolamine groups (P-value ≤ 0.001, 0.001), but in Nitroglycerine group, the delay is significantly higher than in Phentolamine group (P-value = 0.003). The values of P300 amplitude significantly decreased one week following surgery in both Nitroglycerine and Phentolamine groups (P-value ≤ 0.001, 0.001), but there was no statistically significant difference between Nitroglycerine and Phentolamine groups (P-value = 0.099). CONCLUSION: Phentolamine is preferred over nitroglycerin in deliberate hypotensive anesthesia because it has less harmful effect on cognitive function than nitroglycerin.

A Randomized Controlled Trial for Prevention of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting after Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: Aprepitant/Dexamethasone vs. Mirtazapine/Dexamethasone.

Background: Coadministration of different antiemetics proved to decrease postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (LSG). This trial compared aprepitant/dexamethasone (A/D) combination vs mirtazapine/dexamethasone (M/D) combination vs dexamethasone (D) alone for prevention of PONV in morbidly obese patients undergoing LSG. Methods: Ninety patients scheduled for LSG were randomly allocated to receive 8 mg dexamethasone intravenous infusion (IVI) only in the D group or in addition to 80 mg aprepitant capsule in the A/D group or in addition to 30 mg mirtazapine tablet in the M/D group. Assessment of PONV was carried out at 0-2 h (early) and 2-24 h (late). The primary outcome was the complete response 0-24 h after surgery. Collective PONV, postoperative pain, side effects and patient satisfaction score were considered as secondary outcomes. Results: The A/D and M/D groups were superior to the D group for a complete response within 0-24 h after surgery (79.3% for the A/D group, 78.6% for the M/D group, and 20.7% for the D group). The D group was inferior to the A/D and M/D groups regarding collective PONV and use of rescue antiemetic 0-24 h after surgery (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively). The peak nausea scores (2-24 h) were significantly reduced in the M/D group in comparison to the D group (P=0.005). Patients in the M/D group showed high sedation scores, while those in the A/D group showed low pain scores (2-24 h) and less analgesic requirements (P < 0.001, P < 0.001, P < 0.001, respectively). The A/D and M/D groups were superior to the D group with regard to the patient satisfaction score (P < 0.001). Conclusion: Aprepitant/dexamethasone combination and mirtazapine/dexamethasone combination were superior to dexamethasone alone in alleviating postoperative nausea and vomiting in morbidly obese patients scheduled to undergo laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT04013386.

Non-invasive Assessment of Intravascular Volume Status for Postoperative Patients: The Correlation Between the Internal Jugular Vein/Common Carotid Artery Cross-sectional Area Ratio and the Inferior Vena Cava Diameter.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to assess the correlation between the internal jugular vein/common carotid artery (IJV/CCA) cross-sectional area (CSA) ratio and the inferior vena cava (IVC) diameter as non-invasive techniques for the assessment of intravascular volume. METHODS: The study samples included 35 adult patients of both sexes (age range: 20 - 60 years) according to the criteria of the American Society of Anaesthesiology (ASA) physical status II - III, who were admitted to the surgical intensive care unit (SICU) after major surgeries for the assessment of intravascular volume status. RESULTS: There was a positive correlation between the IJV/CCA CSA ratio and the IVC maximum and minimum diameter before and after fluid infusion (r = 0.923, P < 0.001 and r = 0.390, P = 0.021, respectively) and between the IJV/CCA CSA ratio at inspiration and the IVC minimum diameter before and after fluid infusion (r = 0.605, P < 0.001 and r = 0.496, P < 0.001, respectively). The sensitivity and specificity analysis of the IJV/CCA CSA during inspiration after fluid correction to predict a central venous pressure (CVP) of 8 - 12 cmH2O showed that at a ratio of 2.56, the highest sensitivity was 56.5%, and the specificity was 83.3%; at a ratio of 2.58, the highest sensitivity was 65.2% and the specificity was 75%. During expiration, at a ratio of 2.62, the highest sensitivity was 52.2%, and the specificity was 67%; and at a ratio of 2.65, the sensitivity was 56.5%, and the specificity was 50%. CONCLUSIONS: The assessment of the IJV/CCA CSA ratio using bedside ultrasound could be a non-invasive tool for the evaluation of intravascular volume status in spontaneously breathing adult patients after major surgeries.

Impact of duloxetine and dexamethasone for improving postoperative pain after laparoscopic gynecological surgeries: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients' surgical experiences are influenced by their perception of pain management. Duloxetine (Dulox) and dexamethasone (Dex) are used in multimodal analgesia to reduce opioid use and side effects. Dulox is a selective serotonin and norepinephrine reuptake inhibitor and has efficacy in chronic pain conditions. Dex enhances postoperative (PO) analgesia and reduces PO nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: Seventy-five female patients were randomly allocated into one of three equal groups. GI received Dulox 60 mg orally and 100 ml 0.9% sodium chloride (normal saline [NS]) intravenous infusion (IVI) over 15 min, GII: received as GI except Dex 0.1 mg/kg was mixed with NS and GIII received identical placebo for Dulox capsule and Dex IVI, 2 h preoperatively. Patients' vitals, visual analog scale (VAS), and sedation score were assessed at 30 min, 1 h, 2 h, 6 h, and 12 h postoperatively. Total pethidine requirements, plasma cortisol, PONV, and patients satisfaction were recorded. RESULTS: PO time for 1st rescue analgesic was significantly high in GI and GII compared to GIII and in GII compared to GI. There was a significant less VAS score, heart rate, mean arterial pressure, and a high sedation score in GI and GII compared to GIII at 30 min, 1, 2, and 6 h postoperatively. Total pethidine requirements were significantly less in GI and GII compared to GIII 12 h postoperatively. There was a significant reduction in the 2 h PO serum cortisol (µg/dl) and a significant increase in the PO patients satisfaction score in GI and GII compared to GIII. PONV was decreased significantly in GII compared to GI and GIII. CONCLUSION: The use of oral Dulox 60 mg combined with Dex 0.1 mg/kg IVI is more effective than oral Dulox 60 mg alone, 2 h preoperatively, for improving PO pain by reducing the requirements for rescue analgesia and PONV.