ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Children with sensorineural hearing loss are at risk of cardiac electrophysiologic abnormalities. Inhalational Sevoflurane induction in these children can cause QT prolongation. OBJECTIVES: In order to evaluate the safety of inhalational induction of anesthesia with sevoflurane in children with sensorineural hearing loss, who are candidates for cochlear implant, its electrophysiologic effects was compared with intravenous induction of anesthesia with propofol. METHODS: In this double-blind randomized clinical trial, 61 children aged between one and eighteen years old, who were candidates for cochlear implantation, were randomly allocated to groups receiving anesthesia with sevoflurane (n = 32) or propofol (n = 29) for induction of anesthesia. Two 12-leads ECG were taken from all of patients before and after induction and QTc, Tp-e interval, and JTc were measured and compared. RESULTS: Two cases, who had pre-induction QTc longer than 500 ms were excluded from the study. Patients had similar age (102.58 ± 87 versus 101.46 ± 67 months, P = 0.95) and gender (males: 48.3% versus 56.3%, P = 0.53) distribution. The researchers observed significant post induction difference in QTc values between these groups (propofol 422.5 ± 40, sevoflurane 445.0 ± 29, P = 0.016). There was no significant difference in the percent QTc and Tp-e changes in propofol and sevoflurane groups. Greater percentage of patients with increased Tp-e interval (> 100 ms) in the sevoflurane group than the propofol group was also seen. There was no significant long QTc difference (QTc > 500 ms or more than 60 ms increase from baseline) after induction of anesthesia in the sevoflurane group compared to the propofol group (15.6% versus 13.8%, P = 0.84). CONCLUSIONS: After electrophysiological evaluations in children with sensorineural hearing loss, in patients whose pre-induction QTc is not longer than 500 ms, propofol seems safer than inhalational sevoflurane for induction of anesthesia.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Hypotension is a common problem in general anesthesia. Maintaining the mean arterial pressure by choosing a vasopressor with minimal complications is still discussed in various surgeries. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study is comparison of ephedrine versus norepinephrine in treating anesthesia-induced hypotension in hypertensive patients in spinal surgery in a randomized double-blinded study. METHODS: This randomized, double-blinded study was approved by Iran University of Medical Sciences, operating room of medical center. Data collection was completed between Jan to Dec 2017. Inclusion criteria included age between 20 and 75 years, history of high blood pressure (a patient who has been treated for maximum 5 years with a anti hypertensive medication), and patients under general anesthesia in spinal surgery. The exclusion criteria were based on American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of 3 or higher, history of arrhythmia, heart valve disease, cerebrovascular disease, kidney failure, beta-blocker use and diabetes, as well as intra operative massive blood loss. After initiation of anesthesia, when the pressure reaches less than 60, the patient entered the protocol and simultaneously administration of 5 mL/kg serum crystalloid and vasopressor. Patients were randomized to the ephedrine group (n = 28) who received 5 mg ephedrine intravenous (i.v.) or norepinephrine Group (n = 28) who received 10 µg (i.v.) bolus norepinephrine at anesthesia-induced hypotension. The administration of 5 mL/kg serum crystalloid and vasopressor was simultaneous. If the mean arterial pressure (MAP) had not reached 60 mmHg, the same dose should be repeated at a maximum of three or more times at five-minute intervals in the ephedrine group and at two minutes intervals in the norepinephrine group. All parameters were collected before and at the end of administration anesthesia drug and during episodes of hypotension. Hemodynamic variables, frequency of hypotension, and total number of vasopressors doses during anesthesia were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: The mean number of hypotension times, the number of vasopressors doses in the first hypotension, the total number of doses consumed during the anesthesia, and heart rate at the end of anesthesia were lower in the norepinephrine group (P) respectively. MAP, 5 minutes after the first episode of hypotension and MAP at the end of anesthesia were higher in norepinephrine group. CONCLUSIONS: Norepinephrine is more effective than ephedrine in maintenance of MAP in hypertensive patients undergoing spinal surgery under general anesthesia.
ABSTRACT
Urinary system stones are the third most common disease of urinary system following urinary infection and prostate pathology. Extracorporeal shockwave lithotripsy (ESWL) is one of the methods used to treat Urolithiasis where shockwaves are transmitted through skin and body organs and crush the stones into small pieces. This is a painful procedure which usually requires analgesics. Each analgesic drug has its own advantages and disadvantages. The present research seeks to study the effectiveness of using diclofenac suppository in order to control pain and reduce need for venous drugs during ESWL procedure. This is a double blind clinical trial. 158 patients resorting to Shahid Hasheminezhad Specialized Center for ESWL were randomly selected to take part in this projects with due consideration of inclusion criteria. The patients were equally divided into the S (diclofenac suppository) and A (placebo) groups. 2 diclofenac suppositories were used in the S group 20 minutes prior to beginning ESWL. Then, ESWL was carried out in supine position using fluoroscopic conduction with standard method. The present research has studied pain scale of patients, operator's and patient's satisfaction during the operation and patient's hemodynamic parameters in three phases prior to, during, and after ESWL. SPSS v.17 was used to study the data and Chi-Square Tests and Repeated Measure ANOVA were used to analyze the results. The level of significance in the present research was set to P-value < 0.05.A review of pain scales across both groups showed that using diclofenac suppository has a significant influence in reducing the pain scale and, hence, need for venous drugs (P-value < 0.05). No significant difference was observed between the two groups in terms of heart beat and blood pressure changes in various times (P-value > 0.05). The results also report different satisfaction levels for patients and operators across the two groups (diclofenac suppository and placebo) (P-value < 0.05). Higher satisfaction levels were observed among both patients and operators in the group receiving diclofenac suppository. A general look at the data yields the conclusion that receiving pain killers (diclofenac suppository) before starting ESWL plays a more efficient role in reducing pain scales of patients and enhancing operators' satisfaction..
