Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 4 de 4
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Korean J Anesthesiol ; 77(1): 85-94, 2024 Feb.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37679899

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Among the various diaphragm-sparing alternatives to interscalene block, costoclavicular block (CCB) demonstrated a low hemidiaphragmatic paresis (HDP) occurrence but an inconsistent analgesic effect in arthroscopic shoulder surgery. We hypothesized that a larger volume of local anesthetic for CCB could provide sufficient analgesia by achieving sufficient supraclavicular spreading. METHODS: Sixty patients scheduled for arthroscopic rotator cuff repair were randomly assigned to receive CCB using one of two volumes of local anesthetic (CCB20, 0.75% ropivacaine 20 ml; CCB40, 0.375% ropivacaine 40 ml). The primary outcome was the rate of complete analgesia (0 on the numeric rating scale of pain) at 1 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included a sonographic assessment of local anesthetic spread, diaphragmatic function, pulmonary function, postoperative opioid use, and other pain-related experiences within 24 h postoperatively. RESULTS: The rates of complete analgesia were not significantly different (23.3% [7/30] and 33.3% [10/30] in the CCB20 and CCB40 groups, respectively; risk difference 10%, 95% CI [-13, 32], P = 0.567). There were no significant differences in other pain-related outcomes. Among the clinical factors considered, the only factor significantly associated with postoperative pain was the sonographic observation of supraclavicular spreading. There were no significant differences in the incidence of HDP and the change in pulmonary function between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Using 40 ml of local anesthetic does not guarantee supraclavicular spread during CCB. Moreover, it does not result in a higher rate of complete analgesia compared to using 20 ml of local anesthetic in arthroscopic shoulder surgery.


Subject(s)
Anesthetics, Local , Shoulder , Humans , Shoulder/surgery , Ropivacaine , Analgesics , Pain, Postoperative/etiology , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control
2.
Medicina (Kaunas) ; 59(3)2023 Mar 20.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36984614

ABSTRACT

Background and Objectives: Sevoflurane has opposing effects on cancer progression, depending on its concentration and the cancer type. This study investigated the effects of sevoflurane on the proliferation of A549 lung cancer cells. Materials and Methods: In vitro, the number of A549 cells exposed to different concentrations of sevoflurane was counted. The size and weight of tumors from a xenograft mouse model exposed to air or sevoflurane were measured in vivo experiments. Additionally, hematoxylin and eosin staining and immunohistochemical detection of Ki-67 in the harvested tumor tissues were performed. Results: A total of 72 culture dishes were used and 24 dishes were assigned to each group: Air group; 2% Sevo group (air + 2% sevoflurane); and 4% Sevo group (air + 4% sevoflurane). The number of A549 cells in the 2% Sevo group was less than that in the Air and 4% Sevo groups (Air: 7.9 ± 0.5; 0.5, 2% Sevo: 6.8 ± 0.4, 4% Sevo: 8.1 ± 0.3; p = 0.000). The tumor size was not significantly different between the two groups (Air: 1.5 ± 0.7, 2% Sevo: 2.4 ± 1.9; p = 0.380). Conclusions: The in vitro data showed that sevoflurane inhibited the proliferation of A549 lung cancer cells in a concentration-specific manner. However, the in vivo data showed no correlation between sevoflurane exposure and A549 cell proliferation. Thus, further research is required to understand fully the effects of sevoflurane on cancer progression and to reconcile differences between the in vitro and in vivo experimental results.


Subject(s)
Lung Neoplasms , Humans , Animals , Mice , Sevoflurane/pharmacology , A549 Cells , Lung Neoplasms/drug therapy , Cell Proliferation
3.
BMC Anesthesiol ; 23(1): 8, 2023 01 07.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36609229

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Blood pressure measurement is an essential element during intraoperative patient management. However, errors caused by changes in transducer levels can occur during surgery. METHODS: This single center, prospective, observational study enrolled 25 consecutive patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgery with invasive arterial and central venous pressure (CVP) monitoring. Hydrostatic pressures caused by level differences (leveling pressure) between a reference point (on the center of the left biceps brachii muscle) and the transducers (fixed on the right side of the operating table) for arterial and central lines were continuously measured using a leveling transducer. Adjusted pressures were calculated as measured pressure - leveling pressure. Hypotension (mean arterial pressure < 80, <70, and < 60 mmHg), and CVP (< 6, ≥6 and < 15, or ≥ 15 mmHg) and pulmonary artery pressure (PAP, mean > 20 mmHg) levels were determined using unadjusted and adjusted pressures. RESULTS: Twenty-two patients were included in the analysis. Leveling pressure ≥ 3 mmHg and ≥ 5 mmHg observed at 46.0 and 18.7% of pooled data points, respectively. Determinations of hypotension using unadjusted and adjusted pressures showed disagreements ranging from 3.3 to 9.4% depending on the cutoffs. Disagreements in defined levels of CVP and PAP were observed at 23.0 and 17.2% of the data points, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: The errors in pressure measurement due to changes in transducer level were not trivial and caused variable disagreements in the determination of MAP, CVP, and PAP levels. To prevent distortions in intraoperative hemodynamic management, strategies should be sought to minimize or adjust for these errors in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION: cris.nih.go.kr (KCT0006510).


Subject(s)
Cardiac Surgical Procedures , Hypotension , Humans , Adult , Central Venous Pressure/physiology , Transducers, Pressure , Prospective Studies , Cardiac Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Hypotension/diagnosis
4.
J Pers Med ; 11(12)2021 Dec 01.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-34945739

ABSTRACT

Intravenous dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine, in conjunction with peripheral nerve blockade, have each been reported to prolong the duration of analgesia. This study tested whether combined use further prolongs analgesia duration after supraclavicular brachial plexus block (BPB) in patients undergoing orthopedic upper extremity surgery. One hundred twenty patients were randomized 1:1:1:1 to Control (saline bolus and midazolam infusion [0.05 mg/kg loading, 20 µg/kg/h thereafter]); DMED (saline bolus and dexmedetomidine infusion [1 µg/kg loading, 0.4 µg/kg/h thereafter]); DEXA (dexamethasone [10 mg] bolus and midazolam infusion); and DMED-DEXA (dexmedetomidine infusion and dexamethasone bolus) groups. The primary outcome was the duration of postoperative analgesia, defined as the time from the end of the BPB to the first dose of analgesia via a patient-controlled device. Median (interquartile range) times to first dose of analgesia in the Control, DMED, DEXA, and DMED-DEXA groups were 8.1 (6.2-11.6), 9.0 (8.1-11.3), 10.7 (8.1-20.5), and 13.2 (11.5-19.1) hours, respectively (p < 0.001). Pairwise comparisons showed significant prolongation of analgesia in the DEXA included groups compared with the non-DEXA included groups (DEXA vs. control, p = 0.045; DEXA vs. DMED, p = 0.045; DMED-DEXA vs. control, p < 0.001; DMED-DEXA vs. DMED, p < 0.001). A mixed effect model showed that dexamethasone was the only significant factor for the prolongation of analgesia (p < 0.001). Intravenous dexamethasone prolonged the analgesia duration of supraclavicular BPB after orthopedic upper extremity surgery. The concurrent use of mild to moderate sedation dose of intravenous dexmedetomidine in addition to intravenous dexamethasone showed no additional benefit to the prolongation of analgesia.

SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...