ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The Truview EVO2(C) laryngoscope (TL) is a recently introduced optical device designed to provide an unmagnified anterior image of the glottic opening and allow indirect laryngoscopy. AIM: This study is designed to determine whether the TL is a better alternative to the Macintosh laryngoscope (ML) for routine endotracheal intubations in patients with usual airway characteristics. METHODS: We compared the Truview EVO2(C) and MLs in 140 elective surgical patients requiring general anaesthesia and intubation in a prospective crossover fashion. The two blades were compared in terms of Cormack and Lehane grades, time required for intubation, anaesthetists' assessment of ease of intubation, intubation difficulty score, attempts at intubation, success rate, soft tissue damage and arterial oxygen saturation during laryngoscopy. The Student t test and Chi-square test were used to determine the statistical significance of parametric data and categorical data, respectively. RESULTS: The Truview EVO2(C) blade provided a better laryngoscopic view than the Macintosh blade as suggested by improved Cormack and Lehane grades (in 48 patients), but required a longer time for intubation than the Macintosh blade (34.1 vs. 22.4 s), i.e., an improved view at the cost of longer mean intubation time. In spite of lower intubation difficulty scores, Truview EVO2(C) was considered as difficult to use on subjective assessment by the anaesthesiologist when compared with Macintosh. There was no difference observed between the two groups in attempts at intubation, success rate, soft tissue damage and arterial oxygen saturation during laryngoscopy. CONCLUSION: We opine that although Truview provides a better laryngoscopic view than Macintosh in difficult cases, it does not have an extra benefit over Macintosh otherwise, further indicating the need for more experience with the use of a Truview laryngoscope.
ABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is an effective method of providing postoperative analgesia in patients undergoing midline abdominal wall incisions, by blocking the abdominal wall neural afferents via the bilateral lumbar triangles of Petit. We evaluated its analgesic efficacy in patients during the first 48 postoperative hours after abdominal surgery, in a randomized, controlled single-blind clinical trial. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Sixty patients (mean age 36.2 ± 9.6 years) of either sex of ASA grade 1 and 2 who underwent major gynecological or surgical operation were randomized either to receive standard care, including patient-controlled tramadol analgesia (n = 30), or to undergo TAP block (n = 30) in addition to standard care. After completion of surgery, 20 ml of 0.375% levobupivacaine was deposited into the transversus abdominis neurofascial plane via the bilateral lumbar triangles of Petit. Each patient was assessed in the postanesthesia care unit and at 2, 4, 6, 12, 24, and 48 h postoperatively. RESULTS: The TAP block reduced Visual Analog Scale pain scores at most (2, 4, 6, 12, 24 h), but not at all time (36, 48 h) points assessed. Patients undergoing TAP block had reduced tramadol requirement in 24 h (210.05 ± 20.5 vs. 320.05 ± 10.6; P < 0.01) and 48 h (508.25 ± 20.6 vs. 550.25 ± 20.6; P < 0.01), and a longer time to the first PCA tramadol request (in minutes), compared to the control group (178.5 ± 45.6 vs. 23.5 ± 3.8; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: The TAP block provided highly effective postoperative analgesia in the first 24 postoperative hours after major abdominal surgery, and no complications due to the TAP block were detected.
