Comparison of the Efficacy of Intraperitoneal Instillation of Butorphanol Versus Nalbuphine as Adjuvants to Ropivacaine for Postoperative Pain Relief in Patients Undergoing Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy Under General Anesthesia: A Randomized, Double-Blind Placebo-Controlled Study.

Background and Aims: Postoperative pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is very common complication hindering the early return of routine activity. Since agonist opioids are not easily available, the most common drug used for intraoperative analgesia is intravenous butorphanol in our institute. The purpose of our study is to compare the analgesic effect of intraperitoneal butorphanol and nalbuphine as additives with ropivacaine in laparoscopic cholecystectomy for postoperative pain. Setting and Design: Randomized, double-blind prospective study undertaken after approval from the Institutional Ethics Committee. Materials and Methods: In this study, 90 patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly divided into three groups: group A received intraperitoneal ropivacaine 0.2% of 20 mL with butorphanol 2 mg; Group B received intraperitoneal ropivacaine 0.2% 20 mL with nalbuphine 10 mg; and Group C received intraperitoneal ropivacaine 0.2% 20 mL with 0.9% normal saline. The primary outcome was to compare the analgesic efficacy of butorphanol with nalbuphine and the duration of postoperative pain relief. The secondary outcomes included the comparison of hemodynamic parameters, frequency of rescue analgesia, and complications among the three groups. Statistical Analysis: The data analysis was carried out with ANOVA and Chi-square test using the SPSS software version 26.0. Results: The mean of the Numeric Rating Scale pain score was insignificant in Group A versus B at all-time intervals indicating similar efficacy of butorphanol and nalbuphine in terms of pain relief postoperatively. However, the time to first rescue analgesia was significantly higher in Group A (5.70 ± 3.57 h), followed by Group B (3.95 ± 2.06 h) and Group C (2.50 ± 1.24 h). Conclusion: Butorphanol is better analgesic than nalbuphine as postoperative pain-free period was relatively more with lesser complications.

Role of arterial blood gas (ABG) as a valuable assessment tool of disease severity in SARS-CoV-2 patients.

Background: COVID-19 is caused by a novel coronavirus, named severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2). The foremost predominant complication of SARS-CoV-2 is arterial hypoxemia thereby disturbing lung compliance, requiring mechanical ventilation. The aim of the current research study is to analyze role of ABG as a valuable assessment tool of disease severity in SARS-CoV-2 patients. Methods: 170 arterial blood samples were collected from patients admitted in Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Sri Guru Ram Das Charitable Hospital, Amritsar. They were analyzed for arterial blood gas using ABG analyzer. Parameters of ABG such as pH, pCO2, HCO3, O2 saturation, ionized calcium (iCa) and calculated ionized calcium (at pH 7.4) was calculated for all the samples. Results: Continuous variables were described as medians with interquartile ranges (IQRs) and categorical variables as percentages and frequencies. Spearman correlation test was done for calculation of correlation between pH and other ABG parameters. Analysis of arterial blood gas revealed significant negative correlation (p<0.05) between pH and pCO2 and significant positive correlation (p<0.05) between pH and HCO3 and between pH and delta ionized calcium. Low levels (98.2%) of ionized calcium were observed while monitoring the ABG findings though weak negative correlation (p<0.05) was observed between pH and iCa. Conclusions: Our study suggests that ABG analysis acts as a momentous indicator for critically ill patients admitted in Intensive Care Unit (ICU). Estimation of iCa in this critical care setting acts as a distinctive biochemical feature of SARS-CoV-2 disease, as an initial assessment tool, for hypocalcemia.

Role of Dexamethasone on Oxygen Requirement, Mortality, and Survival Incidence among COVID-19 Patients: Quasi-Experimental Study.

BACKGROUND: Patients diagnosed with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) are often prone to developing systemic inflammation which eventually causes damage to the lungs and other important organs. Randomized open-label control trials carried out in the different parts of the world have highlighted the importance of corticosteroids for treating such patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The current quasi-experimental study was based on COVID-19-infected patients with oxygen saturation <92% and evidence of pneumonia confirmed through radiological examination. Study participants in Group A received standard care, while those in Group B received standard care along with 6 mg intravenous dexamethasone for 10 days (or until discharge, if earlier). The clinical status of the study participants was assessed on day 7 and day 14 on a 6-point ordinal scale. RESULTS: It was observed from the study that there was reduction in the intensive care unit (ICU) stay and mortality among the study participants requiring high-flow oxygen or noninvasive ventilation in Group B as compared to Group A. After 7 days of treatment, 50% of the study participants in Group B got discharged as compared to 15% of the study participants in Group A. The number of study participants requiring mechanical ventilation remained 1 in Group B as compared to 5 in Group A. After the completion of treatment schedule, 91% study participants were discharged. There was 1 case of mortality reported in Group B as compared to 6 cases of mortality in Group A. CONCLUSIONS: The current study highlighted that fewer number of COVID-19-positive study participants in Group B required high-flow oxygen supplementation and noninvasive positive pressure ventilation as compared to those included in Group A. The corticosteroid treatment also reduced the number of ICU transfer and mortality.

Premedication for Induced Hypotension in Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgeries: Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Infusion vs Oral Metoprolol vs Placebo: A Comparative Study.

BACKGROUND: Controlled hypotension has been used to reduce bleeding and the need for blood transfusions and provide a satisfactory bloodless surgical field. In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, we are comparing intravenous (i.v.) dexmedetomidine infusion and oral metoprolol as a premedication for controlled hypotension in functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS) for evaluating surgical field visibility. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A total of 90 patients undergoing FESS were randomly divided into three groups of 30 each. Group A received intraoperative i.v. infusion of dexmedetomidine (loading 1 µg.kg-1 over 10 min followed by the maintenance of 0.2-0.5 µg.kg-1.h-1), Group B received oral metoprolol 50 mg on night and 2 h before surgery as a premedication, and Group C was taken as a control group and patients received oral placebo tablet as premedication and intraoperative normal saline infusion. General anesthesia was given using sevoflurane. Intraoperative target mean arterial blood pressure was set 55-65 mmHg. Various parameters were recorded and statistically compared. RESULTS: The three groups were statistically comparable in demographics. Quality of surgical field was better in Group A compared to other two groups. Total blood loss was also less in Group A. The incidence of adverse reactions was more in Group A. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine provides a better surgical field compared to oral metoprolol in FESS along with the desired hemodynamics with lesser blood loss and better outcome.

The Sedative and Propofol-Sparing Effect of Dexmedetomidine and Midazolam as Premedicants in Minor Gynecological Day Care Surgeries: A Randomized Placebo-Controlled Study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Ambulatory surgery is continually evolving specialty in the majority of surgical procedures. Dexmedetomidine and midazolam are newer adjuvants for sedation and reducing the dose of anesthetic agents. The aim of this study was to compare the sedative and propofol-sparing effect of dexmedetomidine and midazolam in minor gynecological day care surgeries. Observer's Assessment of Activity and Sedation, dose of additional propofol, Aldrete and street fitness score were studied as primary outcomes. Hemodynamic parameters and side effects were evaluated as secondary outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective randomized placebo-controlled study was conducted on 150 American Society of Anesthesiologists ASA physical status Classes I and II gynecological patients between 18 and 50 years and were allocated into three groups of fifty each. Group A received intravenous (i.v.) dexmedetomidine 0.1 µg/kg, Group B received i.v. midazolam 0.04 mg/kg, and Group C received normal saline 10 min before induction. RESULTS: Sedation score was statistically highly significant between Group A and B (P < 0.001). Between Group A and C, it was statistically significant (P < 0.05); however, score was nonsignificant between Groups B and C (P > 0.05). During recovery at 120 min after surgery, score 5 was achieved equally by all three groups which was found to be statistically insignificant (P > 0.05). Mean dose of additional propofol used was less in Group A (14 ± 9.25) than B (25 ± 5.40) and C (53 ± 10.96). On intergroup comparison between all three groups, it was found to be statistically highly significant (P < 0.001). Comparison of bispectral index (BIS) values between Groups A and C and Groups B and C were highly significant (P < 0.001). However, it was statistically significant between Groups A and B (P < 0.05). Aldrete scoring and street fitness scores were highly significant between Groups A and B, B and C, and also between Groups A and C (P < 0.001). No significant hemodynamic derangements and side effects were noted in any of three groups. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine had good sedation and better recovery characteristics than midazolam. BIS monitoring was helpful in maintaining the depth of anesthesia.

Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to levobupivacaine in supraclavicular brachial plexus block: A novel anesthetic approach.

AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: Supplementation of dexmedetomidine produces a dose-dependent sedation, anxiolysis and analgesia without respiratory depression. This study was conducted to evaluate the possible effect of dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to levobupivacaine for supraclavicular brachial plexus block in upper limb surgery. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: Tertiary care institute, Department of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care, a placebo-controlled study. MATERIALS AND METHODS: After obtaining Ethical Committee approval, a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study was conducted on sixty American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II patients in the age group of 18-60 years, divided randomly into two groups, Group I received 30 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 1 ml of isotonic sodium chloride solution and Group II received 30 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine and 1 ml (100 mcg) of dexmedetomidine for supraclavicular brachial plexus block. The onset and duration of sensory and motor blockade, duration of analgesia (DOA) and any adverse effects were noted. At the end of the study, data were compiled and analyzed using appropriate statistical tests. The value of P < 0.05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Demographic profile was comparable in both the groups. The time to onset of sensory and motor block was 10.54 ± 2.333 min and 12.21 ± 2.529 min in Group I while it was 3.24 ± 0.951 min and 2.83 ± 1.197 min in Group II, respectively. The duration of sensory and motor block was 7.79 ± 2.007 h and 9.18 ± 1.701 h in Group I, and it was 16.31 ± 2.606 h and 17.52 ± 2.098 h in Group II, respectively. The DOA was 678.68 ± 20.492 min in Group I and 1273.79 ± 83.139 min in Group II. On statistical comparison, these values were highly significant (P < 0.001). Side effects such as nausea, vomiting, hypoxemia, pruritis, or urinary retention were not observed in either of the groups. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine shortens the onset time for sensory and motor block significantly and prolongs DOA as well when used with levobupivacaine for supraclavicular brachial plexus block, without increasing the incidence of any adverse effects.

Intrathecal buprenorphine versus fentanyl as adjuvant to 0.75% ropivacaine in lower limb surgeries.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: This study aims to compare the anesthesia characteristics between buprenorphine and fentanyl when added as an adjuvant to intrathecal ropivaciane in an attempt to prolong the duration of spinal anesthesia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: The present prospective double-blind study was undertaken on ninety American Society of Anesthesiologist I and II patients between 18 and 60 years of age undergoing subarachnoid block for lower limb surgery. Group I (n = 30) patients were administered 3 ml of intrathecal solution (2.8 ml of 0.75% ropivacaine + 0.2 ml of isotonic sodium chloride), while Groups II and III patients (n = 30 each) received 2.8 ml 0.75% ropivacaine + 0.2 ml buprenorphine (60 µg) and 2.8 ml 0.75% ropivacaine + 0.2 ml fentanyl (10 µg), respectively. Following parameters were observed: Onset times and duration of sensory and motor block, time to first analgesic use, total dose of rescue analgesia, intra- and post-operative pain scores based on visual analog scale, sedation scores, hemodynamic parameters, and side effects if any. Data were analyzed by appropriate statistical tests and P < 0.05 were considered significant. RESULTS: Time to onset of sensory and motor block in all the three groups was comparable. However, duration of sensory block was significantly prolonged in Groups II and III in comparison to Group I (P < 0.05) and it was the longest in Group II (P < 0.05). The duration of motor blockade was similar in all the three groups. The time to first analgesic dose was also significantly prolonged in Groups II and III as compared to Group I (P < 0.05) but was comparable between Groups II and III. Intra- and post-operative hemodynamic parameters, as well as side effects, were comparable. CONCLUSION: Addition of buprenorphine and fentanyl as adjuvants to intrathecal 0.75% ropivacaine prolongs postoperative pain relief without causing any increase in the duration of motor blockade but buprenorphine is better as compared to fentanyl in prolonging the duration of sensory block and achieving a better outcome in terms of pain relief.

Intravenous analgesia with opioids versus femoral nerve block with 0.2% ropivacaine as preemptive analgesic for fracture femur: A randomized comparative study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Femoral fractures are extremely painful and pain invariably worsens on any movement. Anesthesia for fracture femur surgery is usually provided by spinal block. This study was undertaken to compare the analgesic effects of femoral nerve block (FNB) using nerve stimulator with 0.2% ropivacaine (15 ml) and intravenous (I.V.) fentanyl before patient positioning for fracture femur surgery under spinal anesthesia. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A prospective, randomized, double-blind, comparative study was conducted on 60 American Society of Anesthesiologists I and II patients (18-60 years) scheduled for femur surgery under combined spinal epidural anesthesia. Patients in Group I (n = 30), were administered FNB using nerve stimulator with 0.2% ropivacaine (15 ml) and in Group II patients (n = 30), I.V. fentanyl 0.5 µg/kg was given as preemptive analgesia. Parameters observed included time to spinal anesthesia, intra-operative and postoperative visual analog scale (VAS) for any pain and postoperative epidural top-ups dosages. RESULTS: Demographic profile was comparable in both the groups. VAS at 2 min in Group I was 5.63 and in Group II it was 8.00. Satisfaction score was better in Group I as compared to Group II patients. Time to administer subarachnoid block was 17.80 min in patients of Group I as compared to 25.03 min in Group II patients. Postoperatively, VAS scores were lower in Group I than Group II patients. The frequency of epidural top-ups was higher in Group II than in Group I patients. CONCLUSIONS: FNB is comparatively better in comparison to I.V. fentanyl when used as preemptive and postoperative analgesic in patients being operated for fracture femur.

Role of measurement of antioxidant enzymes in evaluation of antioxidant therapy in tobacco abusers with oral leukoplakia.

Antioxidants are widely used in chemoprevention of malignancy. Numerous studies in medical literature have reported the evaluation of this treatment protocol by indirect methodology-epidemiology, invitro studies, pharmacology and animal models etc. However, there is a paucity of literature on the measurement of antioxidant enzymes as a parameter for assessing the outcome of antioxidant therapy. This study explores the efficacy and outcome of antioxidant enzyme assay in relation to antioxidant therapy in tobacco abusers, hitherto unreported in medical literature. A prospective cohort study with control in 50 patients carried out at a tertiary care teaching Institution (Institute of Medical Sciences, Banaras Hindu University, Varanasi, India). Out of these patients, 10 patients acted as control, rest 40 patients-all tobacco users in some form, were divided into three groups on the basis of histopathological grading of dysplasia-no dysplasia, mild or moderate dysplasia. The levels of Lipid peroxidase (LPO), Superoxide dismutase (SOD) and Catalase (CAT) in mucosa and serum were assayed in each group, and re-evaluated at the end of 3 months after intervention with antioxidant treatment. To detect any alteration in degree of dysplasia a repeat biopsy was also done at the end of 3 months. The results were statistically analysed using paired t test. A statistically significant decrease in level of LPO and SOD, and an increase in CAT levels were recorded both in mucosa and serum. However, no change in dysplasia and no new case of dysplasia were observed. Further, antioxidant treatment was continued for a year and the final out come of the lesion was assessed by "Carter's criteria". A final success rate of 74.19% was recorded in terms of partial or complete regression of the lesion. This study confirms the therapeutic efficacy of antioxidants in oral leukoplakia, and cites the importance of LPO, SOD and CAT in evaluating the efficacy of antioxidant treatment. However, the study failed to elucidate any relationship between enzyme measurement and the final outcome of the lesion.

An association of dominant hand grip strength with some anthropometric variables in Indian collegiate population.

The present study deals with the correlations of dominant hand grip strength and 12 anthropometric variables, namely, height, weight, BMI, upper arm length, forearm length, total arm length, hand breadth, hand length, upper arm circumference, forearm circumference, biceps skinfold and triceps skinfold in randomly selected 303 unrelated, normal, healthy students (151 males and 152 females) aged 18-25 years of Guru Nanak Dev University, Amritsar, Punjab, India. The findings of the present study indicate a strong association of dominant right hand grip strength with all the anthropometric variables, except biceps skinfold in male students and with height (r = 0.200), weight (r = 0.275), BMI (p = 0.217), total arm length (p = 0.218) and upper arm circumference (r = 0.199) in female students. Statistically significant positive correlations were also found between dominant left hand grip strength and height (r = 0.275), weight (p = 0.537), BMI (p = 0.472), hand breadth (p = 0.464), upper arm circumference (r = 0.570), forearm circumference (p = 0.464) and triceps skinfold (p = 0.343) only in male students, but no such association was found between grip strength of left hand dominant female students with any of the twelve anthropometric variables. It may be concluded that hand dominance, especially of the right hand, has some close association with the anthropometric variables related to upper extremities.