A comparison of sugammadex and neostigmine for reversal of rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade in children.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex is designed to be a reversal agent for steroidal muscle relaxants. The current trial was aimed to compare between sugammadex and neostigmine concerning the recovery time from neuromuscular blockade. We hypothesised that sugammadex might have shorter recovery time than neostigmine. METHODS: Sixty paediatric patients aged 2-10 years scheduled for lower abdominal surgeries were randomly assigned into two equal groups to receive 4 mg/kg sugammadex (Group S) or 0.35 mg/kg neostigmine and 0.02 mg/kg atropine (Group N) as a reversal agent for rocuronium at the end of surgery. Primary outcome was the recovery time [time from starting of sugammadex or neostigmine till reaching train of four (TOF) ratio> 0.9] whereas secondary outcomes included number of patients who needed another dose of sugammadex or neostigmine to reach TOF ratio> 0.9, extubation time (time from stoppage of anaesthetic inhalation until the patient fulfilled criteria for safe extubation, post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) discharge time and post-operative adverse effects. RESULTS: The mean recovery and extubation times were significantly shorter (P = 0.002 and 0.005) in Group S compared with Group N (2.5 and 2.0 min vs. 12.6 min and 4.3 min respectively). In the Group N, eight patients needed another reversal dose compared with one patient in Group S (P = 0.035). PACU discharge time showed no significant difference between both groups. Incidence of nausea, vomiting, tachycardia, and dry mouth were significantly higher in Group N. CONCLUSION: Sugammadex administration in children resulted in faster recovery and extubation times and lower incidence of adverse events compared with neostigmine.

Cardiac and renal protective effects of dexmedetomidine in cardiac surgeries: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiac and renal injuries are common insults after cardiac surgeries that contribute to perioperative morbidity and mortality. Dexmedetomidine has been shown to protect several organs against ischemia/reperfusion-(I/R) induced injury. We performed a randomized controlled trial to assess the effect of dexmedetomidine on cardiac and renal I/R injury in patients undergoing cardiac surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgeries were randomized to dexmedetomidine group that received a continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine initiated 5 min before cardiopulmonary bypass (1 µg/kg over 15 min, followed by 0.5 µg/kg/h) until 6 h after surgery, whereas the control group received an equivalent volume of physiological saline. Primary outcome measures included myocardial-specific proteins (troponin-I, creatine kinase-MB), urinary-specific kidney proteins (N-acetyl-beta-D-glucosaminidase, alpha-1-microglobulin, glutathione transferase-pi, glutathione transferase alpha), serum proinflammatory cytokines (tumor necrosis factor alpha and interleukin-1 beta), norepinephrine, and cortisol levels. They were measured within 5 min of starting anesthesia (T0), at the end of surgery (T1), 12 h after surgery (T2), 24 h after surgery (T3), 36 h postoperatively (T4), and 48 h postoperatively (T5). Furthermore, creatinine clearance and serum cystatin C were measured before starting surgery as a baseline, and at days 1, 4, 7 after surgery. RESULTS: Dexmedetomidine reduced cardiac and renal injury as evidenced by lower concentration of myocardial-specific proteins, kidney-specific urinary proteins, and pro-inflammatory cytokines. Moreover, it caused higher creatinine clearance and lower serum cystatin C. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine provided cardiac and renal protection during cardiac surgery.

Comparative effect of propofol versus sevoflurane on renal ischemia/reperfusion injury after elective open abdominal aortic aneurysm repair.

BACKGROUND: Renal injury is a common cause of morbidity and mortality after elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. Propofol has been reported to protect several organs from ischemia/reperfusion (I/R) induced injury. We performed a randomized clinical trial to compare propofol and sevoflurane for their effects on renal I/R injury in patients undergoing elective AAA repair. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty patients scheduled for elective AAA repair were randomized to receive propofol anesthesia in group I or sevoflurane anesthesia in group II. Urinary specific kidney proteins (N-acetyl-beta-glucosamidase, alpha-1-microglobulin, glutathione transferase [GST]-pi, GST-alpha) were measured within 5 min of starting anesthesia as a base line (T0), at the end of surgery (T1), 8 h after surgery (T2), 16 h after surgery (T3), and 24 h postoperatively (T4). Serum pro-inflammatory cytokines (tumor necrosis factor-α and interleukin 1-ß) were measured at the same time points. In addition, serum creatinine and cystatin C were measured before starting surgery as a baseline and at days 1, 3, and 6 after surgery. RESULTS: Postoperative urinary concentrations of all measured kidney specific proteins and serum pro-inflammatory cytokines were significantly lower in the propofol group. In addition, the serum creatinine and cystatin C were significantly lower in the propofol group compared with the sevoflurane group. CONCLUSION: Propofol significantly reduced renal injury after elective open AAA repair and this could have clinical implications in situations of expected renal I/R injury.

Effect of N-acetylcysteine on cardiac injury and oxidative stress after abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Several studies have reported that the antioxidant properties of N-acetylcysteine (NAC) can provide cardiac protection through scavenging of free radicals. The present study was aimed to assess the efficacy of NAC for cardiac protection in patients undergoing elective abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair. METHODS: Fifty adult patients undergoing (AAA) repair were randomly allocated to receive NAC infusion (n = 25) or placebo infusion (n = 25). NAC infusion in group I (NAC group) was started at a rate of 0.3 mg/kg/min intravenously during surgery then decreased to a rate of 0.2 mg/kg/min for 24 h post-operatively. Group II (placebo group) received an equivalent rate of placebo infusion. The following parameters: myocardial-specific protein troponin-I, creatine phosphokinase-MB (CPK-MB), plasma pro-inflammatory cytokines [tumour necrosis factor-α (TNF-α) and interleukin (IL)-1ß], were assessed at the following time points: preoperatively and at 1 h, 12 h, 24 h, 48 h, and 96 h after surgery. Furthermore, serum malondialdehyde (MDA) and total antioxidant capacity (TAC) were measured preoperatively as a baseline, during aortic clamping, 30 min after declamping, at the end of surgery, 2 h after surgery, 12 h after surgery, and 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: NAC infusion patients had significantly lower post-operative concentrations of myocardial-specific protein [cTnI, CPK-MB] and pro-inflammatory cytokines [TNF-α, IL-1ß]. In addition, MDA level was less and TAC was higher in patients who received NAC infusion. CONCLUSION: NAC infusion provided cardiac protection through scavenging of oxygen free radicals.

Myocardial infarction with normal coronary angiography compared with severe coronary artery disease without myocardial infarction: the crucial role of smoking.

BACKGROUND: Why do some patients suffer acute myocardial infarction (MI) despite angiographically normal coronary arteries (NL + MI) whereas others enjoy an acute MI-free life despite extensive three-vessel disease (3VD-MI)? The present study contrasts these two groups to identify some differences in the risk profile. METHODS: In 10,000 patients admitted to the cardiology service, a first MI was confirmed in 2356 patients, of whom 1609 underwent coronary angiography. In 77 patients with MI, coronary angiography was found to be entirely normal (NL + MI, 77/1609, 4.1%). These were contrasted to 123 patients with severe three-vessel coronary disease but no MI (3VD-MI). RESULTS: Patients with NL + MI were 13 years younger (42 +/- 8.3 vs 55 +/- 10.5, P < 0.05), with 33 patients (43%) under the age 40 years, in contrast to only 9 patients (7.3%) in the 3VD group being this age. Patients with NC + MI were more often current smokers (80.5% vs 29% in the 3VD group; P < 0.01). Patients with 3VD-MI were, on the other hand, more often diabetic (54% vs 9% in the NL + MI group; P < 0.01) and had a higher cholesterol level (5.6 +/- 1.1 vs 4.9 +/- 1.0 Mmol/l, P < 0.01) as well as a higher incidence of chronic stable angina (52% vs 22%; P < 0.01) and heart failure (6% compared with 0% in the NL + MI group). Sixty-one out of 77 (79%) NL + MI patients had a single risk factor, and in 87%, this was smoking alone. Diabetes mellitus was rare and never occurred alone in this group. CONCLUSION: In patients who suffer MI despite normal coronary angiography, smoking is a major risk factor: In contrast, in patients with extensive coronary artery disease on angiography but no MI, diabetes rather than smoking is the dominant risk factor. The findings of this study support the view that the risk factors for stable and unstable coronary artery disease are different, as reflected by the contrast of the above groups at the extremes of the spectrum. Smoking appears to be a major risk factor for acute MI (even with normal coronary angiography), whereas diabetes is a major risk factor for more severe but more stable coronary artery disease.

Tecto-cerebellar dysraphia with occipital encephalocele.

We report four cases with the rare syndrome of tecto-cerebellar dysraphia with occipital encephalocele. The clinical features seen in these patients included episodic tachypnea and irregular breathing, opsoclonus, ataxia, marked hypotonia of the limbs, coloboma, and polydactyly. All four patients had midline occipital encephalocele. The cranial computed tomography scan showed partial to total agenesis of the vermis with a large communication between cisterna magna and the fourth ventricle. The computed tomography scan also showed partial deficiency of the midbrain tectum. We discuss the clinical and radiological findings and review the literature.