Lactated Ringer as Preservation Solution in Living Donor Renal Transplantation.

BACKGROUND: Optimal organ preservation remains a critical hallmark event in renal transplantation as it is the supply line. Previous studies have shown that the choice of preservation solution may affect transplant outcomes. In this study, we aimed to present the early follow-up results of the graft and patients, using lactated Ringer to preserve kidney allografts with living donors. METHODS: The results of 97 living donor transplant operations performed in Sanko University Hospital were evaluated retrospectively. The patient's evaluation included demographics, dialysis time duration, renal replacement method, primary disease, comorbidity, surgical and clinical complications in the acute period, graft functions, blood levels of calcineurin inhibitor drugs, anastomotic renal artery, warm ischemia, and cold ischemia times. RESULTS: Donor (49 men, 50.5%) and recipient (58 men, 59.7%) demographics, HLA compatibility (mismatch), hospitalization days, and length of warm and cold ischemic time are summarized in Table 1. Primary nonfunction was not defined in any patients, but delayed graft function was observed during the follow-up of 3 patients (3.09%), who were all hypotensive in the post-transplantation period, and positive inotropic infusion was needed for hemodynamic stability. CONCLUSIONS: Lactated Ringer demonstrated efficacy in terms of patient and graft survival, and its lower cost represents a financial advantage, so it can be used in living donor kidney transplantation because it is safe, effective, and inexpensive. Standard preservation solutions may still be recommended in cases with long cold ischemia times, such as paired exchange transplants and cadaveric transplants. Thus, randomized controlled studies are needed for further investigation.

General versus epidural anesthesia for lumbar microdiscectomy.

This study was a retrospective analysis of 850 lumbar microdiscectomy (LMD) under epidural anesthesia (EA; n=573) or general anesthesia (GA; n=277) performed by the same surgeon and paid by invoice to the Social Security Institution of the Turkish Republic between April 2003 and May 2013. Although GA is the most frequently used method of anesthesia during LMD, the choice of regional anesthetia (epidural, spinal or a combination of these) differs between surgeons and anesthetists. Studies have reported that EA in surgery for lumbar disc herniation may be more reliable than GA, as it enables the surgeon to communicate with the patient during surgery, but few studies have compared the costs of these two anesthetic methods in LMD. We found that EA patient costs were significantly lower than GA patient costs (p<0.01) and there was a statistically significant difference between the two groups in terms of the time spent in the operating room (p<0.01). There was no difference in the duration of surgery (p>0.05). The anesthetic method used during LMD affected the complication rate, cost and efficiency of operating room use. We suggest that EA is an anesthetic method that can contribute to health care cost savings and enable LMD to be completed with less nerve root manipulation and more comfort, efficacy, reliability and cost efficiency without affecting the success rate of the surgical procedure.

The comparison of levobupivacaine in continuous or single dose spinal anesthesia for transurethral resection of prostate surgery.

BACKGROUND: The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy of levobupivacaine induced continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) versus single dose spinal anesthesia (SDSA) in patients who are planned to undergo transurethral prostate resection. METHODS: Sixty years or older, ASA I-II or III, 50 patients were included in the study. 12.5mg 0.5% levobupivacaine were administered intrathecally in SDSA group. In CSA group, initially 2mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine were administered through spinal catheter. In order to achieve sensory block level at T10 dermatome, additional 1mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine were administered through the catheter in every 10min. Hemodynamic parameters and block characteristics were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative blood samples of the patients were drawn to determine plasma cortisone and plasma epinephrine levels. RESULTS: CSA technique provided better hemodynamic stability compared to SDSA technique particularly 90min after intrathecal administration. The rise in sensory block level was rapid and the time to reach surgical anesthesia was shorter in SDSA group. Motor block developed faster in SDSA group. In CSA group, similar anesthesia level was achieved by using lower levobupivacaine dose and which was related to faster recovery. Although, both techniques were effective in preventing surgical stress respond, postoperative cortisone levels were suppressed more in SDSA group. CONCLUSION: CSA technique with 0.25% levobupivacaine can be used as a regional anesthesia method for elderly patients planned to have TUR-P operation.

Comparação de levobupivacaína em raquianestesia contínua ou com dose única para cirurgia de ressecção transuretral de próstata / The comparison of levobupivacaine in continuous or single dose spinal anesthesia for transurethral resection of prostate surgery / Comparación de la levobupivacaína en raquianestesia continua ocon dosis única para cirugía de resección transuretral de próstata

Justificativa e objetivo: comparar a eficácia de levobupivacaína na indução de raquianestesia contínua (RAC) versus dose única (Radu) em pacientes programados para ressecção transuretral de próstata (RTUP). Métodos: foram incluídos no estudo 50 pacientes, ≥ 60 anos, ASA I-II ou III. Levobupivacaína a 0,5% (12,5 mg) foi administrada por via intratecal no grupo Radu. No grupo RAC, levobupivacaína a 0,25% (2 mL) foi inicialmente administrada através de cateter espinhal. Para o nível de bloqueio sensorial atingir o dermátomo T10, 1 mL adicional de levobupivacaína a 0,25% foi administrado através do cateter a cada 10 minutos. Os parâmetros hemodinâmicos e as características do bloqueio foram registrados. Amostras de sangue dos pacientes foram coletadas nos períodos pré- e pós-operatórios para determinar os níveis plasmáticos de cortisona e adrenalina. Resultados: a RAC proporcionou melhor estabilidade hemodinâmica em comparação com a Radu, particularmente aos 90 minutos após a administração intratecal. O aumento do nível de bloqueio sensorial foi rápido e o tempo para atingir a anestesia cirúrgica foi menor no grupo Radu. O desenvolvimento do bloqueio motor foi mais rápido no grupo Radu. No grupo RAC, um nível semelhante de anestesia foi obtido com o uso de uma dose mais baixa de levobupivacaína, que foi relacionada à recuperação mais rápida. Embora ambas as técnicas tenham sido eficazes na prevenção da resposta ao estresse cirúrgico, os níveis de cortisona no pós-operatório foram mais suprimidos no grupo Radu. Conclusão: a técnica RAC com levobupivacaína a 0,25% pode ser usada como um método de anestesia regional em pacientes idosos programados para RTUP. .

Background: The aim of the study is to compare the efficacy of levobupivacaine induced continuous spinal anesthesia (CSA) versus single dose spinal anesthesia (SDSA) in patients who are planned to undergo transurethral prostate resection. Methods: Sixty years or older, ASA I-II or III, 50 patients were included in the study. 12.5 mg 0.5% levobupivacaine were administered intrathecally in SDSA group. In CSA group, initially 2 mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine were administered through spinal catheter. In order to achieve sensory block level at T10 dermatome, additional 1 mL of 0.25% levobupivacaine were administered through the catheter in every 10 min. Hemodynamic parameters and block characteristics were recorded. Preoperative and postoperative blood samples of the patients were drawn to determine plasma cortisone and plasma epinephrine levels. Results: CSA technique provided better hemodynamic stability compared to SDSA technique particularly 90 min after intrathecal administration. The rise in sensory block level was rapid and the time to reach surgical anesthesia was shorter in SDSA group. Motor block developed faster in SDSA group. In CSA group, similar anesthesia level was achieved by using lower levobupivacaine dose and which was related to faster recovery. Although, both techniques were effective in preventing surgical stress respond, postoperative cortisone levels were suppressed more in SDSA group. Conclusion: CSA technique with 0.25% levobupivacaine can be used as a regional anesthesia method for elderly patients planned to have TUR-P operation. .

Justificación y objetivo: el objetivo de este estudio fue comparar la eficacia de la levobupivacaína en la inducción de la raquianestesia continua (RAC) versus dosis única (RADU) en pacientes programados para la resección transuretral de próstata. Métodos: cincuenta pacientes, ≥ 60 años de edad, ASA I-II o III, fueron incluidos en el estudio. La levobupivacaína al 0,5% (12,5 mg) se administró vía intratecal en el grupo RADU. En el grupo RAC, la levobupivacaína al 0,25% (2 mL) fue inicialmente administrada a través de un catéter espinal. Para que el nivel de bloqueo sensorial alcanzase el dermatoma T10, se administró 1 mL adicional de levobupivacaína al 0,25% a través del catéter cada 10 min. Los parámetros hemodinámicos y las características del bloqueo fueron registrados. Las muestras de sangre de los pacientes fueron extraídas en los períodos pre y postoperatorios para determinar los niveles plasmáticos de cortisona y adrenalina. Resultados: la técnica RAC proporcionó una mejor estabilidad hemodinámica en comparación con la técnica RADU, particularmente a los 90 min después de la administración intratecal. El aumento del nivel de bloqueo sensorial fue rápido y el tiempo para alcanzar la anestesia quirúrgica fue menor en el grupo RADU. El desarrollo del bloqueo motor fue más rápido en el grupo RADU. En el grupo RAC, un nivel parecido de anestesia se obtuvo con una dosis más baja de levobupivacaína que fue relacionada con la recuperación más rápida. Aunque ambas técnicas hayan sido eficaces en la prevención de la respuesta al estrés quirúrgico, los niveles de cortisona en el postoperatorio fueron mejor suprimidos en el grupo RADU. .

Effects of fentanyl-lidocaine-propofol and dexmedetomidine-lidocaine-propofol on tracheal intubation without use of muscle relaxants.

The aim of this study was to compare the effects of fentanyl or dexmedetomidine when used in combination with propofol and lidocaine for tracheal intubation without using muscle relaxants. Sixty patients with American Society of Anesthesiologists stage I risk were randomized to receive 1 mg/kg dexmedetomidine (Group D, n = 30) or 2 mg/kg fentanyl (Group F, n = 30), both in combination with 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine and 3 mg/kg propofol. The requirement for intubation was determined based on mask ventilation capability, jaw motility, position of the vocal cords and the patient's response to intubation and inflation of the endotracheal tube cuff. Systolic arterial pressure, mean arterial pressure, heart rate and peripheral oxygen saturation values were also recorded. Rate pressure products were calculated. Jaw relaxation, position of the vocal cords and patient's response to intubation and inflation of the endotracheal tube cuff were significantly better in Group D than in Group F (p < 0.05). The intubation conditions were significantly more satisfactory in Group D than in Group F (p = 0.01). Heart rate was significantly lower in Group D than in Group F after the administration of the study drugs and intubation (p < 0.05). Mean arterial pressure was significantly lower in Group F than in Group D after propofol injection and at 3 and 5 minutes after intubation (p < 0.05). After intubation, the rate pressure product values were significantly lower in Group D than in Group F (p < 0.05). We conclude that endotracheal intubation was better with the dexmedetomidine-lidocaine-propofol combination than with the fentanyl-lidocaine-propofol combination. However, side effects such as bradycardia should be considered when using dexmedetomidine.