Temperature increases on the external root surface during endodontic treatment using single file systems.

AIMS: The aim of this study is to evaluate increases in temperature on the external root surface during endodontic treatment with different rotary systems. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Fifty human mandibular incisors with a single root canal were selected. All root canals were instrumented using a size 20 Hedstrom file, and the canals were irrigated with 5% sodium hypochlorite solution. The samples were randomly divided into the following three groups of 15 teeth: Group 1: The OneShape Endodontic File no.: 25; Group 2: The Reciproc Endodontic File no.: 25; Group 3: The WaveOne Endodontic File no.: 25. During the preparation, the temperature changes were measured in the middle third of the roots using a noncontact infrared thermometer. The temperature data were transferred from the thermometer to the computer and were observed graphically. Statistical analysis was performed using the Kruskal-Wallis analysis of variance at a significance level of 0.05. RESULTS: The increases in temperature caused by the OneShape file system were lower than those of the other files (P < 0.05). The WaveOne file showed the highest temperature increases. However, there were no significant differences between the Reciproc and WaveOne files. CONCLUSIONS: The single file rotary systems used in this study may be recommended for clinical use.

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. .

Does dexmedetomidine reduce the injection pain due to propofol and rocuronium?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: This prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study was designed to determine the efficacy of dexmedetomidine compared with lidocaine in reducing the pain of propofol and rocuronium injection pain. METHODS: One hundred and fifty patients, scheduled for elective surgery with general anaesthesia, were divided into five groups: saline (Group 1), dexmedetomidine 0.25 microg kg(-1) (Group 2), lidocaine 0.5 mg kg(-1) (Group 3), dexmedetomidine 0.25 microg kg(-1) plus lidocaine 0.25 mg kg(-1) (Group 4) or dexmedetomidine 0.25 microg kg(-1) plus lidocaine 0.5 mg kg(-1) (Group 5) were administered at a rate of 0.5 mL s(-1) after tourniquet application. The occlusion was released after 1 min and 5 mL of propofol was injected over 20 s. Pain was evaluated by use of a 10-point verbal analogue scale. Then, the rest of the induction dose of propofol, 3 mL of saline bolus and 0.6 mg kg(-1) of rocuronium, was injected. The response to injection of rocuronium was assessed with a four-point scale (0-3). RESULTS: Groups 1 and 2 were found to have higher propofol injection pain scores than Groups 3, 4 and 5 (P < 0.05). When the study groups were compared according to the overall incidence of withdrawal movements due to rocuronium (1 response) in Groups 1, 2, 3, 4 and 5, they were different (86.7%, 60%, 36.7%, 50% and 40%, respectively) (P < 0.05). Except Group 1, there was no significant difference between the groups according to incidence of withdrawal movement after rocuronium injection (P = 0.325). CONCLUSIONS: Pretreatment with dexmedetomidine is not effective in reducing injection pain of propofol, but may attenuate the hand withdrawal associated to rocuronium, as lidocaine does.

Evaluation of a local anaesthesia regimen using a subphrenic catheter after gynaecological laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: The purpose of intraperitoneal local anaesthetic administration is to block visceral nociceptive conduction and to provide an additional route of analgesia. The present study evaluates the effects of sequential injections of bupivacaine on postoperative pain through a subphrenic catheter. METHODS: In this double-blinded controlled study, patients scheduled for gynaecological laparoscopy were randomly divided into two groups. One group received 20 mL of saline with 1:200000 epinephrine through a subphrenic catheter before the incision closure and at 4-hourly intervals for the first postoperative 20 h. The second group received 20 mL of bupivacaine 0.125% with 1:200000 epinephrine at the same injection times. Postoperative pain scores and consumption of analgesics were compared. RESULTS: There were no statistical differences in pain scores at rest or incidence of shoulder pain between the two groups, but the patients of the bupivacaine group reported lower pain scores on coughing only in the first hour postoperatively (P = 0.007). Although the patients consumed comparable amounts of metamizole and ondansetron, the number of patients requiring supplemental meperidine and flurbiprofen in the bupivacaine group were significantly lower than in the saline group (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that intraperitoneal bupivacaine may reduce pain on coughing in the early postoperative period and the consumption of analgesics postoperatively. The subphrenic catheter technique had no impact upon pain at rest and shoulder-tip pain after gynaecological laparoscopy.

Comparison of ephedrine and ketamine in prevention of injection pain and hypotension due to propofol induction.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This prospective, double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled study compares the effects of ephedrine and ketamine on injection pain, and hypotension from propofol. METHODS: After obtaining the approval of the Ethics Committee, 75 patients (ASA I-II) scheduled for elective operations with general anaesthesia were divided into three groups. Saline 2 mL (Group S, n = 25), ketamine 0.5 mg kg(-1) (Group K, n = 25) or ephedrine 70 microg kg(-1) (Group E, n = 25) were administered over 5 s after tourniquet application. After releasing the tourniquet, propofol 2 mg kg(-1) was injected in 30 s. Pain was evaluated on a numerical scale (0-10) where 0 represented no pain and 10 the most severe pain possible. Systolic, diastolic blood pressures and heart rates were recorded preoperatively, 1 min after propofol injection, before intubation and 1, 2 and 3 min after intubation in all patients. RESULTS: The incidences of pain in Groups S, E and K were similar (84%, 80% and 72%, respectively). The mean pain score in Group K (2.1, SD 3.1) was significantly lower than those of Groups S and E (4.9, SD 2.6 and 4.6, SD, 3.3, respectively) (P < 0.05). The systolic and diastolic blood pressure values in Group K (120 +/- 27 mmHg) and Group E (123 +/- 21 mmHg) before intubation were significantly higher than that of Group S (104 +/- 25 mmHg) (P < 0.05). There was no significant difference between the mean heart rate values of the groups. CONCLUSIONS: Low dose ketamine or ephedrine pretreatment may prevent hypotension due to propofol induction. Despite the reduction in injection pain intensity after ketamine, the study drugs were found to be ineffective in lowering the injection pain incidence.

Comparison of postoperative analgesic effects of preemptively used epidural ketamine and neostigmine.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To compare the analgesic and side effects of preemptively used epidural ketamine +bupivacaine, neostigmine +bupivacaine, and bupivacaine alone on postoperative analgesia after major abdominal surgery. DESIGN: Randomized, controlled study. SETTING: Inpatient anesthesia at the department of surgery of a metropolitan hospital. PATIENTS: 30 ASA physical status I, II, and III patients scheduled for abdominal surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Group K received 1 mL (50 mg) ketamine and 5 mL (25 mg) bupivacaine epidurally, Group N received 1 mL (0.5 mg) neostigmine and 5 mL (25 mg) bupivacaine epidurally, and Group B received 1 mL saline and 5 mL (25 mg) bupivacaine epidurally 30 minutes before operation. All patients underwent anesthesia induction with thiopental and vecuronium; anesthesia was maintained with isoflorane and vecuronium. For postoperative analgesia, all patients received epidural morphine for 48 hours postoperatively. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Standard monitoring included: 48 hours of analgesic requirement, visual analog scale (VAS), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR) in the 1st, 2nd, 6th, 12th, 24th, and 48th hours. Data were analyzed using Kruskall-Wallis and Mann Whitney U tests, with a p < 0.05 considered statistically significant. No significant differences were observed regarding MAP and HR among the groups during the study period. In Group N, VAS was significantly lower than Group K and Group B. The total opioid consumption in Group N was significantly lower than in Groups K and B in the first 48 hours after the operation. CONCLUSIONS: Preemptive neostigmine can be a good choice for postoperative analgesia.

The histopathological comparison of the results of the intra-arterial injections of propofol and thiopentone in rabbits.

The results of injections of propofol and thiopentone intra-arterially are compared in rabbits according to histopathological criteries. Thirteen New Zealand type rabbits are used. Two ml of 2.5% Thiopentone and 2 ml of 1% Propofol are administered to the rabbits under anesthesia. Three days after, their ears are amputated and sent to this pathological blind examination. In both groups, we saw neither a morphological change along the vessel walls nor significant bleeding. But between the groups there was a significant difference about oedema. Consequently, 2.5% thiopentone which is routinely used after intra-arterial administration, may be responsible of the gangrenous change but it is discussable and it makes significant oedema in animal models although propofol does not have this effect.