Journal of anaesthesiology, clinical pharmacology
-
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol · Apr 2016
Comparison of surgical conditions following premedication with oral clonidine versus oral diazepam for endoscopic sinus surgery: A randomized, double-blinded study.
Endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) provides a challenge and an opportunity to the anesthesiologists to prove their mettle and give the surgeons a surgical field which can make their delicate surgery safer,more precise and faster. The aim of the study was to evaluate the surgical field and the rate of blood loss in patients premedicated with oral clonidine versus oral diazepam for endoscopic sinus surgery. ⋯ Premedication with clonidine as compared to diazepam, provides a better surgical field with less blood loss in patients undergoing ESS.
-
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol · Apr 2021
Comparison of the time taken for subarachnoid block using ultrasound-guided method versus landmark technique for cesarean section - A randomized controlled study.
Spinal anesthesia is the regional technique preferred for cesarean section and is usually administered using the traditional landmark technique. Ultrasonography of the spine appears to be helpful in locating the puncture site and increasing the success rate. The primary objective of this study was to assess the use of ultrasonogram in locating the lumbar interspinous space for spinal anesthesia in laboring parturients brought for elective cesarean section. ⋯ Preprocedural ultrasound is a useful tool for successful lumbar puncture in parturients as it minimizes the number of attempts of needle insertion and provides better patient satisfaction.
-
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol · Aug 2020
ReviewAnesthesia for oral surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic.
The severe acute respiratory syndrome corona virus 2(SARS-Cov2) virus replicates in the nasal cavity, nasopharynx, and the oropharynx. During oral surgery, the risk of viral transmission is high during instrumentation in these areas, while performing airway management procedures, the oral surgery itself, and related procedures. During the corona virus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, patients with an oral pathology usually present for emergency procedures. ⋯ Maintaining patient safety, while protecting the healthcare workers from getting infected during oral surgery is paramount. Meticulous advance planning and team preparation are essential. In this review, we discuss the challenges and recommendations for safe anesthesia practice for oral surgery during the COVID-19 pandemic, with special emphasis on risk mitigation.
-
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol · Apr 2021
ReviewSugammadex and anaphylaxis: An analysis of 33 published cases.
In this study, the published sugammadex-induced anaphylaxis reports were reviewed to determine similarities in their presentation during anesthesia. PubMed was searched for sugammadex-induced anaphylaxis without time limitation. Reports were evaluated if they were in English and met the criteria of anaphylaxis determined by the World Allergy Organization. ⋯ Sugammadex-induced anaphylaxis onset time was less than 5 min in 92.3% of all the reported cases. Rapid diagnosis and early recognition of signs and symptoms of anaphylaxis are essential for a favorable prognosis. Treatment needs to be started as soon as possible to ensure the best outcome for the patient.
-
J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol · Apr 2021
Laryngeal mask airway protector generates higher oropharyngeal leak pressures compared to the laryngeal mask airway supreme: A randomized clinical trial in the ambulatory surgery unit.
The Laryngeal Mask Airway (LMA) Protector™ is one of the latest introduced supraglottic airway devices. It provides access and functional separation of the respiratory and digestive tracts. Compared to the LMA Supreme™, it has two digestive ports, one to provide suction in the pharyngeal region and one for gastric tube insertion. High oropharyngeal leak pressure is a marker for safe ventilation when using LMA devices. We hypothesized that oropharyngeal leak pressure of the LMA Protector™ is 5 cm H2O higher than the oropharyngeal leak pressure of the LMA Supreme™ at various cuff volumes. Secondary outcome measures were ease of insertion of both masks, fiberoptic confirmation of correct positioning, failures of insertion, presence of blood staining, sore throat, presence of air leak and insertion time. ⋯ Oropharyngeal leak pressures were consistently higher (>5 cm H2O) for LMA Protector™ compared to LMA Supreme™. LMA Protector™, therefore, allows effective ventilation at higher airway pressures than LMA Supreme™.