The Silent Killer Seeks Young Blood: A Case Report on the Perioperative Anesthetic Management of a Paraganglionoma in Pregnancy.

Pheochromocytomas and paraganglionomas are rare neuroendocrine tumors. The multisystem effects of these tumors on the pregnant woman and fetus, the timing of surgery in relation to the pregnancy, and the pharmacological treatment have several anesthetic implications. Case reports on elective cesarean section followed by postpartum resection of the tumor are scarce. A case is presented of a 31-year-old nulliparous female where an antenatal diagnosis of a paraganglionoma was made at 19 weeks gestation for whom an elective cesarean section was performed at 31 weeks gestation under graded lumbar epidural anesthesia, followed by an elective open surgical removal of the tumor six weeks postpartum.

Emergency Awake Abdominal Surgery Under Thoracic Epidural Anaesthesia in a High-Risk Patient Within a Resource-Limited Setting.

Awake abdominal surgery is performed daily around the world for caesarean section surgery under lumbar subarachnoid anaesthesia and/or graded lumbar epidural anaesthesia. Reports of awake abdominal surgery under thoracic epidural anaesthesia (TEA) for patients with bowel obstruction are scarce, as this patient population is at high risk for pulmonary aspiration. In this report, we describe a case in which a graded TEA was successfully used as the sole anaesthetic technique in a patient with severe pulmonary disease undergoing an awake emergency laparotomy for bowel ischaemia for whom no postoperative intensive care monitoring was available. No anaesthetic or surgical complications occurred, and the patient was discharged home seven days after the surgical procedure. A 30-day follow-up revealed no residual anaesthetic or surgical complications, with a return to baseline function.

Defining the role of thoracic spinal anaesthesia in the 21st century: a narrative review.

Since the performance of the first thoracic spinal anaesthetic in early 1908 many anaesthetists have gained interest in this unorthodox neuraxial anaesthetic technique. The main rationale justifying its use is to prevent complications related to general anaesthesia in high-risk patient populations. There is, however, significant debate regarding this practice around the world. The main concerns are fear of iatrogenic injury to the spinal cord, cephalad spread of local anaesthetic causing a complete spinal block, and haemodynamic instability owing to blockade of cardioaccelerator sympathetic fibres. The purpose of this narrative review is to appraise the literature critically regarding thoracic spinal anaesthesia, to synthesise the available information, and to provide a summary of evidence justifying its use in modern anaesthesia.

Within- and between-laboratory reproducibility and predictive capacity of amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) using a 0.5 mg/mL test chemical solution: Results of the study for reproducibility confirmation implemented in five participating laboratories.

The amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) is an in chemico alternative assay for skin sensitization listed in OECD test guideline 442C. ADRA evaluates the reactivity of sensitizers to proteins, which is key event 1 in the skin sensitization adverse outcome pathway. Although the current key event 1 evaluation method is a simple assay that evaluates nucleophile and test chemical reactivity, mixtures of unknown molecular weights cannot be evaluated because a constant molar ratio between the nucleophile and test chemical is necessary. In addition, because the nucleophile is quantified by HPLC, the frequency of co-eluting the test chemical and nucleophile increases when measuring multi-component mixtures. To solve these issues, test conditions have been developed using a 0.5 mg/mL test chemical solution and fluorescence-based detection. Since the practicality of these methods has not been substantiated, a validation test to confirm reproducibility was conducted in this study. The 10 proficiency substances listed in the ADRA guidelines were tested three times at five different laboratories. The results of both within- and between-laboratory reproducibility were 100%, and the results of ultraviolet- and fluorescence-based measurements were also consistent. In addition to the proficiency substances, a new positive control, squaric acid diethyl ester, was tested three times at the five laboratories. The results showed high reproducibility with N-(2-(1-naphthyl)acetyl)-l-cysteine depletion of 37%-52% and α-N-(2-(1-naphthyl)acetyl)-l-lysine depletion of 99%-100%. Thus, high reproducibility was confirmed in both evaluations of the 0.5 mg/mL test chemical and the fluorescence-based measurements, validating the practicability of these methods.

The within- and between-laboratories reproducibility and predictive capacity of Amino acid Derivative Reactivity Assay using 4 mM test chemical solution: Results of ring study implemented at five participating laboratories.

Amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) for skin sensitization was adopted as an alternative method in the 2019 OECD Guideline for the Testing of Chemicals (OECD TG 442C). The molar ratio of the nucleophilic reagent to the test chemicals in the reaction solution was set to 1:50. Imamura et al. reported that changing this molar ratio from 1:50 to 1:200 reduced in false negatives and improved prediction accuracy. Hence, a ring study using ADRA with 4 mM of a test chemical solution (ADRA, 4 mM) was conducted at five different laboratories to verify within- and between-laboratory reproducibilities (WLR and BLR, respectively). In this study, we investigated the WLR and BLR using 14 test chemicals grouped into three classes: (1) eight proficiency substances, (2) four test chemicals that showed false negatives in the ADRA with 1 mM test chemical solution (ADRA, 1 mM), but correctly positive in ADRA (4 mM), and (3) current positive control (phenylacetaldehyde) and a new additional positive control (squaric acid diethyl ester). The results showed 100% reproducibility and 100% accuracy for skin sensitization. Hence, it is clear that the ADRA (4 mM) is an excellent test method in contrast to the currently used ADRA (1 mM). We plan to resubmit the ADRA (4 mM) test method to the OECD Test Guideline Group in the near future so that OECD TG 442C could be revised for the convenience and benefit of many ADRA users.

Oxidation of a cysteine-derived nucleophilic reagent by dimethyl sulfoxide in the amino acid derivative reactivity assay.

The amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA), which is an in chemico alternative to the use of animals in testing for skin sensitization potential, offers significant advantages over the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA) in that it utilizes nucleophilic reagents that are sensitive enough to be used with test chemical solutions prepared to concentrations of 1 mm, which is one-hundredth that of DPRA. ADRA testing of hydrophobic or other poorly soluble compounds requires that they be dissolved in a solvent consisting of dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) and acetonitrile. DMSO is known to promote dimerization by oxidizing thiols, which then form disulfide bonds. We investigated the extent to which DMSO oxidizes the cysteine-derived nucleophilic reagents used in both DPRA and ADRA and found that oxidation of both N-(2-(1-naphthyl)acetyl)-l-cysteine (NAC) and cysteine peptide increases as the concentration of DMSO increases, thereby lowering the concentration of the nucleophilic reagent. We also found that use of a solvent consisting of 5% DMSO in acetonitrile consistently lowered NAC concentrations by about 0.4 µm relative to the use of solvents containing no DMSO. We also tested nine sensitizers and four nonsensitizers having different sensitization potencies to compare NAC depletion with and without 5% DMSO and found that reactivity was about the same with either solvent. Based on the above, we conclude that the use of a solvent containing 5% DMSO has no effect on the accuracy of ADRA test results. We plan to review and propose revisions to OECD Test Guideline 442C based on the above investigation.

The within- and between-laboratory reproducibility and predictive capacity of the in chemico amino acid derivative reactivity assay: Results of validation study implemented in four participating laboratories.

The amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) is an in chemico alternative method that focuses on protein binding as the molecular initiating event for skin sensitization. It is a simple and versatile method that has successfully solved some of the problems of the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA). The transferability and within- and between-laboratory reproducibility of ADRA were evaluated and confirmed as part of a validation study conducted at four participating laboratories. The transfer of ADRA technology from the lead laboratory to the four participating laboratories was completed successfully during a two-step training program, after which the skin sensitization potentials of 40 coded chemicals were predicted based on the results of ADRA testing. Within-laboratories reproducibility was 100% (10 of 10), 100% (10 of 10), 100% (7 of 7) and 90% (9 of 10), or an average of 97.3% (36 of 37); between-laboratory reproducibility as calculated on the results of three laboratories at the time was 91.9%. The overall predictive capacity comprised an accuracy of 86.9%, sensitivity of 81.5% and specificity of 98.1%. These results satisfied the targets set by the validation management team for demonstrating transferability, within- and between-laboratory reproducibility, and predictive capacity as well as gave a clear indication that ADRA is easily transferable and sufficiently robust to be used in place of DPRA.

Cause of and countermeasures for oxidation of the cysteine-derived reagent used in the amino acid derivative reactivity assay.

The amino acid derivative reactivity assay (ADRA) is an in chemico alternative to animal testing for skin sensitization that solves certain problems found in the use of the direct peptide reactivity assay (DPRA). During a recent validation study conducted at multiple laboratories as part of the process to include ADRA in an existing OECD test guideline, one of the nucleophilic reagents used in ADRA-N-(2-(1-naphthyl)acetyl)-l-cysteine (NAC)-was found to be susceptible to oxidation in much the same manner that the cysteine peptide used in DPRA was. Owing to this, we undertook a study to clarify the cause of the promotion of NAC oxidation. In general, cysteine and other chemicals that have thiol groups are known to oxidize in the presence of even minute quantities of metal ions. When metal ions were added to the ADRA reaction solution, Cu2+ promoted NAC oxidation significantly. When 0.25 µm of EDTA was added in the presence of Cu2+ , NAC oxidation was suppressed. Based on this, we predicted that the addition of EDTA to the NAC stock solution would suppress NAC oxidation. Next, we tested 82 chemicals used in developing ADRA to determine whether EDTA affects ADRA's ability to predict sensitization. The results showed that the addition of EDTA has virtually no effect on the reactivity of NAC with a test chemical, yielding an accuracy of 87% for predictions of skin sensitization, which was roughly the same as ADRA.