Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Mais filtros

Base de dados
Tipo de documento
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Colorectal Dis ; 25(9): 1921-1928, 2023 09.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-37525414

RESUMO

AIM: The aim of this study was to assess if laparoscopic-assisted transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block (L-TAPB) is as efficient as ultrasound-guided TAP block (U-TAPB) in postoperative pain control. METHOD: In all, 112 patients scheduled for elective laparoscopic colon resection from February 2018 to December 2021 at two Swiss hospitals were included and randomized in a 1:1 ratio before surgery with either L-TAPB or U-TAPB. The primary end-point was the non-inferiority of the L-TAPB compared to U-TAPB with regard to the total opioid consumption within the first 24 h after surgery. Data regarding patients' characteristics, opioid consumption, pain on the visual analogue scale, operative and anaesthesia induction time, complications and length of stay were collected and analysed. RESULTS: Fifty-five patients were allocated to the L-TAPB and fifty-seven to the U-TAPB. No significant difference was found in the overall dose of opioids within 24 h, and the non-inferiority of the L-TAPB was confirmed. There were almost twice as many patients in the L-TAPB group requesting opioid reserves compared to the U-TAPB group (54.5% vs. 29.8%, P = 0.008). The anaesthesia induction time was significantly longer in the U-TAPB group (17 ± 11 min vs. 23 ± 12 min, P = 0.014). For all other variables (pain on the visual analogue scale, opioid consumption, need of epidural analgesia, operating time, postoperative complications and hospital stay) no statistically significant difference between the L-TAPB and the U-TAPB groups was noted. CONCLUSION: Our results showed the non-inferiority of the laparoscopic delivery compared to ultrasound-guided administration of the TAP block, with the advantage of not affecting anaesthesia times. STUDY REGISTRATION NUMBER: 2017-02017 CE 3294, ClinicalTrials.gov identifier NCT04575233.


Assuntos
Cirurgia Colorretal , Laparoscopia , Humanos , Músculos Abdominais/diagnóstico por imagem , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Colectomia/métodos , Laparoscopia/métodos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção
2.
PLoS One ; 17(6): e0269024, 2022.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35653380

RESUMO

INTRODUCTION: Nasogastric tube (NGT) placement is a procedure commonly performed in mechanically ventilated (MV) patients. Chest X-Ray is the diagnostic gold-standard to confirm its correct placement, with the downsides of requiring MV patients' mobilization and of intrinsic actinic risk. Other potential methods to confirm NGT placement have shown lower accuracy compared to chest X-ray; end-tidal CO2 (ETCO2) and pH analysis have already been singularly investigated as an alternative to the gold standard. Aim of this study was to determine threshold values in ETCO2 and pH measurement at which correct NGT positioning can be confirmed with the highest accuracy. MATERIALS & METHODS: This was a prospective, multicenter, observational trial; a continuous cohort of eligible patients was allocated with site into two arms. Patients underwent general anesthesia, orotracheal intubation and MV; in the first and second group we respectively assessed the difference between tracheal and esophageal ETCO2 and between esophageal and gastric pH values. RESULTS: From November 2020 to March 2021, 85 consecutive patients were enrolled: 40 in the ETCO2 group and 45 in the pH group. The ETCO2 ROC analysis for predicting NGT tracheal misplacement demonstrated an optimal ETCO2 cutoff value of 25.5 mmHg, with both sensitivity and specificity reaching 1.0 (AUC 1.0, p < 0.001). The pH ROC analysis for predicting NGT correct gastric placement resulted in an optimal pH cutoff value of 4.25, with mild diagnostic accuracy (AUC 0.79, p < 0.001). DISCUSSION: In patients receiving MV, ETCO2 and pH measurements respectively identified incorrect and correct NGT placement, allowing the identification of threshold values potentially able to improve correct NGT positioning. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03934515 (www.clinicaltrials.gov).


Assuntos
Intubação Gastrointestinal , Respiração Artificial , Humanos , Concentração de Íons de Hidrogênio , Intubação Gastrointestinal/métodos , Projetos Piloto , Estudos Prospectivos
3.
Int J Colorectal Dis ; 35(9): 1741-1747, 2020 Sep.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-32474710

RESUMO

PURPOSE: In this double-blind randomized trial, we aimed to compare the postoperative pain, complications, and length of hospital stay in patients undergoing open hemorrhoidectomy under spinal anesthesia with or without the pudendal nerve block. METHODS: Patients undergoing Milligan-Morgan hemorrhoidectomy under spinal anesthesia were randomized to undergo a pudendal nerve block or no intervention. Postoperative pain on the visual analogue scale (VAS) at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h; opioid administration; and length of hospital stay were recorded and analyzed. RESULTS: Over the study period, 49 patients were included and 23 randomized in the treatment arm. No differences in terms of age, gender, and preoperative risk factors were noted between groups. The pain on the VAS at 6, 12, 24, and 48 h was 2.8 vs. 4.6 (p = 0.046), 3.4 vs. 4.7 (p = 0.697), 1.4 vs. 3.1 (p = 0.016), and 1.0 vs. 2.1 (p = 0.288) in the treatment and control groups respectively. No differences in opioids use or complications were noted. Length of hospital stay was 1.2 vs. 1.8 days respectively (p = 0.046). No complications directly associated to the pudendal nerve block were observed. Multivariate analysis revealed that the pudendal nerve block was an independent factor reducing the postoperative pain. CONCLUSIONS: The ultrasound-guided pudendal nerve block in patients undergoing open hemorrhoidectomy under spinal anesthesia showed a statistically significant reduction in postoperative pain and length of hospital stay. The proposed technique appeared to be safe and feasible and may be recommendable in patients undergoing open hemorrhoidectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04251884.


Assuntos
Hemorroidectomia , Hemorroidas , Bloqueio Nervoso , Nervo Pudendo , Método Duplo-Cego , Hemorroidectomia/efeitos adversos , Hemorroidas/cirurgia , Humanos , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Dor Pós-Operatória/etiologia , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA