Oral midodrine for prophylaxis against post-spinal anesthesia hypotension during hip arthroplasty in elderly population: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: We aimed to evaluate the efficacy of midodrine as a prophylaxis against post-spinal hypotension in elderly patients undergoing hip arthroplasty. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included elderly patients undergoing hip arthroplasty under spinal anesthesia. Ninety minutes before the procedure, patients were randomized to receive either 5-mg midodrine or placebo (metoclopramide). After spinal anesthesia, mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate were monitored every 2 min for 20 min then every 5 min until the end of the procedure. Post-spinal hypotension (MAP < 80% baseline) was treated with 10 mg ephedrine. The primary outcome was intraoperative ephedrine consumption. Secondary outcomes were the incidence of post-spinal hypotension, bradycardia, and hypertension (MAP increased by > 20% of the baseline reading). RESULTS: We analyzed 29 patients in the midodrine group and 27 in the control group. The intraoperative ephedrine consumption was lower in the midodrine group than in the control group (median [quartiles]: 10 [0, 30] mg versus 30 [20, 43] mg, respectively, P-value: 0.002); and the incidence of intraoperative hypotension was lower in the midodrine group than that in the control group. The incidence of hypertension and bradycardia were comparable between the two groups. CONCLUSION: The use of 5 mg oral midodrine decreased the vasopressor requirements and incidence of hypotension after spinal anesthesia for hip surgery in elderly patients. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: This study was registered on September 22, 2022 at clinicaltrials.gov registry, NCT05548985, URL: https://classic. CLINICALTRIALS: gov/ct2/show/NCT05548985 .

Comparison of the hemodynamic effects of opioid-based versus lidocaine-based induction of anesthesia with propofol in older adults: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The present study aims to compare the hemodynamic profile of lidocaine and fentanyl during propofol induction of general anesthesia. METHODS: This randomized controlled trial included patients aged above 60 years undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery. The included patients received either 1 mg/kg lidocaine (n = 50) or 1 mcg/kg fentanyl (n = 50) based on total body weight with propofol induction of anesthesia. Patient's hemodynamics were recorded every minute for the first 5 min then every 2 min until 15 min after induction of anesthesia. Hypotension (mean arterial pressure [MAP] <65 mmHg or >30% reduction from baseline) was treated by intravenous 4 mcg bolus of norepinephrine. Outcomes included norepinephrine requirements (primary), the incidence of postinduction hypotension, MAP, heart rate, intubation condition, and postoperative delirium via the cognitive assessment method. RESULTS: Forty-seven patients in the lidocaine group and 46 patients in the fentanyl group were analyzed. None in the lidocaine group experienced hypotension, while 28/46 (61%) of patients in the fentanyl group developed at least one episode of hypotension requiring a median (25th and 75th quartiles) norepinephrine dose of 4 (0,5) mcg, p-value <0.001 for both outcomes. The average MAP was lower in the fentanyl group than in the lidocaine group at all time points after anesthesia induction. The average heart rate was comparable between the two groups nearly at all time points after anesthesia induction. The overall intubation condition was comparable between the two groups. None of the included patients developed postoperative delirium. CONCLUSION: Lidocaine-based regimen for induction of anesthesia reduced the risk of postinduction hypotension in older patients compared to the fentanyl-based regimen.

Erector spinae plane block versus subcostal transversus abdominis plane block in patients undergoing open liver resection surgery: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) in relation to subcostal transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) in patients undergoing open liver resection surgery. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, we included adult patients undergoing open liver resection surgery. After induction of general anaesthesia, the included patients were randomized to receive either ESPB (n = 30) or subcostal TAPB (n = 30). Postoperative pain was assessed using the numeric rating scale (NRS) at rest and during cough. Intravenous morphine boluses were used for management of breakthrough pain intra- and postoperatively. The study's primary outcome was morphine consumption during the first 24 h postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative morphine consumption, time to first postoperative morphine requirement, incidence of complications, and patient satisfaction. RESULTS: Sixty patients were included and were available for the final analysis in this study. The intra-and postoperative morphine consumption were less in the ESPB group than the subcostal TAPB group (median [quartiles] morphine dose: 0 [0-0] vs 2 [0-5] mg, p = 0.007 and 20 [15-20] vs 25 [20-30] mg, p = 0.006, respectively). The time to first morphine requirement was longer in the ESPB group (median [quartiles]: 6.5 [5.5-6.5] h) than the subcostal TAPB group (median [quartiles]: 4.3 [1.0-6.5] h), P = 0.013. Patients in the ESPB group had lower incidence of sedation and higher level of satisfaction than the subcostal TAPB group. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing open liver resection surgery, ESPB provided superior analgesic properties than subcostal TAPB. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT05253079, Principal investigator: Maha Mostafa, Date of registration: February 23, 2022. URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05253079.

Evaluation of adequacy of ventilation and gastric insufflation at three levels of inspiratory pressure for facemask ventilation during induction of anaesthesia: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: In this study, we aimed to compare three inspiratory pressures during facemask ventilation in paralysed patients regarding the subsequent incidence of gastric insufflation and the adequacy of lung ventilation. METHODS: In this randomised controlled trial, we included adult patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia. The patients were randomly allocated to receive positive inspiratory pressure (PIP) of 10, 15, or 20 cmH2O during pressure-controlled mask ventilation. Antral cross-sectional area (CSA) was assessed by ultrasound at baseline before mask ventilation and after endotracheal intubation and gastric insufflation was defined as increased CSA after endotracheal intubation > 30% of the baseline measurement. The primary outcome was the incidence of gastric insufflation. Other outcomes included the tidal volume, and the incidence of adequate ventilation (tidal volume of 6-10 mL/kg predicted body weight). RESULTS: We analysed data from 36 patients in each group. The number of patients with gastric insufflation was the lowest in the PIP 10 group (0/36 [0%]) in comparison with PIP 15 (2/36 [19%] and PIP 20 36/36 [100%] groups (P-values of 0.019 and < 0.001, respectively). The probability of adequate ventilation at any time point was the highest in PIP 10, followed by PIP 15, and was the lowest in the PIP 20 group. CONCLUSION: An inspiratory pressure of 10 cmH2O in paralysed patients provided the least risk of gastric insufflation with adequate ventilation during induction of general anaesthesia compared to inspiratory pressure of 15- and 20 cmH2O.