RESUMO
Background and Aims: Endotracheal intubation (ET) in infants is considered a challenging task over the decades. Infants have short safe apnoea time, and this difficulty has been vanquished to some extent by using the videolaryngoscopes (VLs), but there exists a dearth of research particularly in this vulnerable subset. Therefore, this trial was conducted to evaluate intubation times obtained with C-MAC VL and conventional Miller laryngoscopes in infants. Methods: A total of 80 infants aged between 1 month and 1 year with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I-II requiring ET were randomised in two groups; the C-MAC VL or Miller laryngoscope ML. Anaesthesia was induced with sevoflurane 1-8% and atracurium 0.5 mg/kg IV. The primary outcome was evaluated as the total time taken to intubate. Secondary outcomes were time to achieve best glottic view (TBGV), tube insertion time (TIT), percentage of glottic opening (POGO) score, number of attempts and intubation difficulty score (IDS). Results: The median (interquartile range) of time taken for ET was less in VL; 22.5 (20.75-26) compared to ML; 26 (21.75-31). TBGV was achieved early in VL group than the ML group (6.03 ± 1.33s/7.88 ± 2.44) respectively (P-value < 0.001). POGO was better in VL (99.12 ± 4.795s) compared to ML (85.50 ± 31.13s). IDS was less in the VL group (0.07 ± 0.27) than in ML (0.70 ± 1.14). Other parameters, such as the number of attempts, bougie usage, adverse effects and TIT, were comparable across the two groups. Conclusion: When compared to the ML group, the C-MAC VL group exhibited a decreased intubation time, early TBGV, better POGO score, reduced IDS and subjective intubation difficulty. As a result, we consider VL to be a more efficacious device for intubating the trachea in infants.
RESUMO
The outbreak of the coronavirus disease (COVID)-19 pandemic has led to unprecedented challenges globally. At the outset of the receding second wave and third wave of COVID-19, many patients who have recovered from the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 (SARS-CoV-2) are coming for elective/emergency surgery. This demands a noteworthy emphasis on the post-COVID-19 obstetric patients. The administration of quality and safe obstetric anesthesia are quite challenging in this mentioned subset due to the overlap of signs and symptoms of COVID-19 with the constitutional signs and symptoms of pregnancy. The physiological changes in normal pregnancy and vascular, metabolic alterations in high-risk pregnancy may affect or exacerbate the pathogenesis or clinical presentation of COVID-19, respectively. This article highlights the specific concerns in recovered COVID-19 pregnant patients with associated comorbidity posted for surgery and their repercussions on anesthesia management.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND AND AIM: Therapeutic use of nonopioid analgesic such as paracetamol (PCM) is an alternative to opioids, so to avoid the established side effects associated with opioids, PCM is commonly used due to its analgesic and antipyretic effects. Recently, dexmedetomidine has also emerged on the anesthesia front with a potential role of providing postoperative analgesia. The present study was conducted to compare and assess the quality and duration of analgesia with PCM and dexmedetomidine using visual analog scale (VAS). METHODS: One hundred patients between the age of 18 and 60 years of the American Society of Anesthesiologists grade I and II undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgery were randomly allocated into two groups (n = 50). Each patient received either 1 g intravenous PCM, in 100 ml solution before incision (Group I), or i.v. dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg as bolus over 10 min followed by infusion of 0.5 µg/kg/h (Group II). Postoperatively, the following parameters were observed: quality and duration of analgesia, hemodynamic parameters, time to the first dose of rescue analgesia, sedation, and any postoperative complication or side effects. Statistical analysis was carried out using an unpaired t-test for quantitative parameters and nonparametric data using Wilcoxon signed-rank test and Mann-Whitney U-test. Qualitative data were analyzed using Chi-square or Fishers' exact test. RESULTS: Postoperative analgesic requirement significantly decreased (P = 0.001), with a lower score on VAS, better patient satisfaction scores, and Ramsay Sedation Score ranges from 3 to 5 (62%) in Group I. The incidence of nausea and vomiting, hypotension, and bradycardia was comparable in both the groups except shivering, which was found significantly less in Group II. CONCLUSION: Incorporation of dexmedetomidine as a part of multimodal analgesia provides better hemodynamic profile, analgesic, sedative, and amnesic properties along with negligible serious adverse effects.