Comparative Evaluation of IV Paracetamol Versus IV Dexmedetomidine in Inpatient Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery: A Double-Blinded Randomized Controlled Study.

PURPOSE: Reconstructive surgeries following fractures in the maxillofacial region often involve considerable bone manipulation, and paracetamol is a commonly used analgesic medication in both intraoperative and postoperative periods. Dexmedetomidine, an alpha-2 adrenoceptor agonist, has both sedative and analgesic properties with minimal cardiorespiratory effects and has been used primarily for its sedative properties in oral and maxillofacial surgery. AIMS AND OBJECTIVES: To compare the intraoperative analgesic requirements among patients undergoing oral and maxillofacial surgery who receive IV paracetamol versus IV dexmedetomidine. The time to requirement for the first postoperative analgesic dose and safety and adverse events of both medications were also assessed. PATIENTS AND METHODS: In total, 64 patients needing primary reconstructive surgery for facial fractures were recruited and divided into two groups for this double-blinded study. Patients were randomized to receive a preinduction dose of either IV paracetamol 1 g (Group P) or IV dexmedetomidine 1 µg/kg (Group D). Sedation scores (Ramsay sedation scale), maximal interincisal distance and pain scores at maximal mouth opening (visual analogue scale) were assessed in both groups just prior to and after the administration of the study drugs. After induction, Group P and Group D received a maintenance dose of normal saline and dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg/h) during the intraoperative period, respectively. Standard noninvasive cardiorespiratory monitoring was done for the entire duration of surgery. Following extubation, postoperative pain scores and the time to request for first analgesic dose in either group were recorded. RESULTS: The time taken to perform the surgery was comparable in both groups. There was a significant difference between the groups in visual analogue scores and interincisal distance after the bolus dose (p < 0.05). Systolic and diastolic blood pressure was significantly lower in Group D at around 150 and 175 min of surgery. While the intraoperative fentanyl consumption was comparable in both groups, the time to request for the first analgesic dose in the postoperative period was significantly delayed in Group P (p < 0.05). No adverse cardiopulmonary events were observed in either group. CONCLUSION: The intraoperative anesthetic and analgesic requirements and hemodynamic stability were comparable in IV paracetamol and dexmedetomidine groups. Dexmedetomidine did not confer any enhanced analgesia effect in the postoperative period. More research examining the role of dexmedetomidine for longer duration inpatient oral and maxillofacial surgery is needed. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER: http://ClinicalTrials.gov (No. CTRI/2017/08/009468).

Robot-assisted surgical approach to bladder cancer: a decade of progress!

Robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) has gained popularity and proven its efficacy, safety and reproducibility in the last decade. RARC has resulted in less blood loss, enhanced recovery, and shorter hospital stay. RARC has proven to have similar or better postoperative morbidity, mortality and equal oncologic, outcomes. Limiting factors to the acceptance of this surgical approach have included its steep learning curve and the lack of both long-term outcome data. This article systematically reviews the literature comparing the outcomes for RARC (comparisons with open radical cystectomy when performed at the same institution) with a focus on operative, complications, oncologic, functional and survival outcomes.

pT1 substaging in renal cell carcinoma: validation of the 2002 TNM staging modification of malignant renal epithelial tumors.

PURPOSE: Tumor size has been used as one of the criteria to stratify renal cell carcinoma (RCC) into different pathological stages (pT). The recent 2002 UICC/TNM classification of malignant epithelial renal tumors is modified to substratify pT1 RCC into pT1a (less than 4.0 cm) and pT1b (greater than 4.0 but less than 7.0 cm). In this study we ascertained if this stage modification has prognostic relevance. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A total of 259 consecutive radical nephrectomy specimens of organ confined RCC from 1970 to 1997 at 1 institution, including 153 of conventional RCC (CRCC), 71 of papillary RCC, 28 of chromophobe RCC, 1 of collecting duct carcinoma and 6 of RCC not otherwise specified, with a mean clinical followup of 7.5 years (median 6.4) were included in the study. RESULTS: There were 115 pT1a (44.4%), 95 pT1b (36.7%) and 49 pT2 tumors (18.9%). Disease recurrences (DR) and disease specific death occurred in 2 (1.7%) and 0 cases (0%) of pT1a, 7 (7.3%) and 5 (5.3%) of pT1b, and 16 (32.6%) and 12 (24.5%) of pT2. DR for pT1b was higher compared with pT1a (all histological subtypes RR 3.68), although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.106). If only CRCCs were analyzed, DR in the pT1b group was statistically higher compared with pT1a (RR 8.54, p = 0.047). Disease specific survival in pT1a could not be evaluated because no deaths occurred in this subgroup. DR and disease specific survival were significantly different between pT1b and pT2 tumors for all histological subtypes (RR 5.51, p = 0.001 and 5.49, p = 0.001) and for the CRCC subtype (RR 5.50, p = 0.001 and 5.18, p = 0.005, respectively). Using size as a continuous variable the logarithmic change in tumor size was a significant predictor of DR (RR 8.82, p = 0.001). All statistical analyses were adjusted for age and sex. CONCLUSIONS: Substaging RCC into pT1a and pT1b yields prognostically important information, validating the 2002 TNM modification for malignant renal epithelial malignancies. The substratification of pT1 is particularly useful in tumors with CRCC histology.

Prediction of acute renal failure by "bedside formula" in medical and surgical intensive care patients.

BACKGROUND: Prediction of which intensive care unit (ICU) patients are likely to develop acute renal failure (ARF) would be useful. However, scoring systems such as APACHE have been disappointing in this regard. We previously developed a bedside formula to predict ARF using only 3 parameters: serum albumin, urine osmolality, and presence of sepsis. METHODS: We prospectively evaluated 115 consecutive medical ICU (MICU) patients, comparing the bedside formula to APACHE II AND APACHE III as predictors of ARF or death and looking at nutritional parameters such as iron binding capacity, triceps skin fold, mid-arm circumference, and total lymphocyte count. We then evaluated 123 additional consecutive MICU and 98 consecutive surgical ICU (SICU) patients, comparing the bedside formula to APACHE II. RESULTS: The bedside formula was consistently more accurate than APACHE II in predicting ARF or in-hospital death in MICU patients. However, in SICU neither formula predicted ARF, and APACHE II predicted in-hospital death slightly better. No nutritional parameter other than albumin correlated with ARF. CONCLUSION: The bedside formula appears superior to APACHE II in predicting ARF or death in MICU but not SICU. This suggests that these two ICU populations are different.