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











Base de dados
Intervalo de ano de publicação
1.
Pain Res Manag ; 2017: 1030491, 2017.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28951663

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Ibuprofen and pregabalin both have independent positive effects on postoperative pain. The aim of the study is researching effect of 800 mg i.v. ibuprofen in addition to preoperative single dose pregabalin on postoperative analgesia and morphine consumption in posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: 42 adult ASA I-II physical status patients received 150 mg oral pregabalin 1 hour before surgery. Patients received either 250 ml saline with 800 mg i.v. ibuprofen or saline without ibuprofen 30 minutes prior to the surgery. Postoperative analgesia was obtained by morphine patient controlled analgesia (PCA) and 1 g i.v. paracetamol every six hours. PCA morphine consumption was recorded and postoperative pain was evaluated by Visual Analog Scale (VAS) in postoperative recovery room, at the 1st, 2nd, 4th, 8th, 12th, 24th, 36th, and 48th hours. RESULTS: Postoperative pain was significantly lower in ibuprofen group in recovery room, at the 1st, 2nd, 36th, and 48th hours. Total morphine consumption was lower in ibuprofen group at the 2nd, 4th, 8th, 12th, and 48th hours. CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal analgesia with preoperative ibuprofen added to preoperative pregabalin safely decreases postoperative pain and total morphine consumption in patients having posterior lumbar interbody fusion surgery, without increasing incidences of bleeding or other side effects.


Assuntos
Ibuprofeno/administração & dosagem , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Pregabalina/administração & dosagem , Fusão Vertebral , Acetaminofen/administração & dosagem , Administração Intravenosa , Adulto , Idoso , Analgesia Controlada pelo Paciente , Analgésicos/administração & dosagem , Analgésicos/uso terapêutico , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/administração & dosagem , Anti-Inflamatórios não Esteroides/uso terapêutico , Feminino , Humanos , Ibuprofeno/uso terapêutico , Região Lombossacral/cirurgia , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Morfina/administração & dosagem , Morfina/uso terapêutico , Manejo da Dor , Medição da Dor , Pregabalina/uso terapêutico , Fatores de Tempo
2.
Pak J Med Sci ; 32(3): 715-9, 2016.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-27375720

RESUMO

OBJECTIVE: Fentanyl is frequently used during anesthesia induction. The use of fentanyl can cause cough through different mechanisms. Here, we aimed to investigate effects of pheniramine maleate (PM), an antihistaminic agent, and compare it with lidocaine on fentanyl induced cough. METHODS: This is a randomized double-blind prospective clinical study of ASA I-II, 120 patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgery. Patients were administered drugs intravenously and randomly allocated into three groups: Group C (2 ml 0.9 % normal saline), Group L (1mg/kg lidocaine), and Group F (PM 45.5 mg). 90 seconds after administration, 2µ/kg fentanyl was applied in three seconds to all patients. Severity of cough (mild: 1-2, moderate: 3-5, severe> 5), time of the cough and vital parameters were recorded 90 seconds after fentanyl injection. RESULTS: Eight patients (25%) in Group C had fentanyl induced cough whereas three patients (7.5%) in Group L and one patient (2.5%) in Group F experienced this phenomenon. There was statistically significant difference between Group F and Group C (p<0.05); however, differences between Group L and Group C or Group F and Group L were not statistically significant (p>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Pheniramine Maleate 45.5 mg is better that placebo and as effective as lidocaine to prevent fentanyl induced cough.

3.
Environ Monit Assess ; 187(4): 211, 2015 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-25810085

RESUMO

Increasing marine traffic, over 55,000 ships visit per year, through the Turkish Straits System and the Sea of Marmara, produces a yearly average of 12 illegal oil discharges. This paper documents the comparison of chemical fingerprints of spilled oil with suspected sources of oils for identifying the source of illegal pollution in Turkey's seas. Fingerprinting is initiated by comparison of the synchronous fluorescence spectra (Δ=20 or 15 nm) of fugitive and suspected source oils. Potential matches of the spectra/chromatogram are confirmed or rejected by subsequent comparison of Fourier transform infrared spectrometry (FTIR), high-pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC) and gas chromatography with a flame ionisation detector (GC-FID) analysis results. In this study, 39 clean sea waters, 41 polluted sea waters and 111 suspected samples were analysed. According to the comparison of the suspected source sample and polluted sea water sample spectra by using spectrofluorometric analysis, 76 suspected source samples were categorised as non-match whilst 35 suspected samples were classified as match or probable match. Then, match and probable match samples were analysed by using further selected chromatographic methods. Finally, 28 suspected source samples were confirmed as a match, enabling legal proceedings to be initiated.


Assuntos
Monitoramento Ambiental/métodos , Poluição por Petróleo , Poluentes Químicos da Água/análise , Poluição Química da Água/legislação & jurisprudência , Cromatografia Gasosa/métodos , Ionização de Chama , Cromatografia Gasosa-Espectrometria de Massas , Oceanos e Mares , Óleos/análise , Água do Mar/análise , Turquia
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA