A Comparison of Perioperative Complications and Outcomes in Patients Undergoing Cerebral Aneurysm Clipping Performed Ultra-Early (≤ 24 hours) versus Late (> 24 hours): A 7-Year Retrospective Study of 302 Patients.

Objectives The intracerebral aneurysm with subarachnoid hemorrhage (SAH) has a high morbidity and mortality rate. This study aimed to compare the incidences of perioperative complications in ultra-early surgery (within 24 hours) with those in late surgery (> 24 hours). Methods Retrospective data were reviewed for 302 patients who underwent craniotomies with aneurysm clipping between January 2014 and December 2020. Perioperative data were obtained from the medical records and reviewed by the investigators. The complications were compared between ultra-early and late operations. We were interested in major complications such as delayed ischemic neurologic deficit (DIND), intraoperative aneurysm rupture (IAR), and anesthesia-related complications. The short-term (in hospital) and long-term (1 year) outcomes in patients with or without DIND and IAR were compared. The collected data was statistically analyzed. Results Three hundred and two patients were analyzed, and 264 patients had completed follow-up. The ultra-early cases (150 patients) had a higher American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status, a lower Glasgow Coma Scale, and higher Hunt and Hess scales. The surgeons operated on more cases of the anterior cerebral artery as ultra-early operations. The incidence rates of DIND, IAR, severe hemodynamic instability, and cardiac arrest were 5.6, 8.3, 6.3, and 0.3%, respectively, which were not different between groups. However, the reintubation rate was higher in the ultra-early surgery cases (0 vs. 3.3%, p = 0.023). The DIND and IAR patients had poorer short-term (in hospital) outcomes. Conclusions There were no differences in major complications between ultra-early and late craniotomy with aneurysm clipping. However, the reintubation rate was strikingly higher in the ultra-early group. Patients with major complications had early, unfavorable outcomes.

Incidence and Risk Factors of Hypoxemia During Interventional Rigid Bronchoscopy Under Spontaneous-assisted Ventilation.

BACKGROUND: Interventional rigid bronchoscopy for tracheobronchial stenosis can be performed under total intravenous anesthesia and spontaneous-assisted ventilation. Intraoperative hypoxemia can occur during this procedure, but the incidence and risk factors have not yet been determined. METHODS: Medical records of patients who underwent rigid bronchoscopy for the treatment of tracheobronchial stenosis under total intravenous anesthesia and spontaneous-assisted ventilation during the study period from January 2011 to December 2012 were retrospectively reviewed. RESULTS: There were 126 patients who underwent 263 procedures. The 2 main causes of tracheobronchial stenosis were tuberculosis (41.3%) and malignancy (35.7%). The 2 main locations of stenotic area were the trachea (58.6%) and the left main bronchus (46.4%). Tracheobronchial dilatation and stent insertion were performed in 78.7% and 21.3% of patients, respectively. The incidence of intraoperative hypoxemia was 25.5%. Independent risk factors for intraoperative hypoxemia were a degree of tracheal stenosis ≥75% (odds ratio: 2.48; 95% confidence interval, 1.19-5.17) and tumor removal procedure (odds ratio: 2.9; 95% confidence interval, 1.13-7.41). CONCLUSIONS: Incidence of intraoperative hypoxemia during interventional rigid bronchoscopy for tracheobronchial stenosis under spontaneous-assisted ventilation was 25.5%. Risk factors for hypoxemia were a degree of tracheal stenosis ≥75% and tumor removal procedure.

Severe Venous Air Embolism Related to Positioning in Posterior Cranial Fossa Surgery in Siriraj Hospital.

BACKGROUND: Posterior cranial fossa surgery is commonly performed under sitting and horizontal position in our institution. Venous air embolism is a potentially serious complication of neurosurgery especially in the sitting position. OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare the incidence of severe venous air embolism and other complications of both positions. MATERIAL AND METHOD: A retrospective analysis of medical record was performed in 192 patients undergoing posterior cranial fossa craniotomy from January 2010 to December 2013. Data collected from the records included demographic profile, patient position, hemodynamic changes, venous air embolism (VAE), blood loss/transfusion, duration of surgery, postoperative complications, duration of ICU stay, and postoperative discharge status. The definition of severe air embolism was identified as suspected VAE with decreased systolic blood pressure greater than 20%. RESULTS: There were 92 patients in sitting position (SP) group and 100 patients in horizontal position (HP) group. The incidence of severe venous air embolism was signficantly higher in SP group compared with HP group (41.3% vs. 11.0%, p<0. 001). SP group had more complications than HP group in both central nervous system (71% vs. 34.0%, p = 0.001), and cardiovascular system (17% vs. 6%, p = 0.001). Although postoperative ventilator time in SP group was less than HP group (1.24 vs. 1.60 days, p = 0.029), ICU and hospital stay were not different in either group. CONCLUSION: The incidence of severe venous air embolism detected by end tidal CO2 was significantly higher in SP group. However, 11% of HP group were suspected of severe air embolism.

Lidocaine for reducing propofol-induced pain on induction of anaesthesia in adults.

BACKGROUND: Pain on propofol injection is an untoward effect and this condition can reduce patient satisfaction. Intravenous lidocaine injection has been commonly used to attenuate pain on propofol injection. Although many studies have reported that lidocaine was effective in reducing the incidence and severity of pain, nevertheless, no systematic review focusing on lidocaine for preventing high-intensity pain has been published. OBJECTIVES: The objective of this review was to determine the efficacy and adverse effects of lidocaine in preventing high-intensity pain on propofol injection. SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 10), Ovid MEDLINE (1950 To October 2014), Ovid EMBASE (1988 to October 2014), LILACS (1992 to October 2014) and searched reference lists of articles.We reran the search in November 2015. We found 11potential studies of interest, those studies were added to the list of 'Studies awaiting classification' and will be fully incorporated into the formal review findings when we update the review. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) using intravenous lidocaine injection as an intervention to decrease pain on propofol injection in adults. We excluded studies without a placebo or control group. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: We collected selected studies with relevant criteria. We identified risk of bias in five domains according to the following criteria: random sequence generation, allocation concealment, adequacy of blinding, completeness of outcome data and selective reporting. We performed meta-analysis by direct comparisons of intervention versus control. We estimated the summary odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals using the random-effects Mantel-Haenszel method in RevMan 5.3. We used the I(2) statistic to assess statistical heterogeneity. We assessed overall quality of evidence using the GRADE approach. MAIN RESULTS: We included 87 studies, 84 of which (10,460 participants) were eligible for quantitative analysis in the review. All participants, aged 13 years to 89 years, were American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I-III patients undergoing elective surgery. Each study was conducted in a single centre in high- , middle- and low-income countries worldwide. According to the risk of bias assessment, all except five studies were identified as being of satisfactory methodological quality, allowing 84 studies to be combined in the meta-analysis. Five of the 84 studies were assessed as high risk of bias: one for participant and personnel blinding, one for incomplete outcome data, and three for other potential sources of bias.The overall incidence of pain and high-intensity pain following propofol injection in the control group were 64% (95% CI 60% to 67.9%) and 38.1% (95% CI 33.4% to 43.1%), respectively while those in the lidocaine group were 30.2% (95% CI 26.7% to 33.7%) and 11.8% (95% CI 9.7% to 13.8%). Both lidocaine admixture and pretreatment were effective in reducing pain on propofol injection (lidocaine admixture OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.25, 31 studies, 4927 participants, high-quality evidence; lidocaine pretreatment OR 0.13, 95% CI 0.10 to 0.18, 43 RCTs, 4028 participants, high-quality evidence). Similarly, lidocaine administration could considerably decrease the incidence of pain when premixed with the propofol (OR 0.19, 95% CI 0.15 to 0.24, 36 studies, 5628 participants, high-quality evidence) or pretreated prior to propofol injection (OR 0.14, 95% CI 0.11 to 0.18, 52 studies, 4832 participants, high-quality evidence). Adverse effects of lidocaine administration were rare. Thrombophlebitis was reported in only two studies (OR not estimated, low-quality evidence). No studies reported patient satisfaction. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Overall, the quality of the evidence was high. Currently available data from RCTs are sufficient to confirm that both lidocaine admixture and pretreatment were effective in reducing pain on propofol injection. Furthermore, there were no significant differences of effect between the two techniques.

An economic evaluation of bupivacaine plus fentanyl versus ropivacaine alone for patient-controlled epidural analgesia after total-knee replacement procedure: a double-blinded randomized study.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Total-knee replacement (TKR) surgery is one of the most painful orthopedic procedures after surgery. Opioid has been commonly combined with a local anesthetic to improve the quality of pain relief, but the treatment has opioid-related side effects. This study compared the cost effectiveness of patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) with 0.0625% bupivacaine plus fentanyl (BF) 3 microg/mL versus 0.15% ropivacaine alone (R) during the first 48 hours after TKR procedure. METHODS: This prospective randomized double-blinded study was performed on 70 patients who underwent unilateral TKR procedure and received either BF or R after surgery. Visual analog scale (VAS) pain score at rest and upon movement, side effects, and cost of treatment were compared. RESULTS: Overall pain at rest and upon movement between groups was not significantly different (P = 0.58, 95% CI = 4.4 to -7.8 and P = 0.8, 95% CI = 6.4 to -8.2, respectively). Patients in the BF group experienced more pruritus and had more vomiting episodes than those in the R group (P = .015), whereas no difference occurred in other side effects. Nevertheless, patient satisfaction with pain management was higher in the BF group compared with that in the R group. In addition, pain treatment with bupivacaine and fentanyl was 18% less costly compared with ropivacaine alone. CONCLUSIONS: Considering the economic evaluation, we conclude that PCEA with 0.0625% bupivacaine plus fentanyl 3 microg/mL is more cost effective and provides more patient satisfaction than PCEA with ropivacaine alone. However, use of epidural ropivacaine alone causes fewer opioid-related side effects, particularly pruritus and vomiting.