Comparison of Gastric Residual Volume After Ingestion of A Carbohydrate Drink and Water in Healthy Volunteers with Obesity: A Randomized Crossover Study.

INTRODUCTION: Preoperative carbohydrate intake is essential to enhance postoperative recovery. However, its safety for individuals with obesity remains unclear. This study investigated the safety of preoperative carbohydrate consumption compared to water intake in obese populations through gastric volume assessment. METHODS: A prospective randomized crossover study enrolled 30 healthy volunteers aged 18-65 years with a body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2, following a minimum 6-h fast. The participants received either 400 ml of a carbohydrate drink (group C) or water (group W). Gastric ultrasonography, blood glucose level, hunger, and thirst assessments were conducted at baseline (T) and various time points (T2 to T6). The protocol was repeated with reverse interventions at least 1 week later. RESULTS: Group C had significantly higher gastric volume at T3, T4, and T5 compared to group W, with a prolonged time to empty the gastric antrum (94.4 ± 28.5 vs. 61.0 ± 33.5 min, 95% CI 33.41 [17.06,24.69]). However, glucose levels, degrees of hunger, and thirst showed no significant differences between the groups. CONCLUSION: Administering 400 ml of preoperative carbohydrates to healthy obese individuals 2 h preoperatively is safe and comparable to water intake. These findings support the integration of carbohydrate loading into perioperative care for obese individuals, consistent with the enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. Further research is warranted to refine preoperative fasting protocols and improve surgical outcomes in this population.

The anxiolytic effects of preoperative administration of pregabalin in comparison to diazepam and placebo.

We aimed to evaluate the potential anxiolytic effects of premedication with pregabalin, compared with diazepam and placebo. We conducted this non-inferiority, double-blind, randomized controlled trial in ASA classification I-II patients aged 18-70 years, scheduled for elective surgery under general anesthesia. They were allocated to receive pregabalin (75 mg the night before surgery and 150 mg 2 h before surgery), diazepam (5 and 10 mg in the same manner) or placebo. Preoperative anxiety was evaluated using verbal numerical rating scale (VNRS) and Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) before and after premedication. Sleep quality, sedation level, and adverse effects were assessed as secondary outcomes. A total of 231 patients were screened and 224 completed the trial. The mean change (95%CI) in anxiety scores from before to after medication in pregabalin, diazepam, and placebo groups for VNRS were - 0.87 (- 1.43, - 0.30), - 1.17 (- 1.74, - 0.60), and - 0.99 (- 1.56, - 0.41), and for APAIS were - 0.38 (- 1.04, 0.28), - 0.83 (- 1.49, - 0.16), and - 0.27 (- 0.95, 0.40). The difference in change for pregabalin versus diazepam was 0.30 (- 0.50, 1.11) for VNRS and 0.45 (- 0.49, 1.38) for APAIS, exceeding the limit of inferiority for APAIS of 1.3. Sleep quality was statistically different between pregabalin and placebo groups (p = 0.048). Sedation in pregabalin and diazepam groups were significantly higher than placebo group (p = 0.008). No significant differences of other side effects, except dry mouth was higher in placebo group compared with diazepam (p = 0.006). The study filed to provide evidence at non-inferiority of pregabalin compared to diazepam. Furthermore, premedication with either pregabalin or diazepam did not significantly reduce the preoperative anxiety in comparison to placebo, despite the fact that both resulted in higher levels of sedation. Clinicians should weigh the benefits and risks of premedication with these 2 drugs.Thai Clinical Trials Registry: TCTR20190424001 (24/04/2019) Registry URL: https://www.thaiclinicaltrials.org/ .

A comparison of ondansetron and lidocaine in reducing injection pain of propofol: a randomized controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Direct stimulation of the afferent nerve endings in the venous endothelium is one explanation of propofol injection pain. Previous studies found that ondansetron can also block sodium channels. This effect is similar to that of lidocaine. OBJECTIVE: The primary outcome was the efficacy of ondansetron compared to lidocaine and placebo for the reduction of propofol injection pain. METHOD: This trial was conducted in 240 patients, American Society of Anesthesiologists classification I-III and aged between 18-65 years old, undergoing elective surgery, and having a 20-gauge intravenous catheter at the hand dorsum. Each group of 80 patients received 8 mg. of ondansetron in the O Group, 40 mg. of lidocaine in the L Group and normal saline in the C Group. The study medications were blindly administered to the patients through a 20-gauge intravenous catheter placed on the hand dorsum, and then 1 min later, the small dose of propofol (50 mg.) was infused via the syringe pump at a rate of 600 ml/hr. for 30 s. Following that, the syringe pump of propofol was temporarily stopped, and the patients were asked to rate their pain at the injection site. RESULT: The incidence of pain was lowest in the L group (66.2%) compared with the O (82.5%) and the C groups (85.0%) (P < 0.01). The median pain score in the L, O, and C groups were 2 (0-4), 4 (2-5), and 4.5 (2-6), respectively (P < 0.01). The incidences of no pain, mild, moderate, and severe pain were also significantly different in the L group (33.8%, 37.5%, 21.2%, and 7.5%, respectively) compared with those in the O group (17.5%, 31.2%, 31.2%, and 20.0%, respectively) and the C groups (15.0%, 22.5%, 40.0%, and 22.5%, respectively) (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Pretreatment with intravenous lidocaine, rather than ondansetron, can reduce the incidence and intensity of propofol-induced pain.