Perioperative effects of different hypotensive anesthesia techniques in orthognathic surgery.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to investigate the effectiveness of combining sevoflurane with remifentanil, esmolol, or nitroglycerin for hypotensive anesthesia and determine the suitable hypotensive anesthesia method for orthognathic surgery. MATERIAL AND METHODS: This retrospective study included 60 patients who underwent orthognathic surgery for developmental malocclusion. They were divided into three groups based on the hypotensive agent preferences: Group 1 (n = 20), sevoflurane and remifentanil; Group 2 (n = 20), sevoflurane and esmolol; Group 3 (n = 20), sevoflurane and nitroglycerin. Bleeding volume, heart rate, systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial blood pressure were recorded at certain times during the perioperative period, including at stages with increased stress levels in the body, such as incision and osteotomy. The patients' blood pressure, analgesic consumption and pain level were recorded in the postoperative period. RESULTS: Bleeding volume, surgery satisfaction related to bleeding, and total operation time did not differ significantly between groups. Intraoperatively, heart rates were significantly higher in Group 3 than in Groups 1 and 2 (p = 0.001). However, hemodynamic stability was similar in Groups 1 and 2. Postoperatively, analgesic consumption, pain levels, and blood pressure dynamics did not differ significantly between groups (p > 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Based on this study's results, it was concluded that infusing remifentanil, esmolol, or nitroglycerin with sevoflurane during orthognathic surgery successfully achieved the targeted hypotensive anesthesia and can be considered alternative methods. The decision on which method to use should consider the patient's overall health status and additional medical conditions.

Which method is successful in closure of acute oroantral communication? A retrospective study.

BACKGROUND: This study's purpose is to retrospectively evaluate the success of surgical methods used in treating Oroantral Communication (OAC). MATERIAL AND METHODS: This study was designed as a retrospective cohort study on patients who developed OAC after surgery maxillary posterior region. The records of patients previously treated with OAC were scanned through the hospital registry software. A data set was created by recording patients' age, gender, systemic disease, etiological reasons, and surgical methods. The primary predictor variable was the surgical method used to treat OAC. Other variables were age, gender, systemic disease and etiological reasons. The primary outcome was oroantral fistula development after the first surgical intervention. The patients who were positive in clinical examination and Valsalva test on control days were considered unsuccessful. One-way analysis of variance and Kruskal-Wallis tests were used for quantitative variables in more than two groups. Pearson chi-square test was used to compare categorical data. RESULTS: This retrospective cohort study was completed with 605 patients who met the study criteria among 95,883 patients who underwent surgery in the maxillary posterior region. The incidence of OAC was 0.63%. The patients consisted of 238 female and 367 male patients. The mean age was 41.06±14.48 years. Buccal flap and Buccal Fat Pad methods were used most frequently in the treatment. While treatment was completed with the first surgical intervention in 592 (97.85%) patients, OAF developed in 13 (2.15%) patients. No statistically significant relation existed between surgical technique and OAF development (p>0.005). The success rate of the Buccal Flap method was 98.7%, and the Buccal Fat Pad method was 95.8%. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study showed that noninvasive methods in openings smaller than 5 mm and surgical treatment methods in openings larger than 5 mm have a high success rate with the limitations of present study.

Is a contrast study really necessary prior to ureteroscopy?

This study aimed to evaluate the effect of preoperative imaging techniques on the success and complication rates of ureteroscopy. We performed a retrospective analysis of 736 patients (455 males and 281 females), with a mean age of 45.5±15.2 years (range, 1-88 years), who underwent rigid ureteroscopic procedures for removal of ureteral stones. Patients were divided into 4 groups according to the type of imaging modality used: group I, intravenous urography (n=116); group II, computed tomography (n=381); group III, computed tomography and intravenous urography (n=91), and group IV, ultrasonography and abdominal plain film (n=148). Patients’ demographics, stone size and location, prior shock wave lithotripsy, lithotripsy technique, operation time, success rate, and rate of intraoperative complications were compared among the groups. There were no significant differences in success and complication rates among the groups. The stone-free rate after primary ureteroscopy was 87.1% in group I, 88.2% in group II, 96.7% in group III, and 89.9% in group IV (P=0.093). The overall incidence of intraoperative complications was 11.8%. According to the modified Satava classification system, 6.1% of patients had grade 1, 5.1% had grade 2, and 0.54% had grade 3 complications. Intraoperative complications developed in 12.1% of patients in group I, 12.6% of patients in group II, 7.7% of patients in group III, and 12.2% of patients in group IV (P=0.625). Our findings clearly demonstrate that ureteroscopic treatment of ureteral stones can be safely and effectively performed with no use of contrast study imaging, except in doubtful cases of anatomical abnormalities.