ABSTRACT
Not available.
ABSTRACT
PURPOSE: To evaluate the prevalence and potential predictors of obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) in a cohort of adults with severe asthma. METHODS: From March 2021 to December 2021, this cross-sectional study enrolled patients with severe asthma receiving biologics, who were consecutively referred for sleep evaluation irrespective of sleep-related symptoms. Clinical and functional data, including three OSA screening instruments (GOAL, STOP-Bang, and NoSAS) were recorded. All participants underwent a portable sleep test (ApneaLink Air™). OSA diagnosis was based on the respiratory disturbance index ≥ 5.0/h and subclassified according to severity thresholds. Data were subjected to logistic regression tests to identify possible predictors for OSA. Discrimination was estimated from the area under the curve (AUC). RESULTS: Overall, 56 outpatients were included (80% females): 54% with any OSA, 13% with moderate-to-severe OSA, and 4% with severe OSA. In the multivariate analysis, no parameter emerged as an independent predictor for OSA: age (p = 0.080), body mass index (p = 0.060), loud snoring (p = 0.130), and hypertension (p = 0.848). No screening instrument was useful to predict any OSA: GOAL (AUC: 0.714; 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.579-0.849), NoSAS (AUC: 0.645; 95% CI: 0.497-0.793), and STOP-Bang (AUC: 0.640; 95% CI: 0.493-0.788). Similarly, no screening tool was also useful for predicting moderate-to-severe OSA or severe OSA. CONCLUSION: Patients with evere asthma receiving biologics exhibit a high prevalence of OSA. However, no clinical, functional, or OSA screening instrument showed acceptable discriminatory ability to predict the presence of OSA in these patients with severe asthma.
Subject(s)
Asthma , Biological Products , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive , Female , Humans , Adult , Male , Cross-Sectional Studies , Surveys and Questionnaires , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/diagnosis , Sleep Apnea, Obstructive/epidemiology , Asthma/diagnosis , Asthma/drug therapy , Asthma/epidemiologyABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Older people are currently the fastest growing segment of the worldwide population. The present study aimed to estimate propofol dose in older patients based on size descriptors measured by bioelectrical impedance analysis (BIA). METHODS: A cross sectional study in adult and older patients with body mass index equal to or lower than 35 kg/m2 was carried out. BIA and Clinical Frail Scale scoring were performed during pre-operative evaluation. Propofol infusion was started at 2000 mg/h until loss of consciousness (LOC) which was defined by "loss of eye-lash reflex" and "loss of response to name calling". Total dose of propofol at LOC was recorded. Propofol plasma concentration was measured using gas chromatography/ion trap-mass spectrometry. RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled in the study. Total propofol dose required to LOC was lower in Age ≥ 65 group and a higher plasma propofol concentration was measured in this group. 60% of old patients were classified as "apparently vulnerable" or "frail" and narrow phase angle values were associated with increasing vulnerability scores. In the Age ≥ 65 group, the correlation analysis showed that the relationship between propofol dose and total body weight (TBW) scaled by the corresponding phase angle value is stronger than the correlation between propofol dose and TBW or fat free mass (FFM). CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrates that weight-based reduction of propofol is suitable in older patients; however FFM was not seen to be more effective than TBW to predict the propofol induction dose in these patients. Guiding propofol induction dose according to baseline frailty score should also be considered to estimate individualized dosage profiles. Determination of phase angle value appears to be an easy and reliable tool to assess frailty in older patients. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02713698 . Registered on 23 February 2016.
Subject(s)
Anesthetics, Intravenous/administration & dosage , Electric Impedance , Frailty/epidemiology , Propofol/administration & dosage , Adolescent , Adult , Age Factors , Aged , Aged, 80 and over , Anesthetics, Intravenous/pharmacokinetics , Body Composition , Body Mass Index , Body Weight , Cross-Sectional Studies , Dose-Response Relationship, Drug , Female , Gas Chromatography-Mass Spectrometry , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Propofol/pharmacokinetics , Young AdultABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is useful in reducing post-operative pain in laparoscopic nephrectomy compared to placebo. The purpose of this work is to compare post-operative pain and recovery after TAP block or trocar site infiltration (TSI) in this surgery. METHODS: A prospective, single blinded study on patients scheduled for laparoscopic nephrectomy. Patients were assigned to two groups: TSI Group: trocar site infiltration at the end of surgery; TAP Group: unilateral ultrasound-guided TAP block after induction. Sevoflurane and remifentanil, in a target controlled infusion mode, were used for maintenance of general anesthesia. Before the end of surgery paracetamol, tramadol and morphine were administered. Visual analogue scale (VAS 0-100mm) at rest and with cough was applied in three moments: in recovery room (T1 at admission and T2 before discharge) and 24h after surgery (T3). Pain scores with incentive spirometer were also evaluated at T3. In recovery, morphine was administered as a rescue drug whenever VAS>30mm. Time to oral intake, chair sitting, ambulation and length of hospital stay were evaluated 24h after surgery. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS: Student's t-test and Chi-square test, and linear regression models. A p-value<0.05 was considered significant. Data are presented as mean (SD). RESULTS: Forty patients were enrolled in the study. The primary outcome variable, VAS pain scores did not show a statistical significant difference between groups (p>0.05). VAS at rest (TAP vs. TSI groups) was: T1=33±29 vs. 39±32, T2=10±9 vs. 17±18 and T3=7±12 vs. 10±18. VAS with cough (TAP vs. TSI groups) was: T1=51±34 vs. 45±32, T2=24±24 vs. 33±23 and T3=20±23 vs. 23±23. VAS with incentive spirometer (TAP vs. TSI groups) was: T3=21±27 vs. 21±25. Intraoperative remifentanil consumption was similar between TAP (0.16±0.07mcg.kg-1.min-1) and TSI (0.18±0.9mcg.kg-1.min-1) groups. There were no differences in opioid consumption between TAP (4.4±3.49mg) and TSI (6.87±4.83mg) groups during recovery. Functional recovery parameters were not statistically different between groups. CONCLUSIONS: Multimodal analgesia with TAP block did not show a significant clinical benefit compared with trocar site infiltration in laparoscopic nephrectomies.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Local/methods , Laparoscopy , Nephrectomy/methods , Nerve Block/methods , Pain, Postoperative/prevention & control , Ultrasonography, Interventional , Abdominal Muscles , Anesthesia, Local/instrumentation , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective StudiesABSTRACT
Abstract Background Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is useful in reducing post-operative pain in laparoscopic nephrectomy compared to placebo. The purpose of this work is to compare post-operative pain and recovery after TAP block or trocar site infiltration (TSI) in this surgery. Methods A prospective, single blinded study on patients scheduled for laparoscopic nephrectomy. Patients were assigned to two groups: TSI Group: trocar site infiltration at the end of surgery; TAP Group: unilateral ultrasound-guided TAP block after induction. Sevoflurane and remifentanil, in a target controlled infusion mode, were used for maintenance of general anesthesia. Before the end of surgery paracetamol, tramadol and morphine were administered. Visual analogue scale (VAS 0-100 mm) at rest and with cough was applied in three moments: in recovery room (T1 at admission and T2 before discharge) and 24 h after surgery (T3). Pain scores with incentive spirometer were also evaluated at T3. In recovery, morphine was administered as a rescue drug whenever VAS > 30 mm. Time to oral intake, chair sitting, ambulation and length of hospital stay were evaluated 24 h after surgery. Statistical analysis: Student's t-test and Chi-square test, and linear regression models. A p-value < 0.05 was considered significant. Data are presented as mean (SD). Results Forty patients were enrolled in the study. The primary outcome variable, VAS pain scores did not show a statistical significant difference between groups (p > 0.05). VAS at rest (TAP vs. TSI groups) was: T1 = 33 ± 29 vs. 39 ± 32, T2 = 10 ± 9 vs. 17 ± 18 and T3 = 7 ± 12 vs. 10 ± 18. VAS with cough (TAP vs. TSI groups) was: T1 = 51 ± 34 vs. 45 ± 32, T2 = 24 ± 24 vs. 33 ± 23 and T3 = 20 ± 23 vs. 23 ± 23. VAS with incentive spirometer (TAP vs. TSI groups) was: T3 = 21 ± 27 vs. 21 ± 25. Intraoperative remifentanil consumption was similar between TAP (0.16 ± 0.07 mcg.kg-1.min-1) and TSI (0.18 ± 0.9 mcg.kg-1.min-1) groups. There were no differences in opioid consumption between TAP (4.4 ± 3.49 mg) and TSI (6.87 ± 4.83 mg) groups during recovery. Functional recovery parameters were not statistically different between groups. Conclusions Multimodal analgesia with TAP block did not show a significant clinical benefit compared with trocar site infiltration in laparoscopic nephrectomies.
Resumo Justificativa O bloqueio do plano transverso abdominal (TAP) é útil para reduzir a dor no pós-operatório de nefrectomia laparoscópica comparado com o placebo. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a dor no pós-operatório e a recuperação após bloqueio TAP ou infiltração do sítio do trocarte (TSI) nesse tipo de cirurgia. Métodos Estudo prospectivo e cego com pacientes agendados para nefrectomia laparoscópica. Os pacientes foram divididos em dois grupos: Grupo TSI: infiltração do sítio do trocarte ao final da cirurgia; Grupo TAP: bloqueio TAP unilateral guiado por ultrassom após a indução. Sevoflurano e remifentanil administrado em perfusão alvo-controlada foram usados para a manutenção da anestesia geral. Paracetamol, tramadol e morfina foram administrados antes do fim da cirurgia. Escala analógica visual (VAS 0-100 mm), para avaliar a dor em repouso e durante a tosse, foi aplicada em três momentos: na sala de recuperação [na admissão (T1) e antes da alta (T2)] e 24 horas após a cirurgia (T3). Os escores de dor com espirômetro de incentivo também foram avaliados em T3. Durante a recuperação, morfina foi administrada como medicamento de resgate, sempre que VAS > 30 mm. Os tempos até a ingestão oral, sentar em cadeira, deambulação e de permanência hospitalar foram avaliados 24 horas após a cirurgia. Análise estatística: teste t de Student, teste do qui-quadrado e modelos de regressão linear. Um valor de p < 0,05 foi considerado significativo. Os dados foram expressos em média (DP). Resultados Quarenta pacientes foram incluídos no estudo. Os escores do desfecho primário e da VAS não apresentaram diferença estatística significativa entre os grupos (p > 0,05). Os escores VAS em repouso (TAP vs. TSI) foram: T1 = 33 ± 29 vs. 39 ± 32; T2 = 10 ± 9 vs. 17 ± 18 e T3 = 7 ± 12 vs. 10 ± 18. Os escores VAS durante a tosse (TAP vs. TSI) foram: T1 = 51 ± 34 vs. 45 ± 32; T2 = 24 ± 24 vs. 33 ± 23 e T3 = 20 ± 23 vs. 23 ± 23. Os escores VAS com espirômetro de incentivo (TAP vs. TSI) foram: T3 = 21 ± 27 vs. 21 ± 25. O consumo de remifentanil no intraoperatório foi semelhante entre os grupos TAP (0,16 ± 0,07 mcg.kg-1.min-1) e TSI (0,18 ± 0,9 mcg.kg-1.min-1). Não houve diferença no consumo de opioides entre os grupos TAP (4,4 ± 3,49 mg) e TSI (6,87 ± 4,83 mg) durante a recuperação. Os parâmetros funcionais de recuperação não foram estatisticamente diferentes entre os grupos. Conclusões A analgesia multimodal com bloqueio TAP não mostrou benefício clínico significativo comparado com a infiltração do sítio do trocarte em nefrectomia laparoscópica.