Effects of midazolam co-induction to general anesthesia: A randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: This study aimed to determine the potential advantages of midazolam co-induction with general anesthesia (GA) over the use of propofol alone. METHODS: We conducted a randomized, placebo-controlled, single-blinded clinical trial of 102 patients, aged 18 to 65, American Society of Anesthesiologists II and III, who underwent elective laparoscopic gallbladder surgery. Patients were randomly divided into 3 groups: the placebo group (C) received 1 mL of 0.9% saline intravenously and the test groups received intravenous midazolam at doses of 0.03 mg/kg (M1) or 0.06 mg/kg (M2) before induction of GA. We assessed effects of midazolam co-induction on arterial pressure and heart rate (HR) in the early stage of GA prior to surgical incision and effects on perioperative and postoperative glycemia and cortisol levels. Systolic/mean/diastolic (SAP/MAP/DAP) arterial pressure and HR were measured 4 times (preoperative, on the third, sixth and ninth minute after atracurium administration). Cortisol was measured on 3 occasions (preoperatively, 60 minutes after surgical incision, and the following morning) and glucose on 4 occasions (preoperatively, 15 and 60 minutes after incision, and the following morning). We also assessed the incidence of postoperative anxiety, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and propofol requirement for induction. RESULTS: SAP/MAP/DAP were significantly higher in M2 immediately after induction compared to the other study groups (P = .002/.004/.013). Midazolam co-induction led to a significant reduction in postoperative anxiety (P = .03), reduced cortisol concentration 60 minutes after surgical incision (P < .001) and propofol requirements (P < .001). CONCLUSION SUBSECTIONS: Midazolam co-induction prevented a marked decline in SAP/MAP/DAP immediately after induction of GA, led to reduced postoperative anxiety and cortisol response to surgery, and reduced propofol requirements for induction.

Cost-Effectiveness of Zonisamide Versus Levetiracetam in Newly Diagnosed Focal Onset Epilepsy in Serbia.

OBJECTIVES: When choosing initial therapy for epilepsy, the decision should be supported by studies that include both treatment outcome and costs. This is especially important for developing countries with restricted budgets because such circumstances are also characterized by higher epilepsy prevalence rates. The aim of this study was to compare cost-utility of zonisamide (ZNS) and levetiracetam (LEV) in patients with newly diagnosed focal-onset epilepsy in the Republic of Serbia. METHODS: A 5-state, 3-month-cycle Markov model was created to compare ZNS and LEV. The model assumed that patients whose seizures were not controlled by treatment with either ZNS or LEV would be continued on carbamazepine in controlled-release form in the second cycle and would then be treated with a pregabalin add-on if still not adequately controlled. The perspective of the Serbian Republic Health Insurance Fund was chosen, and the time horizon was 15 years. Model results were obtained after Monte Carlo microsimulation of a sample with 1000 virtual patients. Both multiple one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses were performed. RESULTS: After base-case analysis, LEV was dominated by ZNS because the net monetary benefit was positive (16 940.78 ± 22 572.26 Serbian dinars; €144.09 ± €191.99) and the incremental cost-effectiveness ratio was below the willingness-to-pay threshold of 3 Serbian gross domestic products per capita per quality-adjusted life-year gained. Multiple one-way and probabilistic sensitivity analyses confirmed the results of the base-case simulation. CONCLUSIONS: ZNS has a more beneficial cost-effectiveness ratio than LEV for the treatment of newly diagnosed focal epilepsy in Serbian milieu.

A Questionnaire for Rating Health-related Quality of Life.

BACKGROUND: Translations of instruments for measuring quality of life developed in certain, mostly more developed, parts of the world usually do not cover regionally specific aspects of health-related quality of life, even after transcultural validation. The aim of this study was to develop and validate a reliable questionnaire in Serbian, Croatian, Bosnian, and Montenegrin languages suitable for measuring health-related quality of life in adults. METHODS: The study was of a cross-sectional type, assessing the reliability and validity of a newly developed questionnaire for measuring health-related quality of life (HRQoL) in adults residing in western Balkan states (WB-HRQoL). It was conducted on a sample of 489 adults from Serbia, Croatia, Bosnia & Herzegovina, and Montenegro, with a mean age of 52.2±14.4 years and a male/female ratio of 195/294 (39.9%/60.1%). RESULT: The definitive version of the WB-HRQoL scale with 19 items showed very good reliability, with Cronbach's alpha 0.905. The scale was temporally stable, and satisfactory results were obtained for divergent and convergent validity tests. Exploratory factorial analysis brought to the surface four domains of health-related quality of life, namely the physical, psychical, social, and environmental. CONCLUSION: The WB-HRQoL scale is a reliable and valid generic instrument for measuring HRQoL that takes into account the cultural specifics of the western Balkan region.