Patient-controlled sedation in orthopedic surgery under regional anesthesia: a new approach in procedural sedation.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Regional anesthesia is a commonly used technique in orthopedic procedures. Sedation should reduce the patient's anxiety and fear while increasing regional anesthesia quality. This study evaluated the hemodynamic changes, level of sedation, both patients' and surgeons' levels of satisfaction and potential side effects in patient-controlled sedation using propofol. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial studied sixty ASA physical class I-III patients scheduled for total knee replacement surgery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. Patients in Group P (n = 30) received propofol via a patient-controlled analgesia device with the following settings: intravenous propofol bolus dose 400 µg.kg(-1), 5-minute lockout interval and no basal infusion. In Group S, we infused saline 150 using the same settings. To determine the level of sedation, we used BIS and Observer's Assessment of Alertness/ Sedation Scale. For all patients, we recorded the number of requests. As the fi nal evaluation, we scored surgeons' and patients' satisfaction on 4-point scales. RESULTS: Both BIS values and OAA/S scores were lower in Group P than in Group S. Patients' satisfaction was higher in Group P, although there was no significant difference with respect to surgeons' satisfaction between the groups. The number of requests for sedation was significantly higher in Group S. However, most requests were considered unsuccessful. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that patient-controlled sedation with propofol can be used efficiently in orthopedic procedures.

Sedação controlada pelo paciente em cirurgia ortopédica sob anestesia regional: uma nova abordagem em sedação / Patient-controlled sedation in orthopedic surgery under regional anesthesia: a new approach in procedural sedation / Analgesia controlada por el paciente en cirugía ortopédica bajo anestesia regional: un nuevo abordaje en sedación

JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Anestesia regional é uma técnica de uso comum em procedimentos ortopédicos. A sedação deve reduzir a ansiedade e o medo do paciente e aumentar a qualidade da anestesia regional. Este estudo avaliou as alterações hemodinâmicas, o nível de sedação e de satisfação tanto dos pacientes quanto dos cirurgiões e os potencias efeitos colaterais da sedação controlada pelo paciente com o uso de propofol. MÉTODOS: Selecionamos 60 pacientes, estado físico Asa I-III e agendados para artroplastia total do joelho sob anestesia combinada raqui-peridural. Os pacientes do Grupo P (n = 30) receberam propofol por meio de um dispositivo de analgesia controlada pelo paciente com as seguintes configurações: dose de propofol em bolus de 400 µg.kg-1 por via intravenosa (IV), com intervalo de bloqueio de cinco minutos e sem infusão basal. Os pacientes do Grupo S receberam infusão de solução salina (150 mL), com as mesmas configurações. Para determinar o nível de sedação, o índice bispectral (BIS) e a Escala de Avaliação de Alerta e Sedação dos Observadores (OAA/S) foram usados. O número de solicitações foi registrado para todos os pacientes. Como avaliação final, a satisfação dos cirurgiões e dos pacientes foi registrada em escala de 4 pontos. RESULTADOS: Os valores de BIS e da OAA/S foram menores no Grupo P que no Grupo S. A satisfação dos pacientes foi maior no Grupo P, embora não tenha havido diferença significativa em relação à satisfação dos cirurgiões entre os grupos. O número de solitações de sedação foi significativamente maior no Grupo S. Contudo, a maioria das solicitações não foi considerada bem-sucedida. CONCLUSÃO: Este estudo sugere que a analgesia controlada pelo paciente com o uso de propofol pode ser usada com resultados eficazes em procedimentos ortopédicos.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Regional anesthesia is a commonly used technique in orthopedic procedures. Sedation should reduce the patient's anxiety and fear while increasing regional anesthesia quality. This study evaluated the hemodynamic changes, level of sedation, both patients' and surgeons' levels of satisfaction and potential side effects in patient-controlled sedation using propofol. METHODS: This randomized clinical trial studied sixty ASA physical class I-III patients scheduled for total knee replacement surgery under combined spinal-epidural anesthesia. Patients in Group P (n = 30) received propofol via a patient-controlled analgesia device with the following settings: intravenous propofol bolus dose 400 µg.kg_1, 5-minute lockout interval and no basal infusion. In Group S, we infused saline 150 using the same settings. To determine the level of sedation, we used BIS and Observer's Assessment of Alertness/ Sedation Scale. For all patients, we recorded the number of requests. As the final evaluation, we scored surgeons' and patients' satisfaction on 4-point scales. RESULTS: Both BIS values and OAA/S scores were lower in Group P than in Group S. Patients' satisfaction was higher in Group P, although there was no significant difference with respect to surgeons' satisfaction between the groups. The number of requests for sedation was significantly higher in Group S. However, most requests were considered unsuccessful. CONCLUSION: This study suggests that patient-controlled sedation with propofol can be used efficiently in orthopedic procedures.

JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: La anestesia regional es una técnica de uso común en los procedimientos ortopédicos. La sedación debe reducir la ansiedad y el miedo del paciente y aumentar la calidad de la anestesia regional. Este estudio evaluó las alteraciones hemodinámicas, el nivel de sedación, los niveles de satisfacción tanto de los pacientes como de los cirujanos y los potencias efectos colaterales de la sedación controlada por el paciente con el uso de propofol. MÉTODOS: Seleccionamos 60 pacientes, estado físico Asa I-III programados para la artroplastia total de la rodilla bajo anestesia combinada raquiepidural. Los pacientes del Grupo P (n = 30) recibieron propofol por medio de un dispositivo de analgesia controlada por el paciente con las siguientes configuraciones: dosis de propofol en bolo de 400 µg.kg-1 vía intravenosa (IV), con un intervalo de bloqueo de cinco minutos y sin infusión basal. Los pacientes del Grupo S recibieron infusión de solución salina (150 mL), con las mismas configuraciones. Para determinar el nivel de sedación, usamos el índice bispectral (BIS) y la Escala de Evaluación del Índice de Alerta y Sedación del Observador (EAIASO). El número de solicitaciones fue registrado para todos los pacientes. Como evaluación final, la satisfacción de los cirujanos y de los pacientes fue registrada en escala de 4 puntos. RESULTADOS: Los valores de BIS y de la Evaluación del Observador de Guardia (OAA/S) fueron menores en el Grupo P que en el Grupo S. La satisfacción de los pacientes fue mayor en el Grupo P, aunque no haya habido diferencia significativa con relación a la satisfacción de los cirujanos entre los grupos. El número de solicitaciones de sedación fue significativamente mayor en el Grupo S. Sin embargo, la mayoría de las solicitaciones no fue considerada exitosa. CONCLUSIONES: Este estudio sugiere que la analgesia controlada por el paciente con el uso de propofol puede ser usada con resultados eficaces en procedimientos ortopédicos.

Primary retroperitoneal hydatid cyst: report of 2 cases and review of 41 published cases.

This paper gives an overview of the literature between 2000 and 2010 on primary retroperitoneal hydatid cyst. We reported 2 cases of primary retroperitoneal hydatid cyst, and studies published in English literature on hydatid cyst developing in the retroperitoneal space were accessed via Pubmed and Google Scholar databases. Forty-one published primary retroperitoneal hydatid cyst cases were evaluated, and 2 patients (1 man, 78 years old; 1 woman, 75 years old) who presented with abdominal mass caused by retroperitoneal hydatid cyst were reported. Twenty-five of the patients were men (including our patient), and 18 were women; patients ranged in age from 3 to 80 years, and the median +/- standard deviation age was 41.37 +/- 20.4 years. On presentation, 72% of the patients complained of back or abdominal pain; 13.9% had urinary tract symptoms, and 65.1% were determined as having a palpable mass. Ultrasonography was performed on 93% of the patients, computed tomography was performed on 81.4%, magnetic resonance imaging was performed on 18.6%, and intravenous pyelography test was performed on 13.9%. The results of these tests showed a cystoid mass located on the left in 32.5% of the patients, on the right in 37.2%, and in the retrovesical area in 16.2%. Serologic tests determined 67.8% of the patients were indirect hemagglutination positive, and 71.4% were positive on enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. As a surgical approach, total exision was performed on 55.8% of patients, partial cystectomy was performed on 39.5%, and 4.6% of patients underwent unroofing. If a cystic lesion is determined in the retroperitoneal area in a patient living in an area of endemic hydatid disease, a differential diagnosis of hydatid cyst should be considered. Clinical, radiologic, serologic, and histopathologic evaluations should be made for a differential diagnosis.

The effects of volatile induction and maintenance of anesthesia and selective spinal anesthesia on QT interval, QT dispersion, and arrhythmia incidence.

OBJECTIVE: The effects of sevoflurane general anesthesia and bupivacaine selective spinal anesthesia on QT dispersion (QTd) and corrected QT (QTc) interval were investigated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted between July and September 2009 in the Urology and General Surgery operating rooms. Forty ASA I-II patients undergoing noncardiac surgery were randomized into two groups: Group R (n=20) and Group V (n=20). In Group R, 5 mg bupivacaine was administered into the spinal space. Anesthesia induction in Group V was established with sevoflurane + 0.1 mg/kg vecuronium using the maximum vital capacity technique. Anesthesia was maintained with 2-3% sevoflurane + 50% N2O/O2 inhalation. All patients were tested with a 24-hour Holter ECG device. QT, QTc, and QTd intervals were measured using 12-lead ECG records at 1 and 3 minutes during preinduction, postinduction, postincision and postextubation periods. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate and ECG records were measured simultaneously. RESULTS: None of the patients displayed arrhythmia. There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to QTd values (p>0.05). However, QTc was longer in Group V than in Group R after the induction of anesthesia at 3 minutes, after the intubation at 1 and 3 minutes, and after the incision at 1 and 3 minutes. MAP and heart rate were generally higher in Group V (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Although Volatile Induction and Maintenance of Anesthesia (VIMA) with sevoflurane might prolong the QTc interval and did not result in arrhythmia, selective spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine was not associated with alterations in the QT interval or arrhythmia.

Left-sided acute appendicitis with situs inversus totalis: review of 63 published cases and report of two cases.

BACKGROUND: Situs inversus (SI) and midgut malrotation (MM) are uncommon anatomic anomalies that complicate diagnosis and management of acute abdominal pain. METHODS: We present two cases of left-sided acute appendicitis with situs inversus totalis and a literature review of studies published in English language on left-sided acute appendicitis, accessed via Pubmed and Google Scholar database. RESULTS: Sixty-three published cases of left-sided acute appendicitis were evaluated, and two patients (M:16 yr, F:17 yr) who presented to our clinic with left lower quadrant pain caused by left-sided acute appendicitis were reported. Thirty-five of the patients were male and 30 were female (including our patients) with age range from 8 to 63 years and median age of 26.7 +/- 14.0 years. Fifty-three patients had situs inversus totalis (SIT), 8 had MM and two were with malrotation of the caecum. Thirty-eight patients had applied to the hospital with left lower quadrant pain, 12 with right and 6 with bilateral lower quadrant pain. Thirty patients were diagnosed as having SIT or MM, while the diagnosis in 12 patients was established during the intraoperative period. Eleven patients with SIT were aware of having this anomaly. Five of the patients underwent laparoscopic appendectomy and in two patients laparoscopic appendectomy and cholecystectomy were performed in one session. Preoperative diagnosis has been easier to achieve after 1985, when ultrasonography (USG) and computed tomography (CT) were introduced into the medical practice. CONCLUSION: SIT and MM should be taken into consideration in patients with findings of the physical examination suspicious for left-sided acute appendicitis. X-ray, USG, CT and diagnostic laparoscopy are beneficial in developing the differential diagnosis.

The effects of volatile induction and maintenance of anesthesia and selective spinal anesthesia on QT interval, QT dispersion, and arrhythmia incidence

OBJECTIVE: The effects of sevoflurane general anesthesia and bupivacaine selective spinal anesthesia on QT dispersion (QTd) and corrected QT (QTc) interval were investigated. METHODS AND MATERIALS: This prospective, randomized, double-blind study was conducted between July and September 2009 in the Urology and General Surgery operating rooms. Forty ASA I-II patients undergoing noncardiac surgery were randomized into two groups: Group R (n=20) and Group V (n=20). In Group R, 5 mg bupivacaine was administered into the spinal space. Anesthesia induction in Group V was established with sevoflurane + 0.1 mg/kg vecuronium using the maximum vital capacity technique. Anesthesia was maintained with 2-3 percent sevoflurane + 50 percent N2O/O2 inhalation. All patients were tested with a 24-hour Holter ECG device. QT, QTc, and QTd intervals were measured using 12-lead ECG records at 1 and 3 minutes during preinduction, postinduction, postincision and postextubation periods. Mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate and ECG records were measured simultaneously. RESULTS: None of the patients displayed arrhythmia. There was no significant difference between the groups with regard to QTd values (p>0.05). However, QTc was longer in Group V than in Group R after the induction of anesthesia at 3 minutes, after the intubation at 1 and 3 minutes, and after the incision at 1 and 3 minutes. MAP and heart rate were generally higher in Group V (p<0.05). CONCLUSION: Although Volatile Induction and Maintenance of Anesthesia (VIMA) with sevoflurane might prolong the QTc interval and did not result in arrhythmia, selective spinal anesthesia with bupivacaine was not associated with alterations in the QT interval or arrhythmia.