Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters











Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
Craniomaxillofac Trauma Reconstr ; 13(3): 151-156, 2020 Sep.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-33456680

ABSTRACT

The COVID-19 pandemic is a global problem that has adversely and significantly impacted the safe practice of maxillofacial surgery. The risk lies in the heavy viral load in the oral/nasal/upper respiratory mucosal surfaces. Surgical procedures performed in this anatomic regional produce aerosalized viral particles which are highly infectious. Best practices and recommendations are outlined to mitigate the risk to the provider.

2.
Eur J Pain ; 23(5): 884-893, 2019 05.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-30592344

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: Total intravenous anaesthesia (TIVA) with propofol may reduce pain after surgery compared with inhalational anaesthetic techniques. Whether propofol provides analgesic benefit may be influenced by the surgical procedure and anaesthetic/analgesic regime. Third molar surgery is a consistent and fairly standard surgical technique that provides a good model for postoperative pain. We investigated whether propofol TIVA or sevoflurane (SEVO) inhalational anaesthesia would produce better quality pain relief after third molar surgery. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized controlled trial, patients scheduled for bilateral third molar surgery received propofol TIVA or SEVO inhalational anaesthesia. Postoperative numerical rating pain scores, analgesic consumption, adverse effects and global pain satisfaction were assessed. RESULTS: Data from 48 patients in each group were analysed. The area under curves for numerical rating scale pain scores were significantly lower in the propofol TIVA group at rest and during mouth opening between 1 and 72 hr after surgery (p = 0.013 at rest, p = 0.021 with mouth opening). There was no difference in postoperative analgesic consumption. Propofol TIVA was associated with less postoperative headache (p = 0.041 in the postoperative anaesthetic care unit, p = 0.036 in ward). There were no differences in other adverse effects including postoperative nausea and vomiting. Global pain satisfaction and level of postoperative discomfort at 24 hr after surgery were significantly better in the propofol TIVA group (p = 0.008 and p = 0.009, respectively). CONCLUSION: Propofol TIVA was associated with reduced postoperative pain after bilateral third molar surgery, but did not reduce postoperative analgesic consumption. SIGNIFICANCE: Choice of general anaesthetic technique can affect postoperative analgesia. The results of this study suggest that propofol TIVA improves postoperative pain and patient satisfaction after third molar surgery compared to inhalational anaesthesia.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia, Intravenous , Anesthetics, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Molar, Third/surgery , Oral Surgical Procedures/adverse effects , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Propofol/therapeutic use , Adult , Anesthetics, Inhalation/therapeutic use , Double-Blind Method , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Pain, Postoperative/etiology , Patient Satisfaction , Sevoflurane/therapeutic use , Treatment Outcome , Young Adult
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL