ABSTRACT
AIM: Gestational diabetes (GD) is a global health concern with significant implications for maternal and neonatal outcomes. This study investigates the association between early GD (eGD) diagnosis (<24 weeks), pharmacotherapy requirements and adverse neonatal outcomes. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A cohort of 369 pregnant women underwent a 75-g oral glucose tolerance test. Maternal variables, pharmacotherapy prescriptions and neonatal outcomes were analysed employing t-tests, χ2 tests, and logistic regression. A p < .05 was considered significant. RESULTS: Early GD increased the odds of neonatal hypoglycaemia [odds ratio (OR): 18.57, p = .013] and respiratory distress syndrome (OR: 4.75, p = .034). Nutritional therapy prescription by an accredited nutritionist was the most common treatment in women diagnosed after 24 weeks, but those with eGD required more frequently specialized nutritional consulting + metformin to achieve glycaemic control (p = .027). eGD was associated with a higher requirement of nutritional therapy prescription + metformin (OR: 2.26, 95% confidence interval: 1.25-4.09, p = .007) and with maternal hyperglycaemia during the post-partum period at 2 h of the oral glucose tolerance test (OR: 1.03, 95% confidence interval: 1.02-1.13, p = .024). CONCLUSION: Timely diagnosis and personalized treatment of GD are desirable because an earlier presentation is related to a higher risk of adverse neonatal and maternal outcomes.
Subject(s)
Diabetes, Gestational , Early Diagnosis , Glucose Tolerance Test , Hypoglycemic Agents , Metformin , Humans , Female , Pregnancy , Diabetes, Gestational/drug therapy , Diabetes, Gestational/diagnosis , Diabetes, Gestational/blood , Infant, Newborn , Adult , Hypoglycemic Agents/therapeutic use , Metformin/therapeutic use , Hypoglycemia/chemically induced , Hypoglycemia/prevention & control , Hypoglycemia/epidemiology , Pregnancy Outcome/epidemiology , Cohort Studies , Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn/prevention & control , Respiratory Distress Syndrome, Newborn/epidemiology , Blood Glucose/metabolism , Blood Glucose/analysisABSTRACT
Resumen: Introducción: La tos es una respuesta fisiológica de protección de la vía aérea, produce aerosoles que se identifican por imagen y alcanza una velocidad de hasta ocho metros por segundo. La extubación produce tos, hipertensión, taquicardia, apnea y laringoespasmo, existen métodos para minimizar su aparición. Debido a la pandemia de COVID-19 se han utilizado como profilaxis del reflejo tusígeno, la lidocaína intravenosa y el bloqueo del nervio laríngeo superior. El objetivo fue compararlos en la inhibición de la tos. Material y métodos: Se seleccionaron pacientes entre 18-60 años, cirugía electiva con anestesia general balanceada, ASA 1-3, con intubación menor a tres horas. Se aleatorizó un total de 90 pacientes, 45 en cada grupo, se eliminó un total de 10 pacientes por presentar inestabilidad hemodinámica al final de la cirugía o por no administrar dosis intravenosa de lidocaína en el tiempo establecido. Resultados: No hubo diferencia estadísticamente significativa en el número de pacientes que presentaron tos en ambos grupos (13 vs 10, p = 0.4684), de éstos se obtuvo una diferencia estadísticamente significativa en el número de decibeles a favor del grupo de bloqueo (75.6 vs 67, p < 0.001). Conclusiones: El bloqueo (selectivo) presenta menos aerolización que la lidocaína intravenosa en la extubación.
Abstract: Introduction: Coughing is a physiological response to protect the airway, it produces aerosols that are identified by imaging reaching a speed of up to 8 meters per second. Extubation produces cough, hypertension, tachycardia, apnea and laryngospasm, there are methods to minimize its occurrence. Due to the COVID-19 pandemic, intravenous lidocaine and superior laryngeal nerve block have been used as cough reflex prophylaxis. The aim was to compare them in cough inhibition. Material and methods: Patients aged 18-60 years, elective surgery with balanced general anesthesia, ASA 1-3, with intubation less than 3 hours, were selected. A total of 90 patients were randomized, 45 in each group. A total of 10 patients were eliminated because they presented hemodynamic instability at the end of surgery, and because the intravenous dose of lidocaine was not administered within the established time. Results: There was no statistically significant difference in the number of patients who presented cough in both groups (13 vs 10, p = 0.4684), of these there was a statistically significant difference in the number of decibels in favor of the block group (75.6 vs 67, p < 0.001). Conclusions: Block presents less aerolization than intravenous lidocaine in extubation.
ABSTRACT
No disponible.