Comparison of the Efficacy of Macintosh Laryngoscope Versus Airtraq Videolaryngoscope for Visualization of Laryngeal Structures at the End of Thyroidectomy: A Randomized Control Study.

To compare the efficacy of conventional Macintosh laryngoscope with Airtraq videolaryngoscope for visualization of laryngeal structures to rule out recurrent laryngeal nerve injury at the end of thyroidectomy. This randomized double-blind control study was conducted following IEC-Human approval, prospective CTRI registration and written informed consent from participants. Patients of either sex, aged 18-65 years, ASA grade I/II, scheduled for thyroidectomy under GA were included. Group DL underwent direct laryngoscopy using Macintosh blade whereas group VL underwent laryngoscopy using Airtraq® videolaryngoscope. CL(Cormack-Lehane) grade of laryngeal view, time taken to achieve optimal view, haemodynamic parameters, Patient reactivity score(PRS) and complications were noted. Unpaired t-test, chi-square test were used. A total of 73 patients were included for study with 38 in group DL and 35 in group VL. The grade of laryngeal view was found to be significantly better with Airtraq® VL compared to Macintosh laryngoscope without the application of BURP (p < 0.05). In the DL group, 34.2% (n = 13) had a CL grade I, 36.8% (n = 14) had CL grade 2A, 13.2% had CL grade 2B (n = 5) and 15.8% (n = 6) had CL Grade 3 at the end of thyroidectomy. On the contrary, in the VL Group, 71.5% (n = 25) of the participants had a CL Grade I; whereas, 20% (n = 7) had a CL Grade 2A, 5.7% (n = 2) had CL grade 2B and 2.8% (n = 1) of participants had CL grade 3. The mean "time taken to achieve optimal view' was comparable between the two groups (DL = 39.16 ± 105.53 s vs. VL = 38.89 ± 20.69 s) (p = 0.988).The haemodynamic parameters, Patient reactivity score and complications were comparable between the two groups. The performance of Airtraq® videolaryngoscope, a channelled VL is better than conventional Macintosh laryngoscope in terms of the optimal glottic view obtained to rule out recurrent laryngeal nerve palsy at the end of thyroidectomy.

Calculation of effective dose of phenylephrine bolus for treatment of post-spinal hypotension in pre-eclamptic patients undergoing caesarean section - a non-randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Patients with pre-eclampsia require smaller vasopressor doses compared with those with normotension for management of post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section. However, the literature has little evidence as to the phenylephrine dose required for patients with pre-eclampsia. METHODS: Fifty patients, with either pre-eclampsia or normotension, and developing post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia, were studied. Women in both groups did not receive prophylactic vasopressors. The first patient in each group received phenylephrine 50 µg to treat the first episode of hypotension, defined as fall of systolic blood pressure ≥20% from baseline or an absolute value <100 mmHg. If hypotension was corrected within one minute it was considered a 'success'. The doses for the subsequent patients were determined by responses to all previous patients, according to a variation of Narayana's rule for the up-down sequential allocation method. RESULTS: The 95% effective dose (ED95) and 50% effective dose (ED50) of phenylephrine was 41.7 µg (95% CI 33.8 to 49.6 µg) and 29.1 µg (95% CI 26.0 to 32.2 µg) respectively in the pre-eclampsia group, and 64.9 µg (95% CI 54.1 to 75.7 µg) and 47.3 µg (95% CI 39.7 to 54.9 µg) respectively in the normotensive group. The proportionate reduction in phenylephrine dose ranged from 33% (95% CI 18 to 44%) to 40% (95% CI 19 to 52%). CONCLUSION: Patients with pre-eclampsia may need a 33% to 40% reduction in the first phenylephrine bolus dose, compared with patients with normotension, for the treatment of the first episode of post-spinal hypotension.

Neonatal outcomes following phenylephrine or norepinephrine for treatment of spinal anaesthesia-induced hypotension at emergency caesarean section in women with fetal compromise: a randomised controlled study.

BACKGROUND: Norepinephrine is as effective as phenylephrine for management of spinal anaesthesia-induced hypotension. Most of the studies comparing these vasopressors have been conducted in healthy pregnant women undergoing elective caesarean section. In the current study, we tested the null hypothesis that there is no difference in neonatal outcome when phenylephrine or norepinephrine is used to treat spinal anaesthesia-induced hypotension in women undergoing emergency caesarean section for fetal compromise. METHODS: Patients undergoing caesarean section for fetal compromise who developed spinal anaesthesia-induced hypotension were randomised to receive phenylephrine 100 µg or norepinephrine 8 µg for treatment of each hypotensive episode, defined as systolic blood pressure <100 mmHg. Umbilical cord arterial and venous blood samples were obtained for blood gas analysis. The primary outcome measure was umbilical artery pH. RESULTS: One hundred patients (50 in each group) were studied. There was no significant difference in umbilical artery pH between the two groups (mean difference 0.001; 95% CI -0.032 to 0.034). The number of hypotensive episodes, vasopressor boluses required, the incidence of bradycardia, heart rate and blood pressure trends following vasopressor administration, and the incidence of nausea/vomiting were not significantly different between groups. CONCLUSION: Phenylephrine 100 µg and norepinephrine 8 µg were not significantly different in terms of neonatal outcome when administered as intravenous boluses for treatment of spinal anaesthesia-induced hypotension in parturients undergoing emergency caesarean sections for fetal compromise.

A randomised controlled trial of phenylephrine and noradrenaline boluses for treatment of postspinal hypotension during elective caesarean section.

Phenylephrine is currently the vasopressor of choice during elective caesarean section, but it can cause reflex bradycardia. Noradrenaline, a potent α-agonist and weak ß-agonist, may be associated with a lower incidence of bradycardia. However, comparative information is limited. This double-blind randomised controlled trial compared the effects of 100 µg phenylephrine and 5 µg noradrenaline administered as boluses for the treatment of postspinal hypotension during elective caesarean section in women with an uncomplicated singleton pregnancy. Hypotension was defined as a decrease of ≥ 20% from baseline systolic arterial pressure, or an absolute value < 100 mmHg. Ninety women were included in the study. The primary outcome was the incidence of maternal bradycardia < 60 beats.min-1 . There was no difference in the incidence of bradycardia (37.8% with phenylephrine vs. 22.2% with noradrenaline; p = 0.167), number of hypotensive episodes, number of boluses required to treat the first hypotensive episode or reactive hypertension. The total number of boluses used was higher in the phenylephrine group (p = 0.01). Maternal heart rate at 1 min after vasopressor administration was non-significantly lower using phenylephrine vs. noradrenaline (p = 0.034, considering p < 0.01 as statistically significant). The umbilical artery pH was higher using phenylephrine than with noradrenaline (p = 0.034). In conclusion, both vasopressors reversed postspinal hypotension without a statistically significant difference in maternal bradycardia. However, in view of the lower umbilical artery pH when using noradrenaline, further research is warranted to study its placental transfer and fetal metabolic effects.

Comparison of the potency of phenylephrine and norepinephrine bolus doses used to treat post-spinal hypotension during elective caesarean section.

BACKGROUND: Phenylephrine, although considered the vasopressor of choice, can cause reflex bradycardia and a fall in cardiac output. Norepinephrine, due to its direct positive chronotropic and reflex negative chronotropic actions, is expected to overcome this problem. However, limited information about its effective dose for management of post-spinal hypotension, and its potency compared to phenylephrine, is available. METHODS: One hundred consecutive patients who developed post-spinal hypotension were treated with a predetermined dose of either phenylephrine or norepinephrine. Correction of hypotension after one minute was considered 'success'. The starting dose for the first patient and testing interval (the incremental or decremental dosing) were 100 µg and 10 µg in the phenylephrine group, and 6 µg and 0.5 µg in the norepinephrine group. Doses for subsequent patients were determined by the responses of previous patients according to the Narayana rule for up-down sequential allocation. ED95 and ED50 of phenylephrine and norepinephrine boluses and their potency ratio were calculated. RESULTS: Using Probit analysis, ED95 and ED50 values were 43.1 µg (95% CI 39.5 to 65.0 µg) and 33.2 µg (95% CI 5.1 to 37.0 µg) for phenylephrine, and 3.7 µg (95% CI 3.5 to 4.7 µg) and 3.2 µg (95% CI 1.8 to 3.4 µg) for norepinephrine. The relative potency ratio of norepinephrine and phenylephrine was 11.3 (95% CI 8.1 to 16.9). CONCLUSION: Based on the results of this study, norepinephrine is about 11 times more potent than phenylephrine. When used as bolus doses for treatment of hypotension, 100 µg phenylephrine should be approximately equivalent to 9 µg norepinephrine.

Randomised double-blind comparison of bolus phenylephrine or ephedrine for treatment of hypotension in women with pre-eclampsia undergoing caesarean section.

Treatment of post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section assumes special concern in pre-eclamptic patients due to a compromised fetoplacental circulation and increased risk of placental hypoperfusion. Phenylephrine and ephedrine are the most commonly used vasopressors, although the best choice is still not clear. We studied 80 pre-eclamptic women with a singleton pregnancy who underwent caesarean section with spinal anaesthesia, and who developed hypotension defined as a decrease in systolic arterial pressure ≥ 20% from baseline or absolute value < 100 mmHg. Women were randomly allocated to receive phenylephrine 50 µg or ephedrine 4 mg boluses for treatment of hypotension. Blood pressure changes following vasopressor administration were similar in both groups, but heart rate remained higher after ephedrine at all time-points. The primary outcome measure of umbilical artery pH was 7.26 (0.11) in the phenylephrine group and 7.25 (0.09) in the ephedrine group (p = 0.86). The incidence of neonatal acidosis (umbilical artery pH < 7.20) was 9 (22.5%) in the phenylephrine group and 11 (27.5%) in the ephedrine group (p = 0.80). Other secondary outcome measures were comparable. In conclusion, phenylephrine 50 µg and ephedrine 4 mg, administered as intravenous boluses to treat post-spinal hypotension during caesarean section in pre-eclamptic patients, resulted in similar fetal acid-base values, were equally effective in treating hypotension and were associated with good maternal and neonatal outcome.

Randomized double-blind comparison of ephedrine and phenylephrine for management of post-spinal hypotension in potential fetal compromise.

BACKGROUND: Most studies comparing phenylephrine and ephedrine have been conducted during elective caesarean sections in healthy mothers with no fetal compromise. The effect of vasopressors on fetal outcome may differ between healthy and compromised fetuses. There has been little research into the effect of phenylephrine and ephedrine, when used for management of post-spinal hypotension in the presence of potential fetal compromise. METHODS: Healthy women with a singleton pregnancy undergoing emergency caesarean section for fetal compromise under spinal anaesthesia were studied. One-hundred-and-six consecutive subjects, who developed hypotension after spinal anaesthesia, were randomly allocated to two groups of 53 each, to receive either phenylephrine (Group P) or ephedrine (Group E). For every systolic blood pressure reading <100mmHg patients received phenylephrine 100µg or ephedrine 8mg depending on group allocation. Umbilical blood gas parameters and Apgar scores were recorded. RESULTS: There was no statistically significant difference in umbilical arterial pH (P=0.79), umbilical venous pH (P=0.98), other blood gas parameters, incidence of fetal acidosis (P=1.00) and Apgar scores. The number of hypotensive episodes, vasopressor doses for treatment of the first hypotensive episode and the total number of doses used during the study period were comparable. The median [IQR] total number of doses of phenylephrine and ephedrine used before delivery were 2 [1-2] and 2 [1-2], respectively (P=0.67). More patients receiving ephedrine (24.5%) developed tachycardia than those receiving phenylephrine (3.8%) (P=0.004). Bradycardia was more common with phenylephrine, with 39.6% of patients in Group P as compared to only 1.9% of patients in Group E developing a heart rate <60beats/min after vasopressor administration (P=0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Both phenylephrine 100µg and ephedrine 8mg boluses are equally efficacious when treating post-spinal hypotension in the presence of potential fetal compromise. However, phenylephrine may be a better choice in the presence of maternal tachycardia.

Effect of different phenylephrine bolus doses for treatment of hypotension during spinal anaesthesia in patients undergoing elective caesarean section.

The efficacy of phenylephrine might be improved by giving doses higher than that traditionally used (100 µg). This study compared the effects of three initial bolus doses of intravenous phenylephrine; 100 µg (group P100), 125 µg (group P125) and 150 µg (group P150), for the treatment of post-spinal hypotension in patients undergoing elective caesarean delivery. If hypotension was not corrected by this dose, additional boluses of 25 µg were given every minute. Further hypotensive episodes were treated with half the initial bolus dose, followed by 25 µg boluses, as required. Umbilical arterial and venous blood samples were obtained for blood gas analysis and Apgar scores recorded. One hundred and twenty subjects (40 per group) who developed post-spinal hypotension (75%) were included in this randomised, double blind trial. Although systolic blood pressure was higher at certain time-points after 150 µg phenylephrine, there were no statistically significant differences in the effectiveness of the first bolus of phenylephrine to treat hypotension (85%, 95% and 95% in groups P100, P125 and P150, respectively, P=0.215); the additional dose of phenylephrine after the first bolus (P=0.810); the number of additional boluses (P=0.318) or of hypotensive episodes (P=0.118). There were no significant differences in the number of patients developing reactive hypertension or bradycardia, in maternal side-effects or in neonatal outcomes. Although the study may have been underpowered, initial phenylephrine bolus doses of 100 µg, 125 µg and 150 µg did not significantly differ in efficacy to treat post-spinal hypotension in these patients.

Problem-based learning research in anesthesia teaching: current status and future perspective.

The teaching curriculum in anesthesia involves traditional teaching methods like topic-based didactic lectures, seminars, and journal clubs; intraoperative apprenticeship; and problem-based learning (PBL) and simulation. The advantages of incorporating PBL in anesthesia teaching include development of skills like clinical reasoning, critical thinking, and self-directed learning; in addition it also helps in developing a broader perspective of case scenarios. The present paper discusses the characteristics, key elements, and goals of PBL; various PBL methods available; lacunae in the existing knowledge of PBL research; its current status and future perspectives in anesthesia teaching.

A comparison of pressure-controlled and volume-controlled ventilation for laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

The potential advantages of pressure-controlled over volume-controlled ventilation during laparoscopic surgery have yet to be proven. We randomly assigned 42 patients with BMI <30 kg.m(-2) scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy to receive either pressure- or volume-controlled ventilation. Compared with volume-controlled ventilation, pressure-controlled ventilation resulted in a significant decrease in mean (SD) peak airway pressure at 10 min (20.4 (2.7) vs 24.0 (4.7)cmH2O, p=0.004) and 30 min (20.7 (3.0) vs 23.9 (4.9)cmH2O, p=0.015) and an increase in mean airway pressure at 10 min (10.5 (0.9) vs 9.6 (1.1)cmH2O, p=0.007) and 30 min (10.5 (1.1) vs 9.6 (1.2)cmH2O, p=0.016) after the start of surgery. Gas exchange and haemodynamic stability were similar. We conclude that pressure-controlled ventilation is a safe alternative and offers some advantages to volume-controlled ventilation during laparoscopic cholecystectomy in non-obese patients.

Comparison of phenylephrine hydrochloride and mephentermine sulphate for prevention of post spinal hypotension.

This study compared the effects of intravenous infusions of phenylephrine and mephentermine on the prevention of maternal hypotension and neonatal outcome in patients receiving spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section. Sixty ASA 1-2 patients with term, uncomplicated singleton pregnancy undergoing caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia were randomly divided into two groups of 30 each, to receive a prophylactic intravenous infusion of either phenylephrine or mephentermine. The incidence of hypotension was statistically similar in the two groups. However, in patients receiving phenylephrine, 7 (23%) developed bradycardia and 6 (20%), reactive hypertension. Neonatal outcome, in terms of Apgar scores and umbilical artery pH, was similar in both the groups. To conclude, phenylephrine and mephentermine infusions are equally effective in preventing post spinal hypotension in patients undergoing caesarean section and are associated with a similar neonatal outcome.

Subdural block and the anaesthetist.

There are a number of case reports describing accidental subdural block during the performance of subarachnoid or epidural anaesthesia. However it appears that subdural drug deposition remains a poorly understood complication of neuraxial anaesthesia. The clinical presentation may often be attributed to other causes. Subdural injection of local anaesthetic can present as high sensory block, sometimes even involving the cranial nerves due to extension of the subdural space into the cranium. The block is disproportionate to the amount of drug injected, often with sparing of sympathetic and motor fibres. On the other hand, the subdural deposition can also lead to failure of the intended block. The variable presentation can be explained by the anatomy of this space. High suspicion in the presence of predisposing factors and early detection could prevent further complications. This review aims at increasing awareness amongst anaesthetists about inadvertent subdural block. It reviews the relevant anatomy, incidence, predisposing factors, presentation, diagnosis and management of unintentional subdural block during the performance of neuraxial anaesthesia.

Potency of mephentermine for prevention of post-spinal hypotension.

This study was designed to determine the minimum effective dose (ED50) of mephentermine for prevention of post-spinal hypotension in women undergoing elective caesarean section. Dixon's up-down method of sequential allocation was used to determine the patient's dose of vasopressor drug. In our previous study, mephentermine appeared to be much more potent than ephedrine, so the present study was conducted using a lower initial dose and smaller dose interval for this vasopressor. Following administration of spinal anaesthesia, a prophylactic infusion of mephentermine was started with 5 mg infused over a period of 30 minutes as the initial dose and a dose interval of 1 mg. The ED50 of mephentermine of 3.7 mg (95% confidence interval 2.4 to 5.7 mg) was much less than that of ephedrine, as calculated in our previous study using the same methodology. Using these values gives a potency ratio of ephedrine to mephentermine of 1:6.8 (95% confidence interval 6.0 to 7.5).

Single-shot spinal anaesthesia, combined spinal-epidural and epidural volume extension for elective caesarean section: a randomized comparison.

BACKGROUND: Single-shot spinal and combined spinal-epidural block, with or without epidural volume extension, can be used for caesarean section. There is no trial comparing their block characteristics and adverse effects under identical conditions. METHODS: 60 ASA I or II parturients with gestational age 37 weeks or more, scheduled for elective caesarean section under regional anaesthesia, were included in the trial. Women were randomized to three groups: group SSS: single-shot spinal; group CSE: combined spinal-epidural; group EVE: epidural volume extension of a combined spinal-epidural. Intrathecal injection was identical in the three groups (0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 9 mg with fentanyl 10 microg) and was injected via a 25-gauge pencil-point spinal needle, either as a single-shot spinal or through the spinal needle of the needle-through-needle CSE set. In group EVE, 5 mL of normal saline was injected through the epidural catheter. All blocks were performed with the women sitting. Haemodynamic parameters and block characteristics were assessed. RESULTS: The onset of maximum sensory and motor block was significantly faster in the SSS group than in the other two. Extent and duration of sensory and motor block and the incidence of adverse effects were similar in the three groups (P>0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Intrathecal block is similar in extent and duration whether given as a single-shot spinal or a combined spinal-epidural with or without epidural volume extension when performed for elective caesarean section using hyperbaric bupivacaine in the sitting position.

Tramadol for prevention of postanaesthetic shivering: a randomised double-blind comparison with pethidine.

The present study was conducted with the aims of comparing intravenous tramadol 1, 2 and 3 mg.kg(-1) with pethidine 0.5 mg.kg(-1) for prophylaxis of postanaesthetic shivering and to find a dose of tramadol that could provide the dual advantage of antishivering and analgesic effect in the postoperative period. The study included 165 patients, randomly allocated to five groups of 33 each. Tramadol in doses of 1, 2 and 3 mg.kg(-1), pethidine 0.5 mg.kg(-1) or normal saline were administered at the time of wound closure. All three doses of tramadol were effective and comparable to pethidine in preventing postanaesthetic shivering. Tramadol 2 mg.kg(-1) had the best combination of antishivering and analgesic efficacy without excessive sedation and thus appeared to be a good choice to be administered at the time of wound closure to provide antishivering effect and analgesia without significant side effects in the postoperative period.