RESUMO
Monkeypox is a contagious disease that manifests as a smallpox-like skin rash. The disease has shown a sudden surge worldwide across several countries. These patients may present for emergency surgery. Anesthetic management of these cases in an emergency setting is challenging. There is not much literature on the anesthetic management of monkeypox patients. We aimed to discuss the anesthetic management of monkeypox in this review.
RESUMO
Background The analgesic efficacy of preemptive administration of caudal morphine for spine surgeries in adults is not well studied. In a double-blinded, randomized controlled trial, safety and analgesic efficacy of preemptive, single-shot caudal morphine and bupivacaine was compared with caudal bupivacaine alone in lumbosacral spine surgeries. Methods After Institutional Ethics Committee approval, 40 patients aged 18-60 yrs planned for lumbosacral spine surgery were randomized to groups of 20 patients each. After induction and prone positioning, an ultrasound-guided caudal block was performed with morphine 50 µg/kg with 20 ml 0.25% bupivacaine in the study group (LM) and only bupivacaine in the control group (LA). Postoperatively, both groups received intravenous morphine via patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump (No basal, 1 mg/bolus, 10 minutes lockout interval). Intraoperative fentanyl use, postoperative 24-h morphine consumption, visual analogue pain scores (VAS) and adverse effects of morphine were noted. Results Demographics and baseline data were comparable. Postoperative 24-hour morphine requirement was more in LA group (34.3 ± 10.7 mg vs 19.65 ± 11.8 mg, p=0.0001). Total intraoperative supplemental fentanyl requirement was similar (79.25 ± 67.60 µg in LA vs 54 ± 50.20 µg in LM group, p=0.28). VAS scores at 2/4/6/12-hour in group-LM were significantly less than group-LA (p=0.005, 0.002, 0.001 and 0.047) but were comparable at 18 and 24 hours (p=0.25, 0.42). Postoperative incidence of adverse effects of morphine was comparable. Conclusions Ultrasound-guided, single-shot preemptive administration of caudal morphine with bupivacaine is a safe and effective modality of analgesia for patients undergoing lumbosacral spine surgeries.
RESUMO
Background and aims Regional anaesthesia has been advocated as a preferred modality during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID19) pandemic, but pursuing regional anaesthesia during COVID-19 is challenging. Our cross-sectional survey aimed to analyze the challenges in conducting regional anaesthesia and the alterations in practices imposed by the COVID19 pandemic across the nation. Material and methods The questionnaire was validated by seven experts. Following ethical approval and trial registration, this Google Forms-based survey was circulated to anaesthesiologists across the country via emails over 3 months (April 2021 to June 2021). Weekly reminders were sent to the non-responders till the desired sample size was attained, after which the survey was closed and responses were analyzed. Results Five hundred and thirty-two of 1100 anaesthesiologists completed the survey (48.3% response rate). Among the 532 respondents, 65.8% reported an increase in the use of regional anaesthesia due to the pandemic, with 77.4% reporting a change in practice. Almost 90% of the respondents used a dedicated operation theatre for all infected patients. Most respondents (75%) used disposable plastic drapes (75%) and full personal protective equipment (PPE) for COVID-19-positive patients during the procedure. However, using PPE resulted in poor vision due to fogging and multiple attempts and increased performance duration. Most respondents (74.4%) used gloves to maintain ultrasound probe sterility, while many other respondents (65.7%) used a sterile camera cover for the same. Many respondents ordered inflammatory markers during preoperative evaluation. Conclusion The present survey revealed that there was increased utilization of regional anaesthesia with increased utilization of PPE, sterility routines, and ordering of investigations. The use of PPE led to many challenges while performing regional anaesthesia. However, many deviations were identified from the accepted recommendations, and one needs to be aware of proper practices to achieve optimal patient outcomes and provider safety.
