Comparison of High Flow Nasal Cannula and Continuous Positive Airway Pressure in COVID-19 Patients With Acute Respiratory Distress Syndrome in Critical Care Unit: A Randomized Control Study.

Background and objective Acute hypoxic respiratory failure in coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pneumonia has been treated with oxygen delivered by oxygen masks and non-invasive ventilation (NIV) with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP), and more recently with high-flow nasal cannula (HFNC) devices. There is a paucity of randomized controlled trials to compare the efficacy of CPAP with HFNC in COVID-19 pneumonia. We conceptualized a randomized control study to compare the efficacy of HFNC and CPAP in reducing the need for invasive mechanical ventilation, estimation of mechanical ventilation-free days, and risk of intubation in COVID-19 patients with hypoxic respiratory failure. Methodology One hundred consecutive patients who satisfied the inclusion criteria were included in the trial. The patients were then randomly allocated to receive either CPAP or HFNC with settings as per the study protocol. The patients were deemed to have achieved the study endpoint when they were intubated due to any reason or successfully weaned from NIV to conventional oxygen therapies. The number of patients who required invasive ventilation and the number of invasive ventilation-free days were recorded and analyzed. Results Nineteen (38%) patients in the CPAP group and 30 (60%) patients in the HFNC group required invasive mechanical ventilation and the difference was statistically significant (p = 0.03, 95%CI: 0.1829-0.9129). The median number of days free of invasive mechanical ventilation in the CPAP group (median=5 (interquartile range (IQR(=5,6)) was more than in the HFNC group (median=4 (IQR=3,4)) and this difference was statistically significant (p<0.000). The secondary analysis of risk evaluation for intubation done using the Cox regression model showed no significant factors that could have contributed to intubation in the study population. The Kaplan-Meyer curve was used to express the probability of a patient getting intubated and the calculated hazard ratio was 2.29. Conclusion The administration of CPAP significantly reduced the intubation rate and prolonged invasive mechanical ventilation-free period in COVID-19 patients with hypoxic respiratory failure. We also inferred a two-fold increase in the risk of intubation in patients receiving HFNC compared to CPAP.

A randomized control study to assess the efficacy of the sphenopalatine ganglion block in patients with post dural puncture headache.

Background: Post dural puncture headache (PDPH) delays discharge from hospital. We studied the efficacy of sphenopalatine ganglion (SPG) block, a novel technique in management of PDPH using 0.25% Ropivacaine. Methodology: Forty patients presenting with PDPH after urological procedures under spinal anaesthesia were randomized into two groups: Group C and Group S. Group C received conservative treatment with bed rest, adequate hydration and caffeine 200 mg 6th hourly. Group S patients received SPG block (packing bilateral nostril for 10 minutes with 0.25% Ropivacaine). Inj Paracetamol 1 g IV was given as primary analgesic. Intravenous Diclofenac 75 mg was administered as rescue analgesic. Patients were monitored for 72 hours. Total analgesic requirement, time to attain adequate pain relief, headache pain score, patient satisfactory score were compared between the two groups. We compared the PDPH severity score for headache using 5-point scale method and patient satisfaction score using Likert-type scale. Results: Demographic data, onset of PDPH, needle size, intervention time were statistically insignificant. Total paracetamol consumption was significantly reduced in SPG group. Headache pain score was significantly low in Group S up to 54 hours. Patient satisfaction score was statistically better in Group S. Mean block onset time was 12 minutes. One patient in Group C required Epidural blood patch. Conclusion: SPG block is an effective alternative in managing patients with PDPH. The need for epidural blood patch is greatly reduced using SPG block. Procedural safety, immediate and sustained pain relief make it an evolving treatment modality for PDPH.

Comparison of low dose intravenous fentanyl and morphine infusion for postoperative analgesia in spine fusion surgeries - a randomized control trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Post-operative analgesia for Spine surgeries is difficult without patient control analgesia (PCA) and inadequate monitoring facilities. The objective was to study the effectiveness of analgesia of intravenous administration of low dose fentanyl and morphine for postoperative analgesia following spine fusion surgeries. METHODS: One hundred adult patients undergoing spine instrumentation surgeries were randomly allotted into two groups: Group M (morphine) or Group F (fentanyl). The patients received either 0.02 mg.kg-1.h-1 of morphine or 0.3 mcg.kg-1.h-1 of fentanyl infusion postoperatively. If the patient had pain, additional bolus dose of 0.04 mg.kg-1 and 0.6 mcg. kg-1 bolus for morphine and fentanyl respectively were given and noted. The additional analgesic consumption was recorded. The Ramsay sedation score (RSS), visual analogue score (VAS), vital parameters and complications were observed. RESULTS: The demographic characteristics did not reveal significant difference among the two groups. In morphine group, 32 patients did not require any additional bolus dose, 15 patients needed one bolus dose and one patient each required two and three boluses. In fentanyl group, two, 24, 20 and four patients required 0, 1, 2 and 3 bolus doses respectively. There were no statistically significant variations in hemodynamic features like heart rate, blood pressure and oxygen saturation, RSS and VAS. The complication rate was not significant among the groups. CONCLUSION: Low dose continuous infusion of morphine is more effective than fentanyl with fewer requirements of rescue analgesics for postoperative analgesia. Both drugs are safe without any serious complications.

Comparison of morphine, dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as an adjuvant to ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block for postoperative analgesia-a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: An ideal adjuvant to local anesthetic in a nerve block should prolong the duration of analgesia, and hasten the onset of sensory and motor blockade without significant adverse effects. The aim of this study was to compare morphine, dexmedetomidine, and dexamethasone as an additive to ropivacaine in ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block (SBPB) for postoperative analgesia. MATERIAL AND METHODS: In this randomized, double-blinded study, 150 patients undergoing upper extremity surgery were randomly divided into three groups: group A (morphine 5 mg), group B (dexmedetomidine 50 µg), and group C (dexamethasone 8 mg). The additives were added to 30 ml of 0.5% ropivacaine solution and administered in SBPB. The duration of postoperative analgesia, onset of sensory and motor blockade, sedation, and adverse effects were observed. The pain was assessed by visual analog scale (VAS) and sedation by Ramsay sedation score. The duration of postoperative analgesia was taken as time consumed from block completion to administration of rescue analgesia (VAS >3). RESULTS: The demographic profile was similar in both groups. The duration of analgesia was significantly longer in dexamethasone (867.2 ± 217.6 min) than morphine (739. 2 ± 162.5 min) and dexmedetomidine (654.2 ± 179.9 min) (P < 0.001). The onset of sensory and motor blockade was quicker with dexmedetomidine than dexamethasone and morphine. Three cases of block failure were reported with morphine. No major adverse effects were reported. CONCLUSION: Dexamethasone is an ideal adjuvant to ropivacaine in brachial plexus block to prolong postoperative analgesia and devoid of adverse effects. Dexmedetomidine has a quicker onset of sensory and motor blockade.

[Efficacy of different doses and timing of tranexamic acid in major orthopedic surgeries: a randomized trial]. / Eficácia de diferentes doses e esquemas de administração de ácido tranexâmico em cirurgias ortopédicas de grande porte: estudo randomizado.

BACKGROUND: Tranexamic acid was studied in four different dosage regimens and their efficacy was compared for perioperative blood loss reduction, blood transfusion requirements and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) complication. METHODS: Two hundred patients undergoing major orthopedic procedures were divided into five groups containing 40 each: placebo, low dose (bolus 10mg.kg-1), low dose+maintenance (bolus 10mg.kg-1+maintenance 1mg.kg-1.hr-1), high dose (bolus 30mg.kg-1) and high dose+maintenance (bolus 30mg.kg-1+maintenance 3mg.kg-1.hr-1). Surgical blood loss was measured intraoperatively and drains collection in the first 24 hours postoperative period. Blood transfusion was done when hematocrit falls less than 25%. DVT screening was done in the postoperative period. RESULTS: The intraoperative blood loss was 440±207.54mL in the placebo group, 412.5±208.21mL in the low dose group, 290±149.6ml in the low dose plus maintenance group, 332.5±162.33mL in the high dose group and 240.7±88.15mL in the high dose maintenance group (p <0.001). The reduction in postoperative blood loss in the drain for the first 24hours was 80±44.44mL in the placebo group, 89.88±44.87mL in the low dose group, 56.7±29.12mL in the low dose plus maintenance group, 77.9±35.74mL in the high dose group and 46.7±19.9mL in the high dose maintenance group (p <0.001). DVT was not encountered in any patient. CONCLUSION: Tranexamic acid was most effective in reducing surgical blood loss and blood transfusion requirements in a low dose+maintenance group.

Efficacy of different doses and timing of tranexamic acid in major orthopedic surgeries: a randomized trial / Eficácia de diferentes doses e esquemas de administração de ácido tranexâmico em cirurgias ortopédicas de grande porte: estudo randomizado

Abstract Background: Tranexamic acid was studied in four different dosage regimens and their efficacy was compared for perioperative blood loss reduction, blood transfusion requirements and deep vein thrombosis (DVT) complication. Methods: Two hundred patients undergoing major orthopedic procedures were divided into five groups containing 40 patients each: Placebo, low dose (bolus 10 mg kg-1), low dose + maintenance (bolus 10 mg kg-1 + maintenance 1 mg kg-1 hr-1), high dose (bolus 30 mg kg-1) and high dose + maintenance (bolus 30 mg kg-1 + maintenance 3 mg kg-1 hr-1). Surgical blood loss was measured intraoperatively and drains collection in the first 24 hours postoperatively. Blood transfusion was done when hematocrit falls less than 25%. DVT screening was done in the postoperative period. Results: The intraoperative blood loss was 440 ± 207.54 mL in the placebo group, 412.5 ± 208.21 mL in the low dose group, 290 ± 149.6 ml in the low dose plus maintenance group, 332.5 ± 162.33 mL in the high dose group and 240.7 ± 88.15 mL in the high dose maintenance group (p < 0.001). The reduction in postoperative blood loss in the drain for first 24 hours was 80 ± 44.44 mL in the placebo group, 89.88 ± 44.87 mL in the low dose group, 56.7 ± 29.12 mL in the low dose plus maintenance group, 77.9 ± 35.74 mL in the high dose group and 46.7 ± 19.9 mL in the high dose maintenance group (p < 0.001). DVT was not encountered in any patient. Conclusion: Tranexamic acid was most effective in reducing surgical blood loss and blood transfusion requirements in a low dose + maintenance group.

Resumo Justificativa: O ácido tranexâmico foi avaliado em quatro esquemas com diferentes posologias, comparando-se a eficácia de cada esquema quanto a redução na perda sanguínea perioperatória, necessidade de transfusão sanguínea e ocorrência de Trombose Venosa Profunda (TVP). Método: Duzentos pacientes submetidos a procedimentos ortopédicos de grande porte foram divididos em cinco grupos de 40 pacientes de acordo com o esquema de administração de ácido tranexâmico: grupo placebo, grupo baixa dose (bolus de 10 mg.kg-1, grupo baixa dose e manutenção (bolus de 10 mg.kg-1 + manutenção de 1 mg.kg-1.h-1), grupo alta dose (bolus de 30 mg.kg-1), e grupo alta dose e manutenção (bolus de 30 mg.kg-1 + manutenção de 3 mg.kg-1.h-1). A perda sanguínea cirúrgica foi medida no intraoperatório. Além disso, nas primeiras 24 horas pós-operatórias, foi medido o volume de sangue coletado no dreno. Era realizada transfusão de sangue se o valor do hematócrito fosse inferior a 25%. Foi realizada avaliação quanto à ocorrência de TVP no pós-operatório. Resultados: A perda sanguínea intraoperatória foi de 440 ± 207,54 mL no grupo placebo, 412,5 ± 208,21 mL no grupo baixa dose, 290 ± 149,6 mL no grupo baixa dose e manutenção, 332,5 ± 162,33 mL no grupo alta dose, e 240,7 ± 88,15 mL no grupo alta dose e manutenção (p < 0,001). A redução na perda sanguínea pós-operatória pelo dreno nas primeiras 24 horas foi de 80 ± 44,44 mL no grupo placebo; 89,88 ± 44,87 mL no grupo baixa dose, 56,7 ± 29,12 mL no grupo baixa dose e dose de manutenção, 77,9 ± 35,74 mL no grupo alta dose e 46,7 ± 19,9 mL no grupo alta dose e manutenção (p < 0,001). TVP não foi observada em nenhum paciente. Conclusão: O ácido tranexâmico administrado em baixa dose combinado à manutenção foi mais eficaz em reduzir a perda sanguínea cirúrgica e a necessidade de transfusão de sangue.

Evaluation of ultrasound-guided quadratus lumborum block for post-operative analgesia in unilateral laparoscopic renal surgeries - A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Quadratus lumborum block (QLB) is a novel anaesthetic technique for abdominal wall block providing excellent post-operative analgesia. The primary objective of this study was to evaluate the duration of post-operative analgesia with QLB in unilateral laparoscopic renal surgeries. The secondary objectives were to assess total morphine consumption during the first 24 h postoperatively and observe for complications. METHODS: Sixty patients undergoing unilateral laparoscopic renal surgeries were randomly divided into two groups, with patients receiving QLB (Group A) or no block (Group B) at the end of surgery. General anaesthesia was standardised in both the groups. The pain was assessed by a Visual Analogue Scale (VAS) of 1-10. The duration of analgesia was taken as time from extubation to VAS of ≥3. Morphine was administered in patient-controlled analgesia pump with a bolus of 1 mg and a lockout interval of 10 min (min). The total morphine consumption was recorded. The statistical analysis was performed with the Student's t-test and Chi-square test. RESULTS: The duration of post-operative analgesia was significantly prolonged in Group A (1288 ± 288.92 min) than Group B (138 ± 54.92 min). Morphine consumption was also less in Group A (3.1 ± 0.87 mg) than Group B (10.46 ± 1.8 mg). There was a significant difference in the VAS score from 16 to 20 h. No complications were recorded. CONCLUSIONS: Ultrasound-guided QLB after laparoscopic renal surgery is safer to perform, effective with an increased post-operative duration of analgesia, reduces the consumption of opioids and is associated with fewer side effects.

Comparison of laparoscopy-guided with ultrasound-guided subcostal transversus abdominis plane block in laparoscopic cholecystectomy - A prospective, randomised study.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Subcostal transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is usually done under ultrasound guidance in laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Laparoscopic-guided subcostal TAP block is an alternate technique where ultrasound is not available. Our primary objective was to compare the success rate of ultrasound and laparoscopic approaches to the subcostal TAP block. The secondary objectives were to assess the duration of postoperative analgesia and morphine consumption postoperatively for 24 h. METHODS: Eighty patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly divided into two groups with patients receiving ultrasound-guided (group U) or laparoscopy-guided (group L) subcostal TAP block at the end of surgery. The success rate was assessed by a sensory blockade of T7 and T8 dermatomes 30 min after extubation. The duration of analgesia was taken as time from block administration to the visual analogue scale of ≥3. Morphine was administered in patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) pump with a bolus of 1 mg and a lock-out interval of 10 min. The total morphine consumption was recorded. The statistical analysis was performed with student t-test and Chi-square test. RESULTS: The success rate of group U (100%) was higher than group L (88%) but it was not statistically significant (P = 0.054). The duration of postoperative analgesia was significantly prolonged in group U (867.24 ± 135.83 min) than group L (751.31 ± 311.22 min) (P = 0.033). Morphine consumption was also less in group U (4.72 ± 0.94 mg) than group L (5.57 ± 2.53 mg) (P = 0.049). There was no significant difference in the VAS scores after 4 h postoperatively. CONCLUSION: Laparoscopy-guided subcostal TAP block is a suitable alternative to ultrasound-guided block and can be utilised in places where an ultrasound machine is not available.

Sex-Based Differences in the Cytokine Production and Intracellular Signaling Pathways in Patients With Rheumatoid Arthritis.

OBJECTIVES: This study aims to investigate lymphoproliferation, cytokine production, and intracellular signaling molecules in peripheral blood mononuclear cells (PBMCs) isolated from healthy individuals and rheumatoid arthritis (RA) patients to understand the extent of the involvement of these pathways in the pathogenesis of RA. PATIENTS AND METHODS: The study included 65 participants (29 males, 36 females; mean age 51.8±10.3 years; range, 37 to 71 years) who were categorized into four groups as healthy males (n=22, mean age 49.8±10.6 years; range, 39 to 65 years), male RA patients (n=7, mean age 51.8±13.9 years; range, 37 to 68 years), healthy females (n=20, mean age 53.7±8.8 years; range, 42 to 67 years), and female RA patients (n=16, mean age 52.9±10.4 years; range, 40 to 71 years). PBMCs were collected from the participants and analyzed for Concanavalin A (Con A)-induced lymphoproliferation using 3-(4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl)-2,5-diphenyltetrazolium bromide assay, cytokine production, and phospho-signal transducer and activator of transcription 3 (p-STAT-3), phospho-extracellular-signal-regulated kinase (p-ERK), phospho-cAMP response element binding (p-CREB), and phospho-protein kinase B expressions using enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Short form of the Arthritis Impact Measurement Scales 2 and multidimensional health assessment questionnaire were used to measure the level of disability and the quality of life. RESULTS: In RA patients, production of Con A-induced interleukin (IL)-2 and IL-17 was higher in both sexes while interferon-gamma levels decreased in RA females alone. Expression of p-STAT-3 in PBMCs increased in RA males while it was unaltered in RA females. p-ERK expression was not altered while p-CREB expression was enhanced in RA males and females. Protein-protein interaction analyses demonstrated that these and other key signaling molecules were dysregulated in RA patients. CONCLUSION: Our results suggest that sex-based differences in RA pathogenesis result from differential alterations in signaling pathways to influence the inflammatory process.

A prospective, randomized, double-blinded control study on comparison of tramadol, clonidine and dexmedetomidine for post spinal anesthesia shivering / Estudo prospectivo randômico, duplo-cego e controlado comparando tramadol, clonidina e dexmedetomidina para tremores pós-raquianestesia

Abstract Introduction Shivering, a common intraoperative problem under spinal anesthesia increases the oxygen consumption considerably and is uncomfortable and distressing to the patient, anesthesiologist as well as surgeon. The present study was designed to explore the effectiveness of tramadol, clonidine and dexmedetomidine in the treatment of post spinal anesthesia shivering and to look for their adverse effects. Methods This prospective, randomized, double blinded control study was done on 90 patients who developed shivering under spinal anesthesia. They were randomly allocated into three groups with Group T receiving tramadol 1 mg.kg-1, Group C getting clonidine 1 mcg.kg-1 and Group D patients receiving dexmedetomidine 0.5 mcg.kg-1. The time taken to control shivering, recurrence rate, hemodynamic variables, sedation score and adverse effects were observed. Results Dexmedetomidine was faster in the control of shivering in 5.7 ± 0.79 minutes (min) whereas tramadol took 6.76 ± 0.93 min and clonidine was slower with 9.43 ± 0.93 min. The recurrence rate was much lower in the dexmedetomidine group with 3.3% than for clonidine (10%) and tramadol (23.3%) group. The sedation achieved with dexmedetomidine was better than clonidine and tramadol. The tramadol group had more cases of vomiting (four) and dexmedetomidine group had six cases of hypotension and two cases of bradycardia. Two of the clonidine patients encountered bradycardia and hypotension. Conclusion Dexmedetomidine is better than tramadol and clonidine in the control of shivering because of its faster onset and less recurrence rate. Though complications are encountered in the dexmedetomidine group, they are treatable.

Resumo Introdução O tremor, problema comum no período intraoperatório sob raquianestesia, aumenta consideravelmente o consumo de oxigênio, além de ser desconfortável e angustiante para o paciente, o anestesiologista e o cirurgião. O presente estudo foi concebido para explorar a eficácia de tramadol, clonidina e dexmedetomidina no tratamento de tremores pós-raquianestesia e observar seus efeitos adversos. Métodos Este estudo prospectivo, randômico, controlado e duplo-cego foi feito com 90 pacientes que desenvolveram tremores sob raquianestesia. Os pacientes foram randomicamente alocados em três grupos para receber 1 mg.kg-1 de tramadol (Grupo T), 1 mcg.kg-1 de clonidina (Grupo C) e 0,5 mcg.kg-1 de dexmedetomidina (Grupo D). O tempo necessário para controlar os tremores, a taxa de recorrência, as variáveis hemodinâmicas, os níveis de sedação e os efeitos adversos foram registrados. Resultados Dexmedetomidina foi mais rápida para controlar os tremores, com tempo de 5,7 ± 0,79 minutos (min); o tempo de tramadol foi de 6,76 ± 0,93 min; clonidina foi mais lenta, com tempo de 9,43 ± 0,93 min. A taxa de recorrência foi muito menor no grupo dexmedetomidina (3,3%) do que nos grupos clonidina (10%) e tramadol (23,3%). A sedação obtida com dexmedetomidina foi melhor do que a obtida com clonidina e tramadol. O grupo tramadol teve mais casos de vômito (quatro); o grupo dexmedetomidina teve seis casos de hipotensão e dois casos de bradicardia. Dois pacientes do grupo clonidina apresentaram bradicardia e hipotensão. Conclusão Dexmedetomidina foi melhor do que tramadol e clonidina para o controle de tremores devido ao seu início de ação mais rápido e à taxa de recorrência mais baixa. Embora complicações tenham sido observadas no grupo dexmedetomidina, elas foram tratáveis.

[A prospective, randomized, double-blinded control study on comparison of tramadol, clonidine and dexmedetomidine for post spinal anesthesia shivering]. / Estudo prospectivo randômico, duplo­cego e controlado comparando tramadol, clonidina e dexmedetomidina para tremores pós­raquianestesia.

INTRODUCTION: Shivering, a common intraoperative problem under spinal anesthesia increases the oxygen consumption considerably and is uncomfortable and distressing to the patient, anesthesiologist as well as surgeon. The present study was designed to explore the effectiveness of tramadol, clonidine and dexmedetomidine in the treatment of post spinal anesthesia shivering and to look for their adverse effects. METHODS: This prospective, randomized, double blinded control study was done on 90 patients who developed shivering under spinal anesthesia. They were randomly allocated into three groups with Group T receiving tramadol 1mg.kg-1, Group C getting clonidine 1mcg.kg-1 and Group D patients receiving dexmedetomidine 0.5mcg.kg-1. The time taken to control shivering, recurrence rate, hemodynamic variables, sedation score and adverse effects were observed. RESULTS: Dexmedetomidine was faster in the control of shivering in 5.7±0.79minutes (min) whereas tramadol took 6.76±0.93min and clonidine was slower with 9.43±0.93min. The recurrence rate was much lower in the dexmedetomidine group with 3.3% than for clonidine (10%) and tramadol (23.3%) group. The sedation achieved with dexmedetomidine was better than clonidine and tramadol. The tramadol group had more cases of vomiting (four) and dexmedetomidine group had six cases of hypotension and two cases of bradycardia. Two of the clonidine patients encountered bradycardia and hypotension. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine is better than tramadol and clonidine in the control of shivering because of its faster onset and less recurrence rate. Though complications are encountered in the dexmedetomidine group, they are treatable.