Evaluation of 254 cesarean sections with COVID-19 in terms of anesthesia and clinical course: 1-year experience.

PURPOSE: The study aims to compare anesthesia methods, clinical course, and maternal and fetal outcomes of symptomatic and asymptomatic pregnant women undergoing cesarean operation with confirmed COVID-19. METHODS: 254 pregnant women with COVID-19 who had a cesarean section in our hospital between March 2020 and March 2021 were included in the study. Demographic information, laboratory test results, radiological data, treatments, anesthesia methods, and prognoses of the patients were evaluated retrospectively. RESULTS: On admission, 160 (63%) patients were asymptomatic (Group A), and 94 (37%) patients were symptomatic (Group S). The ratio of patients who needed oxygen therapy in the obstetric ward (p < 0.001) and intraoperative period (p < 0.001) and ICU admission (p = 0.005) was higher in Group S. Neutrophil-to-lymphocyte ratio (NLR), ferritin, procalcitonin, aspartate aminotransferase (AST) and alanine aminotransferase (ALT) levels were higher in Group S. In both groups, spinal anesthesia was performed predominantly. The rate of general anesthesia was significantly higher in Group S (16.0% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.003). No difference was found in the amount of sedatives during the spinal anesthesia. CONCLUSION: Close follow-up of the laboratory values and comorbidities (especially asthma) of pregnant will provide information about the clinical course as in other patient groups. Spinal anesthesia is a safe and sufficient anesthesia method in both symptomatic and asymptomatic COVID-19 pregnant women when performed by experienced hands.

Effect of Uterine Fundal Pressure on Maternal Intraocular Pressure in Cesarean Delivery: Comparison of Regional and General Anesthesia.

PURPOSE: To evaluate the intraocular pressure (IOP) changes accompanying fundal pressure during a cesarean-section procedure under both regional and general anesthesia. METHODS: In total, 60 women scheduled for elective cesarean section, none of them diagnosed with ocular problems, were enrolled in the study. Patients underwent cesarean section under either general (group G, n=30) or regional anesthesia (group S, n=30) according to their choice. IOP was measured with a Tono-Pen before (T1) and after (T2) application of anesthesia, during fundal pressure (T3), and after the birth of the baby (T4). Heart rate as well as systolic, diastolic, and mean arterial pressure were recorded during the procedure. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in IOP between the groups (P>0.05). In group S, IOP at T3 was significantly higher than at all other timepoints (P<0.001). In group G, IOP at T3 was significantly higher than at T2 and T4. Mean arterial pressure was significantly lower in group S at all timepoints except T1. CONCLUSIONS: In conclusion, fundal pressure may significantly increase the IOP, but the choice of anesthetic technique may not have any effect on IOP.

Bilateral greater occipital nerve block for treatment of post-dural puncture headache after caesarean operations / Bloqueio bilateral do nervo occipital maior para tratamento de cefaleia pós-punção dural após cesarianas

Abstract Background: Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is an important complication of neuroaxial anesthesia and more frequently noted in pregnant women. The pain is described as severe, disturbing and its location is usually fronto-occipital. The conservative treatment of PDPH consists of bed rest, fluid theraphy, analgesics and caffeine. Epidural blood patch is gold standard theraphy but it is an invasive method. The greater occipital nerve (GON) is formed of sensory fibers that originate in the C2 and C3 segments of the spinal cord and it is the main sensory nerve of the occipital region. GON blockage has been used for the treatment of many kinds of headache. The aim of this retrospective study is to present the results of PDPH treated with GON block over 1 year period in our institute. Methods: 16 patients who had been diagnosed to have PDPH, and performed GON block after caesarean operations were included in the study. GON blocks were performed as the first treatment directly after diagnose of the PDPH with levobupivacaine and dexamethasone. Results: The mean VAS score of the patients was 8.75 (±0.93) before the block; 3.87 (±1.78) 10 min after the block; 1.18 (±2.04) 2 h after the block and 2.13 (±1.64) 24 h after the block. No adverse effects were observed. Conclusions: Treatment of PDPH with GON block seems to be a minimal invasive, easy and effective method especially after caesarean operations. A GON block may be considered before the application of a blood patch.

Resumo Justificativa: A cefaleia pós-punção dural (CPPD) é uma complicação importante da anestesia neuroaxial e mais frequentemente observada em grávidas. A dor é descrita como intensa, perturbadora, e sua localização é geralmente fronto-occipital. O tratamento conservador da CPPD consiste em repouso no leito, fluidoterapia, analgésicos e cafeína. O tampão sanguíneo peridural é o padrão ouro de tratamento, mas é um método invasivo. O nervo occipital maior (NOM) é formado por fibras sensoriais com origem nos segmentos C2 e C3 da medula espinhal e é o principal nervo sensorial da região occipital. O bloqueio do NOM tem sido usado para o tratamento de muitos tipos de dor de cabeça. O objetivo deste estudo retrospectivo foi apresentar os resultados de CPPD tratada com bloqueio do NOM no período de um ano em nosso instituto. Métodos: Foram incluídas no estudo 16 pacientes diagnosticadas com CPPD e submetidas a bloqueio de NOM após cesariana. Os bloqueios do NOM foram feitos com levobupivacaína e dexametasona como o primeiro tratamento imediatamente após o diagnóstico de CPPD. Resultados: A média dos escores EVA das pacientes foi de 8,75 (±0,93) antes do bloqueio; 3,87 (±1,78) 10 minutos após o bloqueio; 1,18 (±2,04) duas horas após o bloqueio e 2,13 (±1,64) 24 horas após o bloqueio. Efeitos adversos não foram observados. Conclusões: O tratamento da CPPD com bloqueio do NOM parece ser um método minimamente invasivo, fácil e eficaz, especialmente após cesarianas. O bloqueio do NOM pode ser considerado antes da aplicação de um tampão sanguíneo peridural.

Bilateral greater occipital nerve block for treatment of post-dural puncture headache after caesarean operations.

BACKGROUND: Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is an important complication of neuroaxial anesthesia and more frequently noted in pregnant women. The pain is described as severe, disturbing and its location is usually fronto-occipital. The conservative treatment of PDPH consists of bed rest, fluid theraphy, analgesics and caffeine. Epidural blood patch is gold standard theraphy but it is an invasive method. The greater occipital nerve (GON) is formed of sensory fibers that originate in the C2 and C3 segments of the spinal cord and it is the main sensory nerve of the occipital region. GON blockage has been used for the treatment of many kinds of headache. The aim of this retrospective study is to present the results of PDPH treated with GON block over 1 year period in our institute. METHODS: 16 patients who had been diagnosed to have PDPH, and performed GON block after caesarean operations were included in the study. GON blocks were performed as the first treatment directly after diagnose of the PDPH with levobupivacaine and dexamethasone. RESULTS: The mean VAS score of the patients was 8.75 (±0.93) before the block; 3.87 (±1.78) 10min after the block; 1.18 (±2.04) 2h after the block and 2.13 (±1.64) 24h after the block. No adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of PDPH with GON block seems to be a minimal invasive, easy and effective method especially after caesarean operations. A GON block may be considered before the application of a blood patch.

[Bilateral greater occipital nerve block for treatment of post-dural puncture headache after caesarean operations]. / Bloqueio bilateral do nervo occipital maior para tratamento de cefaleia pós-punção dural após cesarianas.

BACKGROUND: Post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) is an important complication of neuroaxial anesthesia and more frequently noted in pregnant women. The pain is described as severe, disturbing and its location is usually fronto-occipital. The conservative treatment of PDPH consists of bed rest, fluid theraphy, analgesics and caffeine. Epidural blood patch is gold standard theraphy but it is an invasive method. The greater occipital nerve (GON) is formed of sensory fibers that originate in the C2 and C3 segments of the spinal cord and it is the main sensory nerve of the occipital region. GON blockage has been used for the treatment of many kinds of headache. The aim of this retrospective study is to present the results of PDPH treated with GON block over 1 year period in our institute. METHODS: 16 patients who had been diagnosed to have PDPH, and performed GON block after caesarean operations were included in the study. GON blocks were performed as the first treatment directly after diagnose of the PDPH with levobupivacaine and dexamethasone. RESULTS: The mean VAS score of the patients was 8.75 (±0.93) before the block; 3.87 (±1.78) 10min after the block; 1.18 (±2.04) 2h after the block and 2.13 (±1.64) 24h after the block. No adverse effects were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Treatment of PDPH with GON block seems to be a minimal invasive, easy and effective method especially after caesarean operations. A GON block may be considered before the application of a blood patch.

Lidocaine alleviates propofol related pain much better than metoprolol and nitroglycerin / Lidocaína é mais eficaz do que metoprolol e nitroglicerina para o alívio da dor relacionada à injeção de propofol

ABSTRACTBACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Injection pain after propofol administration is common and maydisturb patients' comfort. The aim of this study was to compare effectiveness of intravenous(iv) nitroglycerin, lidocaine and metoprolol applied through the veins on the dorsum of hand orantecubital vein on eliminating propofol injection pain.METHOD: There were 147 patients and they were grouped according to the analgesic adminis-tered. Metoprolol (n = 31, Group M), lidocaine (n = 32, Group L) and nitroglycerin (n = 29, GroupN) were applied through iv catheter at dorsum hand vein or antecubital vein. Pain was evalu-ated by 4 point scale (0 - no pain, 1 --- light pain, 2 --- mild pain, 3 --- severe pain) in 5, 10, 15and 20th seconds. ASA, BMI, patient demographics, education level and the effect of pathwaysfor injection and location of operations were analyzed for their effect on total pain score.RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups in terms of total pain score (p = 0.981).There were no differences in terms of total pain score depending on ASA, education level,location of operation. However, lidocaine was more effective when compared with metoprolol(p = 0.015) and nitroglycerin (p = 0.001) among groups. Although neither lidocaine nor metopro-lol had any difference on pain management when applied from antecubital or dorsal hand vein(p > 0.05), nitroglycerin injection from antecubital vein had demonstrated statistically lowerpain scores (p = 0.001).CONCLUSION: We found lidocaine to be the most effective analgesic in decreasing propofolrelated pain. We therefore suggest iv lidocaine for alleviating propofol related pain at operations.

RESUMOJUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: A dor no local da injeção após a administração de propofol é comum e pode causar desconforto nos pacientes. O objetivo deste estudo foi comparar a eficácia de nitroglicerina, lidocaína e metoprolol, aplicados intravenosamente através de veias do dorso das mãos ou antecubitais, para eliminar a dor causada pela injeção de propofol.MÉTODOS: Foram alocados em grupos 147 pacientes de acordo com o analgésico administrado: metoprolol (n = 31, Grupo M), lidocaína (n = 32, Grupo L) e nitroglicerina (n = 29, Grupo N). Os analgésicos foram aplicados via cateter intravenoso em veia do dorso da mão ou antecubital. A dor foi avaliada com uma escala de quatro pontos (0 = sem dor, 1 = dor leve, 2 = dor moderada, 3 = dor intensa) nos segundos cinco, 10, 15 e 20. Os dados demográficos dos pacientes, estado físico ASA, IMC, nível de escolaridade, efeito das vias de injeção e local das cirurgias foram analisados quanto a seus efeitos no escore total de dor.RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença entre os grupos em relação ao escore total de dor (p = 0,981). Não houve diferença no escore total de dor em relação ao estado físico ASA, escolaridade e local da cirurgia. No entanto, lidocaína foi mais eficaz em comparação com metoprolol (p = 0,015) e nitroglicerina (p = 0,001), na comparação entre os grupos. Embora lidocaína e metoprolol não tenham apresentado diferença no tratamento da dor quando aplicados em veia antecubital ou do dorso da mão (p > 0,05), a injeção de nitroglicerina em veia antecubital apresentou escores de dor estatisticamente menores (p = 0,001).CONCLUSÃO: Lidocaína mostrou-se como analgésico mais eficaz para diminuir a dor relacionada à injeção de propofol. Sugerimos, portanto, lidocaína IV para aliviar a dor relacionada à injeção de propofol em operações.

[Lidocaine alleviates propofol related pain much better than metoprolol and nitroglycerin]. / Lidocaína é mais eficaz do que metoprolol e nitroglicerina para o alívio da dor relacionada à injeção de propofol.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Injection pain after propofol administration is common and may disturb patients' comfort. The aim of this study was to compare effectiveness of intravenous (iv) nitroglycerin, lidocaine and metoprolol applied through the veins on the dorsum of hand or antecubital vein on eliminating propofol injection pain. METHOD: There were 147 patients and they were grouped according to the analgesic administered. Metoprolol (n=31, Group M), lidocaine (n=32, Group L) and nitroglycerin (n=29, Group N) were applied through iv catheter at dorsum hand vein or antecubital vein. Pain was evaluated by 4 point scale (0 - no pain, 1 - light pain, 2 - mild pain, 3 - severe pain) in 5, 10, 15 and 20th seconds. ASA, BMI, patient demographics, education level and the effect of pathways for injection and location of operations were analyzed for their effect on total pain score. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups in terms of total pain score (p=0.981). There were no differences in terms of total pain score depending on ASA, education level, location of operation. However, lidocaine was more effective when compared with metoprolol (p=0.015) and nitroglycerin (p=0.001) among groups. Although neither lidocaine nor metoprolol had any difference on pain management when applied from antecubital or dorsal hand vein (p>0.05), nitroglycerin injection from antecubital vein had demonstrated statistically lower pain scores (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: We found lidocaine to be the most effective analgesic in decreasing propofol related pain. We therefore suggest iv lidocaine for alleviating propofol related pain at operations.

Lidocaine alleviates propofol related pain much better than metoprolol and nitroglycerin.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Injection pain after propofol administration is common and may disturb patients' comfort. The aim of this study was to compare effectiveness of intravenous (iv) nitroglycerin, lidocaine and metoprolol applied through the veins on the dorsum of hand or antecubital vein on eliminating propofol injection pain. METHOD: There were 147 patients and they were grouped according to the analgesic administered. Metoprolol (n=31, Group M), lidocaine (n=32, Group L) and nitroglycerin (n=29, Group N) were applied through iv catheter at dorsum hand vein or antecubital vein. Pain was evaluated by 4 point scale (0 - no pain, 1 - light pain, 2 - mild pain, 3 - severe pain) in 5, 10, 15 and 20th seconds. ASA, BMI, patient demographics, education level and the effect of pathways for injection and location of operations were analyzed for their effect on total pain score. RESULTS: There were no differences between the groups in terms of total pain score (p=0.981). There were no differences in terms of total pain score depending on ASA, education level, location of operation. However, lidocaine was more effective when compared with metoprolol (p=0.015) and nitroglycerin (p=0.001) among groups. Although neither lidocaine nor metoprolol had any difference on pain management when applied from antecubital or dorsal hand vein (p>0.05), nitroglycerin injection from antecubital vein had demonstrated statistically lower pain scores (p=0.001). CONCLUSION: We found lidocaine to be the most effective analgesic in decreasing propofol related pain. We therefore suggest iv lidocaine for alleviating propofol related pain at operations.

Spinal anesthesia for transurethral resection operations: levobupivacaine with or without fentanyl.

BACKGROUND: The objective ofthe present study was double fold; to compare the characteristics of spinal blocks produced by 0.5% levobupivacaine with and without fentanyl in transurethral resection and to test the hypothesis that, fentanyl added to levobupivacaine, may be used as an alternative to pure levobupivacaine solution, in spinal anesthesia. METHODS: Forty males, aged >60 years, ASA I-III patients scheduled for elective transurethral resection were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. Following a spinal tap, intrathecal injection in Group L (n=20), 2.5 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine and in Group LF (n=20), 2.2 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine with fentanyl 15 microg (0.3 mL) was performed. The characteristics of sensory and motor block, hemodynamic data, side effects, patient and surgeon satisfaction were recorded. Patients were observed until the level of sensory block was S1 and the Bromage score was 0. RESULTS: There were no significant differences between the two groups forpatient demographic, intraoperative, hemodynamic parameters, side effects and satisfaction. The highest level of sensory block was T9 in the Group L, and T6 in the Group LF (p = 0.001). Duration of motor block was shorter in Group LF than in Group L (291.00 +/- 81.08 min in Group L; 213.75 +/- 59.49 min in Group LF) (p = 0.001). CONCLUSION: Both regimes are effective, and the addition of fentanyl to levobupivacaine may offers the advantage of shorter duration of motor block and may be used as an alternative to pure levobupivacaine solution in spinal anesthesia, for transurethral resections.

Effect of lornoxicam on postoperative analgesia after myomectomy.

BACKGROUND: In this prospective, randomized study, we evaluate the postoperative analgesic effect of lornoxicam after myomectomy operations. MATERIAL-METHOD: Forty ASA I-II patients scheduled for myomectomy operation were enrolled to this study. Patients were randomly divided into two groups and epidural block was performed with 0,75 % ropivacaine. After the operation, morphine Patient Controlled Epidural Analgesia (PCEA) combined with placebo (saline 2 ml iv) and morphine PCEA combined with lornoxicam 8 mg iv were administered to patients in Group I and Group II, respectively. Pain was assessed at the 0,1st, 2nd, 4th, 6th, 8th, 12th and 24th hours postoperatively. Chi-square and student's t tests were used for statistical analysis. RESULTS: VAS( Visual Analog Scale) scores were higher in Group I than Group II at 2nd, 4th, 6th and 24th hours. Total morphine consumption was 10.45+/- 4.03 in Group I and 4.25 +/- 1.74 in Group II. CONCLUSION: Single dose iv lornoxicam is a safe and an effective treatment option of post-myomectomy pain as it produces effective analgesia, reduces morphine consumption and does not increase the side effects.