Anaesthetic management of a pregnant patient undergoing meningioma resection: A case report.

The management of intracranial malignancies in pregnancy poses unique challenges to the perioperative team. We describe the successful surgical management of a meningioma in a 28-year-old previously healthy patient, in her third trimester of pregnancy, who first presented with a generalised seizure. Without clear guidelines on the management of intracranial malignancies in pregnancy, a multidisciplinary approach was essential in providing a management plan for the patient's seizures and on the timing of her surgical intervention. Hormone-mediated tumour growth was a significant factor in opting for urgent surgical intervention and we discuss the current evidence linking hormones to tumour growth in pregnancy.

Efficacy and safety of extrafascial injection versus intrafascial injection for interscalene brachial plexus block: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to assess the efficacy and safety of interscalene brachial plexus block (ISB) techniques in upper limb and shoulder surgeries. EVIDENCE ACQUISITION: We conducted a comprehensive search of PubMed, Web of Science, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Embase, Medline, and Scopus databases up to May 14th, 2023. We employed a search strategy involving keywords such as "brachial plexus block," "interscalene brachial plexus block," "ISB," "extrafascial," and "intrafascial," without applying search restrictions or filters. Eligible studies consisted of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) that compared extrafascial and intrafascial ISB techniques in adult patients undergoing upper limb and shoulder surgeries. EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS: Our analysis included six RCTs encompassing 485 participants. Extrafascial injection demonstrated superiority over intrafascial injection in reducing the incidence of hemidiaphragmatic paresis (RR 0.33, 95% CI 0.124 to 0.47, P<0.00001) and preserving respiratory function (MS 0.31, 95% CI 0.1 to 0. 52, P=0.003 FEV1 in liters). Additionally, extrafascial ISB exhibited a lower risk of block-related complications (RR 0.35, 95% CI 0.25 to 0.50, P<0.00001). However, the intrafascial technique offered a faster sensory and motor block onset. The duration of sensory block did not significantly differ. The incidence of Horner syndrome showed no statistically significant difference. CONCLUSIONS: Our findings favor extrafascial ISB techniques because they reduce hemidiaphragmatic paresis, preserve respiratory function, and lower block-related complications. However, further research is necessary to establish their safety and efficacy in specific patient populations.

Conventional anatomical landmark versus preprocedural ultrasound for thoracic epidural analgesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural analgesia is the gold standard for major thoracic and abdominal surgeries. AIM: Ultrasound-guided and landmark-based thoracic epidural insertion are compared in this systematic review. METHODS: Randomised controlled trials were sought in six databases for a systematic review and meta-analysis. With a 95% confidence interval, a fixed-effects model calculated risk ratio or mean difference. Cochrane risk of bias assessed bias. Four randomised controlled trials were examined. FINDINGS: Preprocedural ultrasound increased thoracic epidural placement first-puncture success rate (risk ratio = 1.28, 95% confidence interval (1.05 to 1.56), p value = 0.02) and decreased the need for two or more skin punctures (mean difference = -2.41, 95% confidence interval (-3.34 to -1.47), p value = 0.00001). The ultrasound group reduced needle redirections (risk ratio = 0.6, 95% confidence interval (0.38 to 0.94), p value = 0.02). The epidural block success rate was equal in both groups (risk ratio = 1.02, 95% confidence interval (0.96 to 1.07), p value = 0.6). CONCLUSION: Thoracic epidural insertion is improved by ultrasound but not the success rate. Quality research with larger samples is needed to emphasise these conclusions.

VivaSight Double-Lumen Tube Versus Conventional Double-Lumen Tube for One-Lung Ventilation: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials.

The main objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the safety and effectiveness of VivaSight double-lumen tubes (VS-DLTs) in one-lung ventilation (OLV) compared to conventional DLTs (c-DLTs). The study was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis statement's guidelines. From the database's inception to December 2022, we searched seven different databases. We included 364 patients from six randomized controlled trials who were scheduled to undergo surgery requiring OLV. The Cochrane risk of bias assessment tool was utilized to determine the risk of bias. The odds ratio (OR) was estimated for categorical variables, while the mean difference was calculated for continuous variables. Patients were randomly assigned to the VS-DLT or c-DLT group. The results revealed that patients in the c-DLT group have longer intubation time than the VS-DLT patients (mean difference [MD] = -90.01; 95% confidence interval [CI], -161.33 to -18.69; P = 0.01). Significantly, more secretions were present in the VS-DLT group than in the c-DLT group (OR = 4.24; CI, 1.96 to 9.13; P = 0.0002). Also, the fiberoptic bronchoscope was used more frequently in the c-DLT group compared to the VS-DLT group (OR = 0.01 [0.00, 0.07]; P < 0.00001). We found that VS-DLT was safe as the pooled analysis showed no significant difference according to side effects such as hoarseness and sore throat. The other outcomes, such as dislodgement, the clearance of secretions, and the quality of lung deflation (excellent), were non-significant between the two groups.

Ultrasound-based Accuro system versus traditional palpation technique for neuraxial anaesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

INTRODUCTION: This review evaluates the efficacy and safety of Accuro, a handheld ultrasound device, compared to the palpation technique for neuraxial anaesthesia. Accuro provides real-time imaging guidance, potentially improving accuracy and efficiency. METHODS: A comprehensive search across six electronic databases identified randomised clinical trials comparing Accuro with palpation for neuraxial anaesthesia. Risk ratios or mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated using a random-effects model. Bias risk was evaluated using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool. RESULTS: Five studies (n=369) met the inclusion criteria. Accuro showed a favourable risk ratio for first insertion success (1.44 [95% CI [1.01, 2.05], p=0.05]). It significantly reduced needle skin passes (MD -0.63; 95% CI [-1.05, -0.21]; p<0.01), but not needle redirection (MD -1.31; 95% CI [-2.71, 0.11]; p=0.07). Procedure time was shorter in palpation (MD 127.82; 95% CI [8.68, -246.97]; p=0.04). Four studies had a low risk of bias; one had some concerns. CONCLUSION: Accuro can potentially improve success rates and reduce skin passes in neuraxial anaesthesia. Further trials with larger samples are needed, especially in patients with anticipated difficulties.