Priyanka Sethi

Dexmedetomidine versus midazolam for conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography: An open-label randomised controlled trial

Background: Traditionally, midazolam has been used for providing conscious sedation in endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. Objective: The primary objective was to compare haemodynamic, respiratory and recovery profile of both drugs. Secondary objective was to compare the degree of comfort experienced by patients and the usefulness of the drug to endoscopist. Study Design: Open-label Randomised Controlled Trial. Methods: Subjects between 18 and 60 years of age with American Society of Anaesthesiologist Grade I-II requiring ERCP were enrolled in two groups (30 each). Both groups received fentanyl 1 μg/kg IV at the beginning of ERCP. Group M received IV midazolam (0.04 mg/kg) and additional 0.5 mg doses until Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS) score reached 3-4. Group D received dexmedetomidine at loading dose of 1 μg/kg over 10 min followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion until RSS reached 3-4. The vital parameters (heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), respiration rate, SpO 2 ), time to achieve RSS 3-4 and facial pain score (FPS) were compared during and after the procedure. In the recovery room, time to reach modified Aldrete score (MAS) 9-10 and patient and surgeon′s satisfaction scores was also recorded and compared. Any complication during or after the procedure were also noted. Results: In Group D, patients had lower HR and FPS at 5, 10 and 15 min following the initiation of sedation (P<0.05). There was no statistically significant difference in BP and respiratory rate. The procedure elicited a gag response in 29 (97%) and 7 (23%) subjects in Group M and Group D respectively (P<0.05). MAS of 9-10 at 5 min during recovery was achieved in 27 (90%) subjects in Group D in contrast to 5 (17%) in Group M (P<0.05). Dexmedetomidine showed higher patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (P<0.05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine can be a superior alternative to midazolam for conscious sedation in ERCP.

Comparison of supraglottic devices i-gel ® and LMA Fastrach ® as conduit for endotracheal intubation

Background and Aims: i-gel®, a recently introduced supraglottic airway device (SAD) has been claimed to be an efficient supraglottic airway. It can also be used as a conduit for endotracheal intubation. However, LMA Fastrach® frequently used for this purpose; hence in this randomized study, success rate of blind tracheal intubation through two different SADs i-gel® and LMA Fastrach® was evaluated. The complications if any were also studied. Methods: A total of 100 patients undergoing elective surgery under general anaesthesia were randomised in two groups comprising of 50 patients each to tracheal intubation using either i-gel (I group) or LMA Fastrach (F group). After induction of anaesthesia SAD was inserted and on achieving adequate ventilation with the device, blind tracheal intubation was attempted through the SAD. Success at first-attempt and overall tracheal intubation success rates were evaluated, and tracheal intubation time was measured. Data were analysed using IBM SPSS Statistics 20.0 software (Statistical Package for Social Sciences by International Business Machines Corporation). P < 0.05 was considered as statistically significant. Results: There was no difference in the incidence of adequate ventilation with either of the SAD. The success rate of tracheal intubation in first attempt was 66% in Group I and 74% in Group F, while overall success rate of tracheal intubation was 82% in Group I when compared to 96% in Group F. Time taken for successful tracheal intubation through LMA Fastrach was lesser (20.96 s) when compared to i-gel (24.04 s). Complication rates were statistically similar in both the groups. Conclusion: i-gel® is a better device for rescue ventilation due to its quick insertion but an inferior intubating device in comparison to LMA Fastrach®.

Middle East respiratory syndrome: A new global threat

The outbreak of Middle East respiratory syndrome (MERS) is reported from Saudi Arabia and the Republic of Korea. It is a respiratory disease caused by coronavirus. Camels are considered as a source for MERS transmission in humans, although the exact source is unknown. Human-to-human transmission is reported in the community with droplet and contact spread being the possible modes. Most patients without any underlying diseases remain asymptomatic or develop mild clinical disease, but some patients require critical care for mechanical ventilation, dialysis and other organ support. MERS is a disease with pandemic potential and awareness, and surveillance can prevent such further outbreaks.

Inadvertent intrathecal injection of labetalol

Labetalol is a combined α and β adrenergic receptor blocker. It is used to treat hypertension, especially in pregnant patients. We report a case of a female patient who was given labetalol intrathecally in place of bupivacaine due to a similar appearance of ampoules which resulted in a drop in blood pressure and pulse rate. The patient responded to fluid resuscitation and there occurred no neurological sequelae.

Acute respiratory failure and mechanical ventilation in pregnant patient: A narrative review of literature.

Physiological changes of pregnancy imposes higher risk of acute respiratory failure (ARF) with even a slight insult and remains an important cause of maternal and fetal morbidity and mortality. Although pregnant women have different respiratory physiology and different causes of ARF, guidelines specific to ventilatory settings, goals of oxygenation and weaning process could not be framed due to lack of large-scale randomized controlled trials. During the 2009 H1N1 pandemic, pregnant women had higher morbidity and mortality compared to nonpregnant women. During this period, alternative strategies of ventilation such as high-frequency oscillatory ventilation, inhalational of nitric oxide, prone positioning, and extra corporeal membrane oxygenation were increasingly used as a desperate measure to rescue pregnant patients with severe hypoxemia who were not improving with conventional mechanical ventilation. This article highlights the causes of ARF and recent advances in invasive, noninvasive and alternative strategies of ventilation used during pregnancy.

Dexmedetomidine versus propofol in dilatation and curettage: An open-label pilot randomized controlled trial

Background: Traditionally propofol has been used for providing sedation in dilatation and curettage (D and C). Recently, dexmedetomidine has been tried, but very little evidence exists to support its use. Aims: The aim was to compare hemodynamic and recovery profile of both the drugs along with a degree of comfort experienced by patients and the usefulness of the drug to surgeons. Settings and Design: Tertiary care center and open-label randomized controlled trial. Materials and Methods: Patients posted for D and C were enrolled in two groups (25 each). Both groups received fentanyl 1 μg/kg intravenous (IV) at the beginning of the procedure. Group P received IV propofol in dose of 1.5 mg/kg over 10-15 min and Group D received dexmedetomidine at a loading dose of 1 μg/kg over 10 min, followed by 0.5 μg/kg/h infusion until Ramsay sedation score reached 3-4. Hemodynamic vitals were compared during and after the procedure. In the recovery room time to reach modified Aldrete score (MAS) of 9-10 and patient′s and surgeon′s satisfaction scores were also recorded and compared. Results: In Group D, patients had statistically significant lower heart rate at 2, 5, 10 and 15 min as compared to Group P. Hypotension was present in 52% in Group P and 4% in Group D (P < 0.05). MAS of 9-10 was achieved in 4.4 min in subjects in Group D in contrast to 16.2 min in Group P (P < 0.05). Group D showed higher patient and surgeon satisfaction scores (P < 0.05). Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine provide better hemodynamic and recovery profile than propofol. It can be a superior alternative for short surgical day care procedures.

Air- Q intubating laryngeal airway guided intubation in Morquio syndrome

Mucopolysaccharidoses (MPS) are lysosomal storage disorders caused by the deficiency of enzymes required for the stepwise breakdown of glycosaminoglycans (GAGs), also known as mucopolysaccharides. Patients with MPS may develop complications during general anaesthesia (GA) due to the presence of airway obstruction, excessive secretions, a large tongue and an abnormal airway anatomy. Patients with MPS type IV, also known as Morquio syndrome, pose even greater challenge because of additional problems such as neck instability, restrictive pulmonary disease and end-organ damage.

Multiple pterygium syndrome: Challenge for anesthesiologist.

Multiple pterygium syndrome (MPS) is a very rare autosomal recessive disorder characterized by flexion of joint and digit contractures, skin webbing, cleft palate, deformity of the spine, and cervical spine fusion. Difficult airway is associated mainly due to micrognathia, retrognathia, webbing of the neck, and limitation of the mouth opening and neck extension. We are reporting a case of a 5-year-old female diagnosed with MPS and exhibiting a bilateral club foot and congenital vertical talus. The patient was posted for manipulation and above the knee casting under general anesthesia.

Glycine induced retinotoxicity is avoidable

Sir, We read the article ‘glycine induced acute transient post-operative visual loss’ by Pramod et al.[1] and agree with the authors that the absorption of large amount of glycine and application of higher than the recommended pressure were responsible for the glycine induced retinotoxicity. The ‘American Association of Gynecologic Laparoscopists’ guidelines[2] for hysteroscopic surgery published in 2013 recommend avoidance of intrauterine distension pressure more than the patients mean arterial pressure, and use of intra-cervical vasopressin (8 ml of 0.05 U/ml) to reduce the absorption of irrigation fluid. Similar to transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) syndrome, use of neuraxial blockade in this case could have preserved consciousness of the patient and helped to detect the clinical features of volume overload and glycine toxicity at an earlier stage.[3,4] Patients undergoing TURP, hysteroscopy, or surgery in prone position should be informed pre-operatively about the possibility of post-operative temporary and permanent vision loss and such complaint by the patient in the post-operative period warrant urgent assessment and intervention. Hence, we believe that use of neuraxial blockade, intra-cervical injection of vasopressin and adherence to the standard recommendations, could have avoided the complication.Similar to transurethral resection of prostate (TURP) syndrome, use of neuraxial blockade in this case could have preserved consciousness of the patient and helped to detect the clinical features of volume overload and glycine toxicity at an earlier stage.[3,4] Patients undergoing TURP, hysteroscopy, or surgery in prone position should be informed pre‐operatively about the possibility of post‐operative temporary and permanent vision loss and such complaint by the patient in the post‐operative period warrant urgent assessment and intervention.

Warming measures in paediatric cleft surgeries.

This study is a ‘randomised controlled trial’ (RCT) but not a ‘randomised observational study’. It is primarily an interventional/experimental study where randomisation has been done. Here, the intervention is in the form of omission of the standard of care that is, ‘use of active warming measure’. In observational studies, no active intervention is done by the investigator. Any intentional act of ‘commission’ or ‘omission’ by the investigator other than the standard of care constitutes intervention.[2] So actually it is a RCT. There is no mention of the technique used for randomisation, which is considered the heart of any RCT. The ‘closed envelope’ technique as highlighted by the authors is meant for allocation concealment, but not for randomisation.[3] There is no clarity regarding the primary and the secondary outcome. There is no mention of the exact timing (how much time after the start of surgery) when the temperature difference of 0.5°C with a standard deviation of 0.75°C is expected while calculating the sample size.