Postoperative Recovery Profile Research Articles

Postoperative Recovery Profile of the Patients Undergoing Conventional and Stapler Hemorrhoidectomy

Postoperative Recovery Profile of the Patients Undergoing Conventional and Stapler Hemorrhoidectomy

Use of Dexmedetomidine versus Nitroglycerine to Provide Hypotensive Anesthesia in ENT Surgeries (Functional Endoscopic Sinus Surgery)

Abstract Background controlled (deliberate/induced) hypotension is a technique by which the arterial blood pressure is lowered in a controllable manner to reduce surgical blood loss and improve the operative field visibility. There are pharmacological and nonpharmacological techniques for inducing hypotension. The nonpharmacological methods for deliberate hypotension include positioning and positive pressure ventilation to control venous return. Aim of the Work to evaluate the efficacy of dexmedetomidine (DEX) as a hypotensive agent in comparison to nitroglycerin (NTG) in FESS regarding the bloodless field, reduction of mean arterial blood pressure, decrease inhalational anesthetic requirements (MAC), decrease perioperative opioid requirements, increase the time to first postoperative analgesic request and recovery profile and increase hemodynamics stability. Patients and Methods we conducted this study on 20 patients who were planned to perform functional endoscopic sinus surgery and were randomly distributed into 2 equal groups: 10 patients received dexamedotomidine and equal number of patients received nitroglycerine. Serial measurements of mean arterial blood pressure and heart rate were obtained and records between both groups were compared. Results There were statistically significant differences between both groups regarding heart rate as mean values of heart rate were lower among dexamedotomidine group. There were no statistically significant differences between both groups regarding mean arterial blood pressure values at different time points during the operation. Regarding the period after stopping infusion, mean values of heart rate and blood pressure were lower among dexamedotomidine group than nitroglycerine group after 5 minutes and after 10 minutes and the differences had statistically significant differences. Regarding postoperative period, both groups were comparable regarding heart rate and blood pressure immediately postoperative. Conclusion From the results of this study, we could conclude that both Dexmedetomidine and Nitroglycerin can be effectively used in induced hypotensive anesthesia for ENT surgery as FESS. Both groups were comparable with intra operative MAP with no statistically significant differences. This study also show that Dexmedetomidine has added advantages as better haemodynamic stability than Nitroglycerin (No rebound HTN, no tachycardia). Has sedative and analgesic effect, reduce requirement of anesthetic agents and perioperative analgesia. Postoperative recovery score (Time to reach modified Aldert score more than nine significantly higher. Postoperative complication as nausea and vomiting is less.

Laparoscopic versus open appendectomy in the management of chronic appendicitis

Background The term ‘chronic appendicitis’ (CA) is still clearly undefined. However, once established, it necessitates appendectomy, which could be performed via open or laparoscopic approaches. Comparisons between the two approaches have been made in acute appendicitis cases, with no previous trials including CA patients. That is why we conducted this study to compare these two approaches in the management of CA patients. Methodology 50 CA were included in our prospective trial, and they were randomly assigned into two groups; the OA group (25 open appendectomy patients) and the LA group (25 laparoscopic appendectomy cases). Results The statistical analysis revealed no significant differences between the two groups regarding most preoperative characteristics. The laparoscopic approach was associated with significant prolongation in operative time that had an average of 1 h in the LA group, while it ranged between 0.5 and 1 h in the OA group (P = 0.005). Nonetheless, laparoscopy led to a significantly better postoperative recovery profile, manifested in the shorter hospitalization period (1 vs. 2 days in the open approach) and less postoperative pain (all patients with mild pain compared with moderate pain in the open group). Only 2 (8%) casesexperienced temporary vomiting in the OA group. Conclusion Laparoscopy is superior to the open approach in the management of chronic appendicitis patients. It is associated with a better analgesic profile, a shorter hospitalization period, and a better chance of detecting other concomitant intraabdominal pathologies. However, the increased operative time should be considered.

Efficacy of esmolol versus magnesium sulphate on quality of recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy: Randomized controlled study

ABSTRACT Background Ambulatory procedures have a universal objective of rapid, efficient and secure recovery and release. Preliminary advances utilizing intraoperative esmolol infusion have registered a postoperative opioid saving outcomes. In the current study, we compared intraoperative esmolol versus magnesium sulphate infusions on postoperative recovery profile and stay in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU). Patients and methods Sixty patients, of both sexes, of ASA I or II planned for ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy under general anaesthesia were engaged into two groups. Esmolol group was given loading dose (1 mg/kg) over a period of 10 minutes followed by (30 μg/kg/min) all through the surgery, whereas magnesium sulphate (MgSo4) group was given loading dose (40 mg/kg) over 10 minutes then maintenance dose (15 mg/kg/h) till end of surgery. General anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia were standardized for all patients. Variables denoting immediate recovery from anaesthesia, pain score and time for first call to analgesia were recorded. White-Song score ≥ 12 were employed as a tool to review the rapidity of recovery. Results Compared to MgSo4 group, the esmolol group exhibited statistically significant shorter times for sponteaous eye opening, tongue extension, extubation and patients’ capability to recall their names. Incidence of vomiting as well as the total amount of ondansetron consumed in the PACU were evidently less among the esmolol group, whereas pain scores and the time of recall for first rescue analgesia did not vary significantly among the two studied groups. Members of the esmolol group displayed significant higher White -Song score at all times of measurements except at 120 minutes compared to those of MgSo 4 group. Conclusions Perioperative esmolol infusion is accompanied by superior and fast-tracked recovery profile compared to MgSo4 infusion.

Comparative Study on Postoperative Recovery Profiles of Desflurane and Sevoflurane Using I-GEL in Elective Ambulatory Surgeries

Introduction: In providing general anesthesia for ambulatory surgery, the goal is to achieve optimal surgical conditions while ensuring a rapid early recovery without side effects. Desflurane and sevoflurane are proven as effective ambulatory inhalational anesthetic agents. The aim of this research is to investigate and compared the hemodynamic stability, postoperative outcome and airway responses in elective ambulatory surgeries in patients receiving anesthesia with desflurane or sevoflurane using I-Gel supraglottic airway.Methods: A prospective, observational study was conducted involving 60 patients of age 18 – 50 years undergoing ambulatory surgeries under general anesthesia, randomly allocated into 2 equal groups receiving desflurane (Group D) or sevoflurane (Group S) for maintenance of anesthesia with suitable size I-Gel. Patients were monitored for hemodynamic parameters and postoperative recovery profile using fast track criteria (FTC) score at different time intervals. Pearson’s Chi Square test and Mann- Whitney U test were used for statistical analysis.Results: The mean time taken for postoperative recovery characteristics were significantly lower in Group D than Group S (p<0.001).The FTC score was significantly higher (p<0.001) in Group D than Group S at all-time intervals for 30 minutes. The requirement of additional analgesics was 46.7% in Group D and 60% in Group S (p>0.301) and that of antiemetic was 30% in Group D and 26.67% in Group S (p>0.774).Conclusions: Desflurane showed superior postoperative recovery characteristics and better FTC score without any increase in adverse airway events than sevoflurane.

Comparison of hemodynamic alterations and post-operative profile of sevoflurane and propofol during laparoscopic cholecystectomies

Background: Modern laparoscopic surgeries with insufflation of gas into peritoneal cavity are gold standard treatment for cholelithiasis. Propofol, a GABA receptor positive allosteric modulator and Sevoflurane, an inhalational anesthetic are used for maintenance of general anesthesia. In laparoscopy, significant hemodynamic changes occur. Searching in field of anesthesia is going on for anesthetic agent for better recovery. Aims and Objectives: Objective of the study is to compare sevoflurane with propofol for intraoperative hemodynamic changes and post-operative recovery profile of patient’s undergone laparoscopic cholecystectomies under general anesthesia. Secondary objective is to compare post-operative complications. Materials and Methods: A prospective, randomized, single-blinded, and comparative study done after permission from the institutional ethical committee and informed consent from patients. Total 84 patients of 20–50 years age of either sex were scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy, divided in two equal groups – Group P, induced with propofol and anesthesia was maintained with propofol (100–120 μg/kg/min), nitrous oxide and oxygen and Group S induced with propofol and anesthesia was maintained using sevoflurane (1–2%), nitrous oxide, and oxygen. Results: We found that time for eye opening was 9±1.21 min in Group P and 8±1.34 min in Group S. Time for following verbal command was 10±1.20 min in Group P and 9±1.32 min in Group S. Time for speaking name by patient was 11±1.20 min in Group P and 10±1.34 min in Group S. Difference between two groups regarding eye opening, following verbal command, and time to speak own name are highly significant with P<0.001 which proves that eye opening, following verbal command and time for speaking name by patient were significantly shorter in sevoflurane group. Time to achieve modified aldrete score >8 was 14±1.30 min in Group P and 13±1.37 min in Group S. Difference between two groups is also highly significant with P<0.001 which proves that time to achieve modified aldrete score>8 were significantly shorter in sevoflurane group. Conclusion: From our study, maintenance of general anesthesia with sevoflurane is associated with faster recovery from anesthesia.

Psychometric Evaluation of the Postoperative Recovery Profile.

To further evaluate the postoperative recovery profile regarding its psychometric properties. The postoperative recovery profile is an instrument for the self-assessment of general postoperative recovery that has received increased attention within nursing research. However, psychometric evaluation during development was sparse. Psychometric evaluation was done using classical test theory. Data quality, targeting, reliability, and scaling assumptions were measured. In addition, confirmatory factor analysis was used to evaluate construct validity. Data collection was made during 2011-2013. Data derived from this study showed acceptable quality; however, item distribution was skewed, with ceiling effects in the majority of items. Cronbach's alpha showed high internal consistency. Item-total correlations indicated unidimensionality, whereas six items demonstrated high correlations pointing at redundancy. The confirmatory factor analysis confirmed problems related to dimensionality as the five proposed dimensions were highly correlated with each other. Furthermore, items were largely uncorrelated with the designated dimensions. This study shows that the postoperative recovery profile needs to be further developed to serve as a robust instrument within nursing as well as medical research. Arguably, values from the instrument should not be calculated at a dimensional level for the time being because of discriminant validity issues.

Gastrointestinal stromal tumors of the small intestine: the challenge of diagnosis and the outcome of management

PurposesGastrointestinal stromal tumor (GIST) is a rare small intestinal tumor. Most patients usually report long-period complaints due to difficult diagnoses. A high grade of suspicion is required for early diagnosis and initiation of the proper management.MethodsA retrospective study of all patients with small intestinal GIST who were operated in the period between January 2008 and May 2021 at Mansoura University Gastrointestinal Surgical Center (GIST).ResultsThirty-four patients were included in the study with a mean age of 58.15 years (± 12.65) with a male to female ratio of 1.3:1. The mean duration between onset of symptoms and diagnosis was 4.62 years (± 2.34). Diagnosis of a small intestinal lesion was accomplished through abdominal computed tomography (CT) in 19 patients (55.9%). The mean size of the tumor was 8.76 cm (± 7.76) ranging from 1.5 to 35 cm. The lesion was of ileal origin in 20 cases (58.8%) and jejunal in 14 cases (41.2%). During the scheduled follow-up period, tumor recurrence occurred in one patient (2.9%). No mortality was encountered.ConclusionDiagnosis of a small bowel GISTs requires a high grade of suspicion. Implementing new diagnostic techniques like angiography, capsule endoscopy, and enteroscopy should be encouraged when suspecting these lesions. Surgical resection is always associated with an excellent postoperative recovery profile and very low recurrence rates.

Goal-directed fluid therapy guided by Plethysmographic Variability Index (PVI) versus conventional liberal fluid administration in children during elective abdominal surgery: A randomized controlled trial

BackgroundPVI has been shown to be an accurate predictor of fluid responsiveness in paediatric patients. Evidence regarding the role of PVI to guide intraoperative fluid therapy in paediatric abdominal surgery is lacking. We aimed to assess the effect of PVI-guided fluid therapy on the volume of intraoperative fluids administered and post-operative biochemical and recovery profile in children undergoing elective abdominal surgery. Methods42 children, 6 months-3 years scheduled for elective open bowel surgery were randomised to receive either ‘conventional liberal intraoperative fluids’ (liberal group) or ‘goal-directed intraoperative fluids’ (GDT group). PVI <13 was targeted in the GDT group. The primary outcome was the volume of intraoperative fluids administered. Postoperative serum lactate, base excess, hematocrit, recovery of bowel function and duration of postoperative hospital stay were the secondary outcomes. ResultsThe mean fluid administered intra-operatively was significantly lower in the GDT group as compared to the liberal group (24.1 ± 9.6 mL/kg vs 37.0 ± 8.9 mL/kg, p < 0.001). The postoperative hemoglobin concentration (g%) was significantly lower in the liberal group as compared to the GDT group (8.1 ± 1.3 vs 9.2 ± 1.4, p = 0.008). Recovery of bowel function (hours) was significantly delayed in the liberal group as compared to the GDT group (58.2 ± 17.9 vs 36.5 ± 14.1, p < 0.001). ConclusionIntraoperative PVI-guided fluid therapy significantly reduces the volume of intravenous crystalloids administered to children undergoing open bowel surgery. These children also had faster recovery of bowel function and less hemodilution in the immediate postoperative period, compared to those who received liberal intraoperative fluid therapy.Type of study: Randomized Clinical Trial.Level of evidence: Treatment Study (LEVEL 1).

Immediate Postoperative Complications and Recovery Profile Following Spinal Anaesthesia: A Comparison Between Pethidine and Bupivacaine

Background: Spinal anaesthesia is a less expensive option to general anaesthesia for surgical procedures below the umbilicus in resource-constrained settings with a shortage of medical gases and specialized an anesthetists. The patient’s airway is not harmed by spinal anaesthesia, and both the patient and the doctor benefits from a host of additional benefits. Following the discontinuation of hyperbaric lidocaine for intrathecal injection because it can results in radiculopathy, bupivacaine is frequently used for spinal anaesthesia. For spinal, doctors employ pethidine, a lipophilic opioid with local aesthetic properties. In this study, pethidine bupivacaine were used as the only anaesthetic a gents to perform spinal anaesthesia, and the immediate postoperative problems and recovery profile were compared. Methodology: For quick surgical procedures on the lower body, 52 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I and II patients between the ages of 18 and 60 were randomly assigned to receive spinalanaesthesia. The patients' recovery times for pinprick sensation at S2, plantar flexion, big toe proprioception, and full motor recovery (Bromage score 0) were compared after receiving either 2.5mL of isobaric 0.5 percent bupivacaine or 1mg/Kg of preservative-free pethidine. The immediate postoperative period complications of pain, drowsiness, nausea and vomiting, pruritus, and urine retention were compared. Results: The time to return of pinkprick sensation at S2 was 94.6220.25 minutes and 205.9631.05 minutes, respectively, when pethidine and bupivacaine were compared. Pethidine and bupivacaine had a time to return of plantar flexion of 92.8812.01 minutes and viii 1 93.8539.56 minutes, respectively. Between pedthidine and bupivacaine, the mean recovery times f or the big toe’s proprioception were 31.159.41 and 172.5042.70 minutes, respectively, for full motor recovery (Bromage score 0). All recovery time variation were significant (p 0.0001) across the broad. There was no discernible change in the incidence of pain or sedation in the immediate postoperative period. In the Bupivacaine group, four patients (15. 38%) reported having hardly bearable discomfort. Both groups did not experience any instances of nausea or vomiting. Pruritus was experience by five patients (19.22%) in the pethidine group, but none in the bupivacaine group (0.00 %). Urinary retention incidence varied, and this difference was significant (p = 0.048) Conclusion: Compared to bupivacaine, pethidine had a quicker recovery profile and didn't lead to any major complications right after surgery.

The Effects of Switching from Sevoflurane to Short-Term Desflurane prior to the End of General Anesthesia on Patient Emergence and Recovery: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

While sevoflurane and desflurane have been regarded as inhalation agents providing rapid induction and emergence, previous studies demonstrated the superiority of desflurane-anesthesia compared to sevoflurane-anesthesia in the postoperative recovery in obese and geriatric patients. We investigated whether a short-term switch of sevoflurane to desflurane at the end of sevoflurane-anesthesia enhances patient postoperative recovery profile in non-obese patients. We randomly divide patients undergoing elective surgery (n = 60) into two groups: sevoflurane-anesthesia group (Group-S, n = 30) and sevoflurane-desflurane group (Group-SD, n = 30). In Group-S, patients received only sevoflurane-anesthesia until the end of surgery (for >2 hours). In Group-SD, sevoflurane was stopped and switched to desflurane-anesthesia before the completion of sevoflurane-anesthesia (for approximately 30 minutes). We assessed the intergroup differences in the times to get eye-opening, extubation, and a bispectral index of 80 (BIS-80). Group-SD showed significantly shorter times to get eye-opening (438 ± 101 vs. 295 ± 45 s; mean difference, 143 s; 95% confidence interval [CI], 101–183; p < 0.001), extubation (476 ± 108 vs. 312 ± 42 s; mean difference, 164 s; 95% CI, 116–220; p < 0.001), and BIS-80 (378 ± 124 vs. 265 ± 49 minutes; mean difference, 113 s; 95% CI, 58–168 p < 0.001) compared to Group-S. There was no between-group difference in postoperative nausea, vomiting, and hypoxia incidences. Our results suggested that the short-term (approximately 30 minutes) switch of sevoflurane to desflurane at the end of sevoflurane-anesthesia can facilitate the speed of postoperative patient recovery.

Comparison of haemodynamic changes between propofol and ketofol as induction agents in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgeries under general anaesthesia.

Background and Aims:Laparoscopic surgeries are more commonly performed procedure nowadays because of its advantages however generation of pneumoperitoneum causes significant physiological changes. Propofol is the most commonly used induction agent but its use is limited by its side effects like dose-dependent hypotension and myocardial depression. So by combining propofol with ketamine to form ketofol may result in better hemodynamic stability. The aim of this study was to compare the haemodynamic changes in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery under general anesthesia using propofol and ketofol as induction agents.Material and Methods:In this prospective randomized double blind study, 80 patients of ASA I/II undergoing elective laparoscopic surgery were randomized into two Groups. Group A received 1 mg/kg of propofol + 1 mg/kg ketamine made up to a total volume of 20 ml with normal saline and Group B received 2 mg/kg propofol + normal saline to make up to an equal volume. Hemodynamic profiles like HR, SBP, DBP, and MAP were recorded at different time intervals until pneumoperitoneum. Postoperative recovery profile and complications were recorded. All data were entered in MS excel and analyzed using SPSS Version 20.0. Repeated measures ANOVA and Chi-square test were used to test the level of significance.Results:Demographic character and duration of surgery were comparable. SBP, DBP, MAP and HR showed statistically significant difference in both groups in various time intervals with P < 0.05 with Group A (ketofol ) having a better hemodynamic stability. Recovery profile in ketofol group took longer duration (4.95 min) compared to propofol group B (1.8 min). Postoperative nausea and vomiting were significant (P = 0.004) in ketofol group.Conclusion:We concluded that ketofol had a better hemodynamic stability compared to propofol as an induction agent, however time for recovery in ketofol group took a longer period compared to propofol group, with no complication in either groups.

A comparative study of dexmedetomidine–propofol and fentanyl-propofol on perioperative haemodynamics, propofol requirement and post-operative recovery profile in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgeries - A prospective randomised double-blind study

Background: Dexmedetomidine is gaining popularity for its sympatholytic, sedative and haemodynamic stabilising properties, without significant respiratory depression.Methods: A prospective randomised double-blind study was conducted on 60 patients belonging to American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) Grade I and II undergoing elective abdominal surgeries who were randomised to receive either dexmedetomidine (Group D-P) or fentanyl (Group F-P) 10 Min prior to induction. Induction was done with midazolam along with propofol in 20 mg aliquots until bispectral index (BIS) value drops below 60. Infusion of one of the study drugs was continued along with propofol infusion which was titrated to maintain BIS around 40–60. Vecuronium to provide muscle relaxation and bolus doses of fentanyl were given whenever additional analgesia was needed. Intra-operative propofol, vecuronium and additional fentanyl requirement, time from discontinuation of anaesthetic drugs to extubation, time from the end of surgery to achieve a Ramsay sedation score of 2 and to the first post-operative analgesic request were recorded. Post-operatively, patients were monitored till 24 h for any adverse events.Results: A significant decrement in heart rate was observed in the D-P group in comparison to the fentanyl group. The D-P group was found to have required less propofol for induction, limited additional fentanyl requirement, less time required for extubation and a delay in request for first post-operative analgesia which was statistically significant.Conclusions: Propofol–dexmedetomidine provides better haemodynamic stability with lesser intraoperative propofol and fentanyl requirement, early cognitive recovery and longer postoperative analgesia when compared to propofol–fentanyl.

Improved postoperative recovery profile in pediatric oral rehabilitation with low-dose dexmedetomidine as an opioid substitute for general anesthesia: a randomized double-blind clinical trial.

BackgroundLow-dose dexmedetomidine may be a suitable alternative to opioids for pediatric ambulatory procedures under general anesthesia (GA). However, the recovery profile remains unclear. Herein, we aimed to evaluate the effects of low-dose dexmedetomidine on the recovery profile of children.MethodsSeventy-two children undergoing ambulatory oral rehabilitation under GA were randomly and equally distributed into two groups (D and F). Group D received an infusion of dexmedetomidine 0.25 µg/kg for 4 min for induction, followed by maintenance of 0.4 µg/kg/h. Group F received an infusion of fentanyl 1 µg/kg over 4 min for induction, followed by maintenance at 1 µg/kg/h. The primary outcome was the extubation time. The secondary outcomes were awakening time, end-tidal sevoflurane (ET-Sevo) requirement, change in hemodynamic parameters, Richmond Agitation–Sedation Scale (RASS), Children's Hospital of Eastern Ontario pain scale (CHEOPS) score, length of PACU stay, and incidence of adverse events.ResultsStatistically significant differences were observed in the recovery profile between the groups: the median time for extubation was 3.65 (3.44–6.2) vs. 6.25 (4.21–7) minutes in groups D vs. F (P = 0.001), respectively, while the corresponding awakening times were 19 (18.75–21) and 22.5 (22–24) minutes, respectively (P < 0.001). The mean ET-Sevo was low in group D (1.1 vs. 1.2; P < 0.001). The heart rate was significantly low across all time points in group D, without resulting in bradycardia. The median RASS and CHEOPS scores were also significantly lower in group D. No significant differences were observed in the mean arterial pressure, incidence of adverse events, or length of PACU stay.ConclusionLow-dose dexmedetomidine was more effective than fentanyl as an opioid substitute at providing a better recovery profile in pediatric ambulatory oral rehabilitation under GA. Dexmedetomidine also significantly reduced sevoflurane consumption without causing adverse events or prolonging hospital stay.

A comparative study of propofol based total intravenous anesthesia and sevoflurane based volatile induction and maintenance anesthesia on post-operative recovery profile in elective tonsillectomy

Background: Tonsillectomies are common surgeries in day-to-day surgery practice particularly in pediatric age group. Recent trend is to conduct tonsillectomy surgery on a day care basis. It is important to use the best anesthetic option with the least recovery time to reduce the hospital stay of patient. Aims and Objectives: The aim of the study was to compare recovery profile and side effects of Sevoflurane and Propofol as an anesthetic agent for tonsillectomy. Materials and Methods: A total of 60 patients undergoing elective tonsillectomy were selected for the study. Each patient was randomly allocated to either the propofol (Group P) or the sevoflurane group (Group S). Time of surgery (From start to end of surgery), time of anesthesia (From the start of induction to end of surgery), time between the end of anesthesia and the spontaneous eye opening, and time between the end of anesthesia and the following of verbal commands. Time to extubation, time between the end of anesthesia, and the orientation to his or her name and the incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting were compared in both the groups. Results: The eye opening in Group P patients was found to be 8.9+1.21 min and that in Group S was 6.6+1.25 which was found to be statistically significant. The following of verbal commands in Group P was found to occur at 10.13+1.28 min, while that in Group S was found to be at 7.63+1.25 min, which was statistically significant. The time for extubation in Group P was found to be 11.17+1.29 min, while that in Group S was found to be 8.67+1.24 min, which was statistically significant. The duration for complete orientation in Group P was found to be 12.2+1.27 min, while that in Group S was found to be 9.43+1.04 min, which came out to be statistically significant. Hemodynamic parameters were found to be comparable in both the groups with no statistically significant difference in between then at any point of time (P&gt;0.05). Conclusion: Sevoflurane is a useful alternative to propofol in providing anesthesia where rapid emergence and recovery of cognitive functions are desired.

Patient-reported recovery in upper abdominal cancer surgery care: A prospective study.

The study aimed to describe and analyse patient-reported recovery in patients after upper abdominal cancer surgery. This study had a quantitative design and patients were consecutively included in a university hospital in southern Sweden. Twenty-four patients answered the Postoperative Recovery Profile (PRP) questionnaire at three measurement points. All five dimensions were affected. In the physical symptoms dimension, the majority of patients reported a lack of energy upon discharge. High levels of anxiety were reported. Over 50% of patients reported some degree of depressed mood at all three measurement points. In the social dimension, the majority of patients reported some degree of being dependent on help from others in everyday life at 4 weeks after discharge. Few patients are fully recovered at 4 weeks after discharge. Individual patient-reported recovery estimates may be valuable in identifying and planning interventions tailored to each patient's needs throughout the care process.

State of Recovery 6 Months After Rectal Cancer Surgery: Postoperative Symptoms and Differences With Regard to Surgical Procedure.

Rectal cancer surgery has developed to be highly technological and precise. Nevertheless, postoperative symptoms can affect patients for a long time after surgery and might also be persistent. The purpose of this study was to describe the level of postoperative symptoms 6 months after rectal cancer surgery as well as differences in symptoms with regard to surgical procedure. Data from 117 patients recovering from rectal cancer surgery were collected 6 months after surgery using the Postoperative Recovery Profile (PRP) questionnaire measuring self-reported postoperative symptoms. Results showed that the majority of patients had no or mild problems with the 19 symptoms recorded in the questionnaire. There was a significant difference between surgical procedures: patients after anterior resection experienced mild problems in gastrointestinal function (physical domain) and interest in their surroundings (social domain), whereas most patients after abdominoperineal resection and abdominoperineal resection with myocutaneous flap showed no problems. In all groups, a considerably high proportion of patients reported severe problems in sexual activity (physical domain). Findings in this study emphasize that healthcare professionals should pay attention to patients recovering from anterior resection especially regarding problems in the gastrointestinal function. Moreover, there is a need to acknowledge eventual sexual dysfunctions in all rectal cancer patients.

Recovery and Quality of Life After Trauma: A 6-Month Follow-Up Study.

Injuries were the most common cause of hospitalization in Sweden in 2017. There is a lack of knowledge about trauma recovery and its relation to health-related quality of life (HRQoL) after hospitalization due to minor trauma. This study aimed to prospectively evaluate recovery and HRQoL at discharge from hospital and 3 and 6 months after the trauma. This is a secondary analysis of data from a prospective follow-up study. Fifty-seven patients who sustained physical trauma were included. Recovery was measured with postoperative recovery profile and HRQoL 3 and 6 months after discharge. The association between the outcomes was analyzed, as well as the impact of gender, age, Injury Severity Score (ISS), and trauma mechanism using nonparametric statistics. There was a significant improvement in recovery and HRQoL between discharge and 3 months after the trauma (p < .001) as well as between 3 and 6 months after the trauma (p < .001) except for EQ-5D VAS scale (p = .222). However, only 14 (25%) patients viewed themselves as fully recovered 6 months after the incident. Correlation between recovery and HRQoL increased after discharge and was at its strongest 6 months after the trauma (rs > .071). Trauma mechanism has an impact on recovery but not gender, age, or ISS score. Most patients did not consider themselves fully recovered even at 6 months postinjury, indicating that they require additional support to manage their recovery.

Systemic effects and clinical application of dexmedetomidine

Dexmedetomidine is a most potent α-2 adrenergic selective agonist. It is one of the components of the racemic mixture of two enantiomers of medetomidine. It has a selectivity ratio of 1620/1(α 2/ α1), which is 5–10 times higher than that for detomidine (260/1) and xylazine (160/1. Dexmedetomidine produces consistent sedation, anxiolysis and muscle relaxation, which makes it a popular sedative agent in veterinary medicine. In veterinary practice, it is used for premedication and as an adjunct to general anaesthesia in several species. Similar to other alpha-2 agonists it exerts its effect through the action on alpha-2 adrenergic receptors. The sedative and anxiolytic effects of α-2 agonists are mediated by agonism of supraspinal autoreceptors situated in the pons, whereas analgesic effects are mediated by agonism of heteroreceptors located in the dorsal horn of the spinal cord. Dexmedetomidine causes a dose-dependent redistribution of blood flow and preserves blood flow to the most vital organs at the expense of organs like skin and pancreases and this distribution of blood flow is not affected by the type of anaesthesia. The pattern of cardiovascular changes may be affected by the dose used and the type of anaesthetic combined with dexmedetomidine. Most anaesthetic drugs, such as propofol, thiopental, isoflurane and halothane have cardiovascular and respiratory side effects that are dose-dependent. Dexmedetomidine is a good anaesthetic adjuvant for general anaesthesia which reduces intra-operative isoflurane consumption provides analgesic-sparing effect without affecting postoperative recovery profile and improved cardiovascular stability and contributes to the provision of balanced anaesthesia.

A Comparison of Remifentanil and Low Dose Fentanyl for Postoperative Recovery Profile in Patients Undergoing Minimally Invasive Cardiac Surgery

簡介：術後加速康復為近來心臟手術病人照護之發展方向。除了微創手術方式使用，短效的麻醉藥物是術後加速康復中重要的一環。瑞吩坦尼是一極短效的鴉片類止痛藥，因此我們比較術中使用瑞吩坦尼與低劑量吩坦尼對微創心臟手術病人恢復速度之影響。方法：此研究為一回溯性研究，比較分析2018年五月至八月間進行微創心臟手術的病人術後拔管速度、住院天數、術後止痛藥使用量、疼痛指數與併發症比例。結果：共有53名病患納入研究，33名為瑞吩坦尼組，20名為吩坦尼組。結果兩組病人術後拔管時間、住院天數、術後止痛藥使用量、疼痛指數與併發症比例皆無顯著差異。結論：我們認為瑞吩坦尼可安全地用於微創心臟手術並提供病人快速恢復。