3 research outputs found
Comparative Evaluation of Direct Laryngoscopy Versus GlideScope for the Purpose of Laryngoscopy Management and Intubation in Candidates of Cesarean Delivery with General Anesthesia
No full textBackground:
The present study aimed at comparing the hemodynamic responses to laryngoscopy and initiation of intubation with either direct or video-assisted laryngoscopy.
Materials and Methods:
This double-blind clinical trial was performed on 90 pregnant women candidates for cesarean section under general anesthesia. The participants were divided into two groups. In the first group, intubation was performed using direct Macintosh laryngoscope (MCL group). The second group underwent intubation using the GlideScope video laryngoscope (GSL group). Then, systolic blood pressure (SBP), diastolic blood pressure (DBP), mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), the percentage of the saturation of peripheral oxygen (SpO2), the time-to-intubation (TTI), and the number of intubation attempts were recorded.
Results:
SBP, DBP, and MAP in the MCL group were significantly higher than GSL group 1, 3, and 5 min after laryngoscopy (P < 0.05). HR in the MCL group with the mean of 118.44 ± 15.53 bpm was significantly higher than that the GSL group with the mean of 110.11 ± 16.68 bpm only 3 min after laryngoscopy (P = 0.016). The TTI in the MCL group was significantly longer than that of the GSL group (12.80 ± 1.86 vs. 10.15 ± 2.61; P = 0.001). The frequency of the first intubation attempt in the GSL group with 91.1% was significantly higher than that the MCL group with 84.4% (P = 0.003).
Conclusion:
It seems that the GSL technique is a better choice to conduct laryngoscopy with more success in intubation and a higher stability of the patients’ hemodynamic status
Respiratory complications of propofol, sevoflurane, and dexmedetomidine anesthesia for fiberoptic bronchoscopy in children aged 1 month to 3 years: a randomized trial
No full textObjective: To evaluate the effect of propofol, sevoflurane, and dexmedetomidine on respiratory complications in children undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB).
Methods: This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted among 120 children aged 1 month to 3 years undergoing FOB. The patients were randomized into 3 groups (n=40) for anesthesia induction with sevoflurane inhalation, 1 mg/kg propofol, or 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine before bronchoscopy, and the changes in hemodynamic parameters, sedation level, and respiratory complications during and after the procedure were assessed.
Results: The patients' heart rate during bronchoscopy was significantly lower and the mean arterial blood pressure significantly higher in dexmedetomidine group than in sevoflurane and propofol groups (P < 0.05). Cough during bronchoscopy did not occur in any of the cases in propofol group, while the highest frequency of cough was recorded in dexmedetomidine group. The incidence of laryngospasm in the propofol group (12.5%) was significantly lower than those in sevoflurane and dexmedetomidine groups (30% and 32.5%, respectively) (P < 0.05).
Conclusion: Sevoflurane and propofol are safe and suitable for anesthesia induction in children below 3 years of age undergoing diagnostic FOB and can achieve better sedative effect and lower the incidences of cough and respiratory complications as compared with dexmedetomidine.
Keywords: children; dexmedetomidine; fiberoptic bronchoscopy; propofol; sevoflurane
Respiratory complications of propofol, sevoflurane, and dexmedetomidine anesthesia for fiberoptic bronchoscopy in children aged 1 month to 3 years: a randomized trial
No full textOBJECTIVE: To evaluate the effect of propofol, sevoflurane, and dexmedetomidine on respiratory complications in children undergoing fiberoptic bronchoscopy (FOB). METHODS: This double-blind randomized clinical trial was conducted among 120 children aged 1 month to 3 years undergoing FOB. The patients were randomized into 3 groups (n=40) for anesthesia induction with sevoflurane inhalation, 1 mg/kg propofol, or 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine before bronchoscopy, and the changes in hemodynamic parameters, sedation level, and respiratory complications during and after the procedure were assessed. RESULTS: The patients' heart rate during bronchoscopy was significantly lower and the mean arterial blood pressure significantly higher in dexmedetomidine group than in sevoflurane and propofol groups (P < 0.05). Cough during bronchoscopy did not occur in any of the cases in propofol group, while the highest frequency of cough was recorded in dexmedetomidine group. The incidence of laryngospasm in the propofol group (12.5) was significantly lower than those in sevoflurane and dexmedetomidine groups (30 and 32.5, respectively) (P < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Sevoflurane and propofol are safe and suitable for anesthesia induction in children below 3 years of age undergoing diagnostic FOB and can achieve better sedative effect and lower the incidences of cough and respiratory complications as compared with dexmedetomidine
