1.Chyle leak after head and neck surgeries: a comprehensive review of diagnosis and management strategies
Aparna GANESAN ; Nehal C. SINGH ; Naren P. KHATRI ; Charanjeet Singh MADAAN ; Savreek KAUR ; Amanjot KAUR
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2024;50(1):3-12
Chyle leaks are uncommon complications after head and neck surgeries. Although uncommon, such a complication is noteworthy mention due to its perplexing diagnosis and management strategies. This scoping review aims to highlight and emphasize the diagnosis and management options proposed in the literature. A comprehensive search was performed in PubMed, Google Scholar, Cochrane Library, and Scopus databases and identified 617 articles that were reduced to 40 studies and reports after applying the eligibility criteria. Although numerous treatment options ranging from simple, conservative measures to invasive surgical procedures have been mentioned for low-output, high-output, and massive leaks, there is no concrete evidence on the best method. Thus, a combination of management options must be customized by case for optimum results.
2.Minimal clinically important difference of mouth opening in oral submucous fibrosis patients: a retrospective study
Amanjot KAUR ; Neeti RUSTAGI ; Aparna GANESAN ; Nihadha PM ; Pravin KUMAR ; Kirti CHAUDHRY
Journal of the Korean Association of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgeons 2022;48(3):167-173
Objectives:
The purpose of this study was to estimate the minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of mouth opening (MO) and patient satisfaction in surgically treated oral submucous fibrosis (OSMF) patients.
Materials and Methods:
The status of MO was collected preoperatively (T0), postoperatively at 3 months (T1), and at a minimum of 6 months postoperatively (T2). MCID was determined through the anchor-based approach with the change difference method, mean change method, and receiver operator characteristic curve (ROC) method.
Results:
In this study, 35 patients enrolled and completed postoperative follow-up (T2) averaging a duration of 18.1 months. At T1, using the change difference method, MO was 14.89 mm and the ROC curve exhibited a 11.5 gain in MO (sensitivity 81.8% and specificity 100%, area under the curve [AUC] of 0.902) and was classified as MCID as reported by patients. At T2, MCID of MO was 9.75 mm using the change difference method and 11.75 mm by the mean change method. The ROC curve revealed that the MCID of MO at T2 was 10.5 mm with 73.9% sensitivity and 83.3% specificity (AUC of 0.873). The kappa value was 0.91, confirming reliability of the data.
Conclusion
This study demonstrated MCID values that indicate the clinical relevance of surgical treatment of OSMF if the minimum possible gain in MO is approximately 10 mm.
3.Comparative evaluation of propofol versus dexmedetomidine infusion for hypotensive anesthesia during functional endoscopic sinus surgery: a prospective randomized trial
Kewal Krishan GUPTA ; Vandana KUMARI ; Sarvjeet KAUR ; Amanjot SINGH
Anesthesia and Pain Medicine 2022;17(3):271-279
During functional endoscopic sinus surgery (FESS), intranasal bleeding affects operative field visibility and increases the frequency of complications. Therefore, hypotensive anesthesia is a widely used technique to improve surgical outcomes. This study aimed to compare the efficacy of propofol and dexmedetomidine infusion for hypotensive anesthesia in patients undergoing FESS. Methods: This prospective randomized trial was conducted in 80 adult patients who were scheduled for FESS under general anesthesia. Patients were randomly divided into two groups: group P (n = 40) received propofol infusion of 100–200 µg/kg/min and group D (n = 40) received dexmedetomidine infusion with a loading dose of 1 µg/kg over 10 min after induction, followed by maintenance infusion of 0.4–0.8 µg/kg/h. Intraoperative blood loss, quality of the surgical field (Fromme- Boezaart scale), hemodynamic control, and patient recovery were recorded. Statistical analysis was performed using Student’s t-test, chi-square test, and Mann–Whitney U test. Results: The mean arterial pressure and heart rate were significantly lower in group D throughout the surgery than in group P. Blood loss was significantly higher in group P (100.73 ± 18.12 ml) than in group D (85.70 ± 18.56 ml). The average number of patients with Fromme’s score 1/2/3 was comparable between the groups. Intraoperatively, only one incidence of bradycardia and hypotension was observed in group D (2.5%) compared to group P. Conclusions: Both dexmedetomidine and propofol are efficacious and safe drugs for facilitating controlled hypotension during FESS; however, dexmedetomidine provides better hemodynamic control and is associated with lesser blood loss without any significant adverse effects.