No abstract available.
Bradycardia ; Cardiopulmonary Resuscitation ; Cough

Conventional fascial plane block approaches for upper abdominal surgeries spare the lateral cutaneous nerve. An external oblique intercostal block (EOIB) may be suitable for upper abdominal incisions as it blocks the lateral and anterior branches of the intercostal nerves T6–T10. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating this block in clinical settings. The study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of combined EOIB and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: After obtaining written informed consent, 70 patients were randomly allocated to undergo right-sided EOIB with 20 ml and left-sided RSB with 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery (group ER, n = 35). Patients in the LIA group (n = 35) underwent local infiltration at the port site using 20 ml of the same solution (group LIA, n=35). Results: The visual analog scale scores with combined EOI and RSB were significantly lower than those with LIA at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h (P < 0.001). Rescue analgesics were required by 65.7% and 14.3% of the patients in the LIA and block groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The time to first rescue analgesic was significantly greater in the ER group than that in the LIA group (2.8 ± 1.10 vs. 1.6 ± 0.50 h; P = 0.012). The number of times rescue analgesia was required was significantly lower in the ER group than that in the LIA group (1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.83 ± 0.72; P = 0.015). Nausea and vomiting scores were higher in the LIA group than those in the ER group (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were higher in the ER group than those in the LIA group. Conclusions: EOIB combined with RSB provides superior analgesia compared with LIA and should be considered for LC.

Conventional fascial plane block approaches for upper abdominal surgeries spare the lateral cutaneous nerve. An external oblique intercostal block (EOIB) may be suitable for upper abdominal incisions as it blocks the lateral and anterior branches of the intercostal nerves T6–T10. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating this block in clinical settings. The study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of combined EOIB and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: After obtaining written informed consent, 70 patients were randomly allocated to undergo right-sided EOIB with 20 ml and left-sided RSB with 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery (group ER, n = 35). Patients in the LIA group (n = 35) underwent local infiltration at the port site using 20 ml of the same solution (group LIA, n=35). Results: The visual analog scale scores with combined EOI and RSB were significantly lower than those with LIA at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h (P < 0.001). Rescue analgesics were required by 65.7% and 14.3% of the patients in the LIA and block groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The time to first rescue analgesic was significantly greater in the ER group than that in the LIA group (2.8 ± 1.10 vs. 1.6 ± 0.50 h; P = 0.012). The number of times rescue analgesia was required was significantly lower in the ER group than that in the LIA group (1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.83 ± 0.72; P = 0.015). Nausea and vomiting scores were higher in the LIA group than those in the ER group (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were higher in the ER group than those in the LIA group. Conclusions: EOIB combined with RSB provides superior analgesia compared with LIA and should be considered for LC.

Conventional fascial plane block approaches for upper abdominal surgeries spare the lateral cutaneous nerve. An external oblique intercostal block (EOIB) may be suitable for upper abdominal incisions as it blocks the lateral and anterior branches of the intercostal nerves T6–T10. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating this block in clinical settings. The study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of combined EOIB and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: After obtaining written informed consent, 70 patients were randomly allocated to undergo right-sided EOIB with 20 ml and left-sided RSB with 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery (group ER, n = 35). Patients in the LIA group (n = 35) underwent local infiltration at the port site using 20 ml of the same solution (group LIA, n=35). Results: The visual analog scale scores with combined EOI and RSB were significantly lower than those with LIA at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h (P < 0.001). Rescue analgesics were required by 65.7% and 14.3% of the patients in the LIA and block groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The time to first rescue analgesic was significantly greater in the ER group than that in the LIA group (2.8 ± 1.10 vs. 1.6 ± 0.50 h; P = 0.012). The number of times rescue analgesia was required was significantly lower in the ER group than that in the LIA group (1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.83 ± 0.72; P = 0.015). Nausea and vomiting scores were higher in the LIA group than those in the ER group (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were higher in the ER group than those in the LIA group. Conclusions: EOIB combined with RSB provides superior analgesia compared with LIA and should be considered for LC.

Conventional fascial plane block approaches for upper abdominal surgeries spare the lateral cutaneous nerve. An external oblique intercostal block (EOIB) may be suitable for upper abdominal incisions as it blocks the lateral and anterior branches of the intercostal nerves T6–T10. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating this block in clinical settings. The study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of combined EOIB and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: After obtaining written informed consent, 70 patients were randomly allocated to undergo right-sided EOIB with 20 ml and left-sided RSB with 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery (group ER, n = 35). Patients in the LIA group (n = 35) underwent local infiltration at the port site using 20 ml of the same solution (group LIA, n=35). Results: The visual analog scale scores with combined EOI and RSB were significantly lower than those with LIA at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h (P < 0.001). Rescue analgesics were required by 65.7% and 14.3% of the patients in the LIA and block groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The time to first rescue analgesic was significantly greater in the ER group than that in the LIA group (2.8 ± 1.10 vs. 1.6 ± 0.50 h; P = 0.012). The number of times rescue analgesia was required was significantly lower in the ER group than that in the LIA group (1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.83 ± 0.72; P = 0.015). Nausea and vomiting scores were higher in the LIA group than those in the ER group (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were higher in the ER group than those in the LIA group. Conclusions: EOIB combined with RSB provides superior analgesia compared with LIA and should be considered for LC.

Conventional fascial plane block approaches for upper abdominal surgeries spare the lateral cutaneous nerve. An external oblique intercostal block (EOIB) may be suitable for upper abdominal incisions as it blocks the lateral and anterior branches of the intercostal nerves T6–T10. However, there is a paucity of studies evaluating this block in clinical settings. The study aimed to compare the analgesic efficacy of combined EOIB and rectus sheath block with local infiltration analgesia (LIA) in laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC). Methods: After obtaining written informed consent, 70 patients were randomly allocated to undergo right-sided EOIB with 20 ml and left-sided RSB with 10 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine at the end of surgery (group ER, n = 35). Patients in the LIA group (n = 35) underwent local infiltration at the port site using 20 ml of the same solution (group LIA, n=35). Results: The visual analog scale scores with combined EOI and RSB were significantly lower than those with LIA at 1, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h (P < 0.001). Rescue analgesics were required by 65.7% and 14.3% of the patients in the LIA and block groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The time to first rescue analgesic was significantly greater in the ER group than that in the LIA group (2.8 ± 1.10 vs. 1.6 ± 0.50 h; P = 0.012). The number of times rescue analgesia was required was significantly lower in the ER group than that in the LIA group (1.00 ± 0.00 vs. 1.83 ± 0.72; P = 0.015). Nausea and vomiting scores were higher in the LIA group than those in the ER group (P < 0.001). Patient satisfaction scores were higher in the ER group than those in the LIA group. Conclusions: EOIB combined with RSB provides superior analgesia compared with LIA and should be considered for LC.

Background: Nasotracheal intubation (NTI) is commonly performed in oromaxillofacial surgeries. We did this metanalysis to ascertain whether use of video laryngoscopy (VL) provided better NTI characteristics as compared to direct laryngoscopy (DL) in patients undergoing oromaxillofacial surgeries. Methods: We performed a systematic search to identify randomized controlled trials comparing VL with DL for NTI in adults undergoing elective oromaxillofacial surgery. The primary outcome was time to intubation. Secondary outcomes included the first attempt success, overall success, incidence of nasal bleeding, Cormack and Lehane grade, and maneuvers required. Results: Of the 456 studies identified following a systematic search, 10 were included. Meta-analysis showed a significantly lower time to tracheal intubation favoring VL (mean difference: –9.04, 95% CI [–12.71, –5.36], P < 0.001; I2 = 59%). VL was also associated with a greater first attempt success (relative risk [RR]: 1.10, 95% CI [1.04, 1.16], P = 0.001). Maneuvers to facilitate intubation were less with VL (RR: 0.22, 95% CI [0.10, 0.51], P < 0.001). There was no difference in overall intubation success (RR: 1.04, 95% CI [0.98, 1.10], P = 0.17). The incidence of bleeding did not differ between the DL and VL groups (RR: 0.59, 95% CI [0.32, 1.08], P = 0.09). Conclusions Evidence as per this meta-analysis suggests VL leads to a shorter time to NTI, a greater first attempt success rate, and reduced need for maneuvers when compared to DL. The present study supports use of VL as a first line device for NTI in oral-maxillofacial surgeries in experienced hands.