BACKGROUND: This study is aimed to investigate the effect of tramadol on the bispectral index (BIS) during anesthesia with desflurane. METHODS: One hundred fifty adults, ASA class 1 and 2 patients, scheduled for general anesthesia for elective surgical procedures were included in this study. None of the patients were premedicated and anesthesia was induced with propofol 2 mg/kg and maintained with air-oxygen (FiO2 0.5) and desflurane, adjusted to keep the BIS between from 50 and 60. Forty minutes before completing surgery, the subjects were randomly allocated into 3 groups to receive saline (control group), tramadol 1.5 mg/kg (T1 group) or 3.0 mg/kg (T2 group) intravenously. Hemodynamics and BIS values were then recorded every 5 minutes until completion of the operation, during which time the concentrations of desflurane were not modified. RESULTS: The mean BIS values after tramadol administration weren't significantly different from the control group throughout the period of observation. No significant changes in the hemodynamics were noted, except systolic and diastolic arterial blood pressure in the T1 and T2 groups significantly increased in the first 5 minutes after the tramadol injection. CONCLUSIONS: The results indicate that the administration of tramadol while maintaining anesthesia with desflurane, adjusted to keep the BIS between 50 and 60, does not modified BIS values. So, we propose that tramadol can be safely administered as an immediate postoperative analgesia without concern about intra-operative awareness.
Adult ; Analgesia ; Anesthesia ; Anesthesia, General ; Arterial Pressure ; Hemodynamics ; Humans ; Isoflurane ; Propofol ; Surgical Procedures, Elective ; Tramadol

Background: Remdesivir is widely used for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but controversies regarding its efficacy still remain. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the effect of remdesivir on clinical and virologic outcomes of severe COVID-19 patients from June to July 2020. Primary clinical endpoints included clinical recovery, additional mechanical ventilator (MV) support, and duration of oxygen or MV support. Viral load reduction by hospital day (HD) 15 was evaluated by calculating changes in cycle threshold (Ct) values. Results: A total of 86 severe COVID-19 patients were evaluated including 48 remdesivirtreated patients. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. Remdesivir was administered an average of 7.42 days from symptom onset. The proportions of clinical recovery of the remdesivir and supportive care group at HD 14 (56.3% and 39.5%) and HD 28 (87.5% and 78.9%) were not statistically different. The proportion of patients requiring MV support by HD 28 was significantly lower in the remdesivir group than in the supportive care group (22.9% vs. 44.7%, P = 0.032), and MV duration was significantly shorter in the remdesivir group (average, 1.97 vs. 5.37 days; P = 0.017). Analysis of upper respiratory tract specimens demonstrated that increases of Ct value from HD 1–5 to 11–15 were significantly greater in the remdesivir group than the supportive care group (average, 10.19 vs. 5.36; P = 0.007), and the slope of the Ct value increase was also significantly steeper in the remdesivir group (average, 5.10 vs. 2.68; P = 0.007). Conclusion The remdesivir group showed clinical and virologic benefit in terms of MV requirement and viral load reduction, supporting remdesivir treatment for severe COVID-19.

Background: Remdesivir is widely used for the treatment of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), but controversies regarding its efficacy still remain. Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate the effect of remdesivir on clinical and virologic outcomes of severe COVID-19 patients from June to July 2020. Primary clinical endpoints included clinical recovery, additional mechanical ventilator (MV) support, and duration of oxygen or MV support. Viral load reduction by hospital day (HD) 15 was evaluated by calculating changes in cycle threshold (Ct) values. Results: A total of 86 severe COVID-19 patients were evaluated including 48 remdesivirtreated patients. Baseline characteristics were not significantly different between the two groups. Remdesivir was administered an average of 7.42 days from symptom onset. The proportions of clinical recovery of the remdesivir and supportive care group at HD 14 (56.3% and 39.5%) and HD 28 (87.5% and 78.9%) were not statistically different. The proportion of patients requiring MV support by HD 28 was significantly lower in the remdesivir group than in the supportive care group (22.9% vs. 44.7%, P = 0.032), and MV duration was significantly shorter in the remdesivir group (average, 1.97 vs. 5.37 days; P = 0.017). Analysis of upper respiratory tract specimens demonstrated that increases of Ct value from HD 1–5 to 11–15 were significantly greater in the remdesivir group than the supportive care group (average, 10.19 vs. 5.36; P = 0.007), and the slope of the Ct value increase was also significantly steeper in the remdesivir group (average, 5.10 vs. 2.68; P = 0.007). Conclusion The remdesivir group showed clinical and virologic benefit in terms of MV requirement and viral load reduction, supporting remdesivir treatment for severe COVID-19.