BACKGROUND: Sickle cell anemia (SCA) increases the rate of maternal and fetal complications. This pilot study was designed to compare the maternal and fetal outcomes of spinal versus general anesthesia (GA) for parturients with SCA undergoing cesarean delivery. METHODS: Forty parturients with known SCA scheduled for elective Cesarean delivery were randomized into spinal anesthesia (n = 20) and GA groups (n = 20). Perioperative hemodynamic parameters were recorded. Postpartum complications were followed up. Opioid consumption was calculated. Blood loss during surgery and the number of patients who received intraoperative or postpartum blood transfusion were recorded. Patient satisfaction with the type of anesthesia was assessed. The Apgar score at 1 and 5 min, neonatal admission to the intensive care unit, and mortality were also recorded. RESULTS: Blood loss was significantly higher in the GA than spinal group (P = 0.01). However, the number of patients who received an intraoperative or postpartum blood transfusion was statistically insignificant. Significantly more patients developed intraoperative hypotension and bradycardia in the spinal than GA group. Opioid use during the first 24 h was significantly higher in the GA than spinal group (P < 0.0001). More patients had vaso-occlusive crisis in the GA than spinal group without statistical significance (P = 0.4). There was one case of acute chest syndrome in the GA group. No significant differences were observed in postoperative nausea and/or vomiting, patient satisfaction, or hospital length of stay. Neonatal Apgar scores were significantly better in the spinal than GA group at 1 and 5 min (P = 0.006 and P = 0.009, respectively). Neonatal intensive care admission was not significantly different between the two groups, and there was no neonatal mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Spinal anesthesia may have advantages over GA in parturients with SCA undergoing Cesarean delivery.
Acute Chest Syndrome ; Anemia, Sickle Cell* ; Anesthesia ; Anesthesia, General* ; Anesthesia, Spinal ; Apgar Score ; Blood Transfusion ; Bradycardia ; Cesarean Section* ; Female ; Hemodynamics ; Humans ; Hypotension ; Infant ; Infant Mortality ; Infant, Newborn ; Intensive Care Units ; Intensive Care, Neonatal ; Length of Stay ; Mortality ; Patient Satisfaction ; Pilot Projects ; Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting ; Postpartum Period ; Pregnancy ; Vomiting

PURPOSE: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to compare the influence of palatal vault forms on accuracy and speed of intraoral (IO) scans in completely edentulous cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the palatal vault form, participants were divided into three equal groups (n = 10 each); Class I: moderate;Class II: deep; Class III: flat palatal vault. A reference model was created for each patient using polyvinylsiloxane impression material. The poured models were digitized using an extraoral scanner. The resultant data were imported as a solid CAD file into 3D analysis software (GOM Inspect 2018; Gom GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) and aligned using the software’s coordinate system to determine its X, Y, and Z axes. Five digital impressions (DIs) of maxilla were captured for each patient using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark) and the resultant Standard Tessellation Language (STL) scan files served as test models. Trueness was evaluated by calculating arithmetic mean deviation (AMD) of the vault area between reference and test files while precision was evaluated by calculating AMD between captured scans to measure repeatability of scan acquisition. The scan time taken for each participant was also recorded. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in trueness and precision among the groups (P = .806 and .950, respectively). Average scan time for Class I and III palatal vaults was 1 min 13 seconds and 1 min 37 seconds, respectively, while class II deep palatal vaults showed the highest scan time of 5 mins. CONCLUSION Palatal vault form in edentulous cases has an influence on scan time. However, it does not have a substantial impact on the accuracy of the acquired scans.

PURPOSE: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to compare the influence of palatal vault forms on accuracy and speed of intraoral (IO) scans in completely edentulous cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the palatal vault form, participants were divided into three equal groups (n = 10 each); Class I: moderate;Class II: deep; Class III: flat palatal vault. A reference model was created for each patient using polyvinylsiloxane impression material. The poured models were digitized using an extraoral scanner. The resultant data were imported as a solid CAD file into 3D analysis software (GOM Inspect 2018; Gom GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) and aligned using the software’s coordinate system to determine its X, Y, and Z axes. Five digital impressions (DIs) of maxilla were captured for each patient using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark) and the resultant Standard Tessellation Language (STL) scan files served as test models. Trueness was evaluated by calculating arithmetic mean deviation (AMD) of the vault area between reference and test files while precision was evaluated by calculating AMD between captured scans to measure repeatability of scan acquisition. The scan time taken for each participant was also recorded. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in trueness and precision among the groups (P = .806 and .950, respectively). Average scan time for Class I and III palatal vaults was 1 min 13 seconds and 1 min 37 seconds, respectively, while class II deep palatal vaults showed the highest scan time of 5 mins. CONCLUSION Palatal vault form in edentulous cases has an influence on scan time. However, it does not have a substantial impact on the accuracy of the acquired scans.

PURPOSE: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to compare the influence of palatal vault forms on accuracy and speed of intraoral (IO) scans in completely edentulous cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the palatal vault form, participants were divided into three equal groups (n = 10 each); Class I: moderate;Class II: deep; Class III: flat palatal vault. A reference model was created for each patient using polyvinylsiloxane impression material. The poured models were digitized using an extraoral scanner. The resultant data were imported as a solid CAD file into 3D analysis software (GOM Inspect 2018; Gom GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) and aligned using the software’s coordinate system to determine its X, Y, and Z axes. Five digital impressions (DIs) of maxilla were captured for each patient using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark) and the resultant Standard Tessellation Language (STL) scan files served as test models. Trueness was evaluated by calculating arithmetic mean deviation (AMD) of the vault area between reference and test files while precision was evaluated by calculating AMD between captured scans to measure repeatability of scan acquisition. The scan time taken for each participant was also recorded. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in trueness and precision among the groups (P = .806 and .950, respectively). Average scan time for Class I and III palatal vaults was 1 min 13 seconds and 1 min 37 seconds, respectively, while class II deep palatal vaults showed the highest scan time of 5 mins. CONCLUSION Palatal vault form in edentulous cases has an influence on scan time. However, it does not have a substantial impact on the accuracy of the acquired scans.

PURPOSE: The aim of this prospective clinical study was to compare the influence of palatal vault forms on accuracy and speed of intraoral (IO) scans in completely edentulous cases. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Based on the palatal vault form, participants were divided into three equal groups (n = 10 each); Class I: moderate;Class II: deep; Class III: flat palatal vault. A reference model was created for each patient using polyvinylsiloxane impression material. The poured models were digitized using an extraoral scanner. The resultant data were imported as a solid CAD file into 3D analysis software (GOM Inspect 2018; Gom GmbH, Braunschweig, Germany) and aligned using the software’s coordinate system to determine its X, Y, and Z axes. Five digital impressions (DIs) of maxilla were captured for each patient using an intraoral scanner (TRIOS; 3Shape A/S, Copenhagen, Denmark) and the resultant Standard Tessellation Language (STL) scan files served as test models. Trueness was evaluated by calculating arithmetic mean deviation (AMD) of the vault area between reference and test files while precision was evaluated by calculating AMD between captured scans to measure repeatability of scan acquisition. The scan time taken for each participant was also recorded. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in trueness and precision among the groups (P = .806 and .950, respectively). Average scan time for Class I and III palatal vaults was 1 min 13 seconds and 1 min 37 seconds, respectively, while class II deep palatal vaults showed the highest scan time of 5 mins. CONCLUSION Palatal vault form in edentulous cases has an influence on scan time. However, it does not have a substantial impact on the accuracy of the acquired scans.