BACKGROUND: Fentanyl-induced cough (FIC) is a transient condition with a reported incidence of 18% to 65% depending on the dose and route of administration of fentanyl. Nonpharmacological methods to prevent FIC are more cost-effective than medications. Dilution of fentanyl has a proven role in the prevention of FIC. Acupressure can also prevent FIC because it has a proven role in the treatment of cough. METHODS: This study included 225 female patients with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status of I or II who were randomly divided into 3 groups of 75 patients each. Patients in the control group received undiluted fentanyl at 3 µg/kg, patients in the acupressure group received undiluted fentanyl at 3 µg/kg with acupressure, and patients in the dilution group received diluted fentanyl at 3 µg/kg. Coughing was noted within 2 min of fentanyl administration. The severity of FIC was graded as mild (1-2 coughs), moderate (3-4 coughs), or severe (≥5 coughs). The timing of coughs was also noted. RESULTS: The incidence of FIC was 12.7% in the control group, 6.8% in the dilution group, and 1.3% in the acupressure group. The difference in the incidence of cough was statistically significant (P = 0.008) between the control and acupressure groups. The difference in the severity of cough among the groups was not statistically significant. The median onset time of cough among all groups was 9 to 12 seconds. CONCLUSIONS: The application of acupressure prior to administration of fentanyl significantly reduces the incidence of FIC. Dilution of fentanyl also reduces the incidence of FIC, but the difference is not statistically significant.
Acupressure* ; Cough* ; Female* ; Fentanyl* ; Humans ; Incidence* ; Indicator Dilution Techniques ; Prospective Studies*

BACKGROUND: As lung ultrasound (LUS) can be used to identify regional lung ventilation and collapse, we hypothesize that LUS can be better than auscultation in assessing lung isolation and determining double lumen tube (DLT) position. METHODS: A randomized controlled study was conducted in tertiary care cancer institute from November 2014 to December 2015, including 100 adult patients undergoing elective thoracic surgeries. Patients with tracheostomy, difficult airway and pleural-based pathologies were excluded. After anesthesia induction and DLT insertion, patients were randomized into group A (auscultation) and group B (LUS). Regional ventilation was assessed by experienced anesthesiologists using the respective method for each group. Final confirmation of DLT position with a bronchoscope was performed by a blinded anesthesiologist. Contingency tables were plotted to determine sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy for each method. RESULTS: Data from 91 patients were analyzed (group A = 47, group B = 44). Compared with auscultation, LUS had significantly higher sensitivity (94.1% vs. 73.3%, P = 0.010), PPV (57.1% vs. 35.5%, P = 0.044), NPV (93.8% vs. 75.0%, P = 0.018), accuracy (70.5% vs. 48.9%, P = 0.036) and required longer median time (161.5 vs. 114 s, P < 0.001) for assessment of DLT position. Differences in specificity (55.6% vs. 37.5%, P = 0.101) and area under curve (0.748; 95% CI: 0.604–0.893 vs. 0.554, 95% CI: 0.379–0.730; P = 0.109) were not significant. CONCLUSIONS: Compared to auscultation, LUS is a superior method for assessing lung isolation and determining DLT position.
Adult ; Anesthesia ; Area Under Curve ; Auscultation ; Bronchoscopes ; Double-Blind Method ; Humans ; Lung ; Methods ; One-Lung Ventilation ; Pathology ; Prospective Studies ; Sensitivity and Specificity ; Tertiary Healthcare ; Tracheostomy ; Ultrasonography ; Ventilation

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) attenuates the stress response to surgery in the perioperative period and hastens recovery. Liver resection is a complex surgical procedure where the enhanced recovery program has been shown to be safe and effective in terms of postoperative outcomes. ERAS programs have been shown to be associated with lower morbidity, shortened postoperative stay, and reduced cost with no difference in mortality and readmission rates. However, there are challenges that are unique to hepatic resection such as safety after epidural catheterization and postoperative coagulopathy, intraoperative fluids and postoperative organ dysfunction, need for low central venous pressure to reduce blood loss, and non-lactate containing intravenous fluids. This narrative review briefly discusses these concerns and controversies and suggests revisiting some of the strong recommendations made by the ERAS society in light of the recent evidence.
Analgesia, Epidural ; Catheterization ; Catheters ; Central Venous Pressure ; Liver ; Mortality ; Perioperative Period

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) attenuates the stress response to surgery in the perioperative period and hastens recovery. Liver resection is a complex surgical procedure where the enhanced recovery program has been shown to be safe and effective in terms of postoperative outcomes. ERAS programs have been shown to be associated with lower morbidity, shortened postoperative stay, and reduced cost with no difference in mortality and readmission rates. However, there are challenges that are unique to hepatic resection such as safety after epidural catheterization and postoperative coagulopathy, intraoperative fluids and postoperative organ dysfunction, need for low central venous pressure to reduce blood loss, and non-lactate containing intravenous fluids. This narrative review briefly discusses these concerns and controversies and suggests revisiting some of the strong recommendations made by the ERAS society in light of the recent evidence.

BACKGROUND: As lung ultrasound (LUS) can be used to identify regional lung ventilation and collapse, we hypothesize that LUS can be better than auscultation in assessing lung isolation and determining double lumen tube (DLT) position. METHODS: A randomized controlled study was conducted in tertiary care cancer institute from November 2014 to December 2015, including 100 adult patients undergoing elective thoracic surgeries. Patients with tracheostomy, difficult airway and pleural-based pathologies were excluded. After anesthesia induction and DLT insertion, patients were randomized into group A (auscultation) and group B (LUS). Regional ventilation was assessed by experienced anesthesiologists using the respective method for each group. Final confirmation of DLT position with a bronchoscope was performed by a blinded anesthesiologist. Contingency tables were plotted to determine sensitivity, specificity, positive predictive value (PPV), negative predictive value (NPV), and accuracy for each method. RESULTS: Data from 91 patients were analyzed (group A = 47, group B = 44). Compared with auscultation, LUS had significantly higher sensitivity (94.1% vs. 73.3%, P = 0.010), PPV (57.1% vs. 35.5%, P = 0.044), NPV (93.8% vs. 75.0%, P = 0.018), accuracy (70.5% vs. 48.9%, P = 0.036) and required longer median time (161.5 vs. 114 s, P < 0.001) for assessment of DLT position. Differences in specificity (55.6% vs. 37.5%, P = 0.101) and area under curve (0.748; 95% CI: 0.604–0.893 vs. 0.554, 95% CI: 0.379–0.730; P = 0.109) were not significant. CONCLUSIONS Compared to auscultation, LUS is a superior method for assessing lung isolation and determining DLT position.