Abstract Background and objectives: Minimal-flow anesthesia provides various advantages, such as reduced environmental pollution, proper humidification and warming of anesthetic gases, and reduced costs. The aim of this study was to compare the cost-effectiveness of minimal-flow sevoflurane and desflurane anesthesia and their effects on hemodynamics, postoperative recovery, respiratory parameters, and liver and kidney functions. Methods: A total of 60 ASA I-II patients aged 18-70 years who underwent posterior spinal instrumentation were included in the study. The patients were divided into Group S (sevoflurane) and Group D (desflurane). After anesthesia induction, the gas flow was initiated at a rate of 4 L.min-1 using a concentration of 8% in Group D and 3.5% in Group S, and the time to reach 0.8 MAC was recorded. The gas flow was then switched to minimal flow. Patient hemodynamic and respiratory parameters, body temperatures and arterial blood gas levels were recorded. The integrated pulmonary index (IPI) was monitored postoperatively. Biochemical findings were recorded 12 hours after the operation. The amount of bleeding and blood transfused, and the costs involved were calculated. Results: The patients’ demographic characteristics, duration of surgery, hemodynamic parameters, IPI values, body temperatures, and arterial blood gas levels were similar at all time points. Biochemical findings, amount of bleeding and amount of blood transfused were similar between the two groups. The mean cost was lower in Group S than in Group D (p = 0.007). Conclusion: The study found no significant difference in terms of reliability between minimalflow sevoflurane and desflurane anesthesia. Furthermore, the procedure was found to be more cost-effective for Group S than for Group D.

Abstract Background and objectives The risk of emergence agitation (EA) is high in patients undergoing nasal surgery. The aim of the present study was to investigate the incidence of EA in adults undergoing septoplasty and the effect of ketamine on EA. Methods In this randomized study, a total of 102 ASA I-II patients who underwent septoplasty between July 2018 and April 2019 were divided into two groups: ketamine (Group-K, n = 52) and saline (Group-S, n = 50). After anesthesia induction, Group-K was intravenously administered 20 mL of saline containing 1 mg kg-1 ketamine, whereas Group-S was administered 20 mL of saline. Sedation and agitation scores at emergence from anesthesia, incidence of cough, emergence time, and response to verbal stimuli time were recorded. The sedation/agitation and pain levels were recorded for 30 minutes in the recovery unit. Results There was no significant difference between the groups in terms of the incidence of EA (Group-K: 15.4%, Group-S: 24%). The incidence of cough during emergence was higher in Group-S than in Group-K, but the response time to verbal stimuli and emergence time were shorter in Group-S. The sedation and agitation scores were similar after surgery. Pain scores were higher in Group-S at the time of admission to the recovery unit and were similar between groups in the other time points. Conclusion Administration of 1 mg kg-1 ketamine after anesthesia induction does not affect the incidence of EA in patients undergoing septoplasty, but it prolongs the emergence and response time to verbal stimuli and reduces the incidence of cough.

Resumo Justificativa e objetivo O uso do bloqueio do plano transverso abdominal com diferentes anestésicos locais é considerado como parte do regime de analgesia multimodal em pacientes submetidos à colecistectomia laparoscópica. No entanto, nenhum estudo comparando bupivacaína e levobupivacaína para bloqueio do plano transverso abdominal foi publicado. Nosso objetivo foi comparar bupivacaína e levobupivacaína em bloqueio do plano transverso abdominal guiado por ultrassom em pacientes submetidos à colecistectomia laparoscópica. Métodos Cinquenta pacientes (ASA I/II), submetidos à colecistectomia laparoscópica foram alocados aleatoriamente em dois grupos. Após a indução da anestesia, o bloqueio do plano transverso abdominal bilateral guiado por ultrassom foi realizado com 30 mL de bupivacaína a 0,25% no Grupo B (n = 25) e 30 mL de levobupivacaína a 0,25% no Grupo L (n = 25) para cada lado. O nível de dor foi avaliado usando a escala visual analógica de 10 cm em repouso e durante a tosse em 1, 5, 15, 30 minutos e em 1, 2, 4, 6, 12 e 24 horas após a operação. Quando a escala visual analógica > 3, os pacientes receberam 10 mg de tenoxicam por via intravenosa (IV). Se a escala visual analógica permanecesse > 3, os pacientes recebiam tramadol IV (1 mg.kg−1). Em caso de analgesia inadequada, um analgésico de resgate foi administrado. A necessidade de analgésico e o tempo até a primeira solicitação de analgésico foram registrados. Resultados Os escores da escala visual analógica não mostraram diferença, exceto no primeiro e quinto minutos de pós-operatório, onde a escala visual analógica foi maior no Grupo L (p < 0,05). A necessidade de analgésico foi semelhante em ambos os grupos. O tempo até a primeira solicitação de analgésico foi menor no Grupo L (4,35 ± 6,92 min vs. 34,91 ± 86,26 min, p = 0,013). Conclusões Bupivacaína e levobupivacaína apresentaram eficácia similar no bloqueio TAP em pacientes submetidos à colecistectomia laparoscópica.

Abstract Background and objective The use of transversus abdominis plane block with different local anesthetics is considered as a part of multimodal analgesia regimen in laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients. However no studies have been published comparing bupivacaine and levobupivacaine for transversus abdominis plane block. We aimed to compare bupivacaine and levobupivacaine in ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Methods Fifty patients (ASA I/II), undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy were randomly allocated into two groups. Following anesthesia induction, ultrasound-guided bilateral transversus abdominis plane block was performed with 30 mL of bupivacaine 0.25% in Group B (n = 25) and 30 mL of levobupivacaine 0.25% in Group L (n = 25) for each side. The level of pain was evaluated using 10 cm visual analog scale (VAS) at rest and during coughing 1, 5, 15, 30 min and 1, 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 h after the operation. When visual analogue scale > 3, the patients received IV tenoxicam 20 mg. If visual analogue scale remained >3, they received IV. tramadol 1 mg.kg−1. In case of inadequate analgesia, a rescue analgesic was given. The analgesic requirement, time to first analgesic requirement was recorded. Results Visual analogue scale levels showed no difference except first and fifth minutes postoperatively where VAS was higher in Group L (p < 0.05). Analgesic requirement was similar in both groups. Time to first analgesic requirement was shorter in Group L (4.35 ± 6.92 min vs. 34.91 ± 86.26 min, p = 0.013). Conclusions Bupivacaine and levobupivacaine showed similar efficacy at TAP block in patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy.