No abstract

Background:Supraclavicular brachial plexus provides complete and reliable anesthesia for upper limb surgeries. Adjuvants are added to local anesthetists to improve various block characteristics. There are limited studies comparing the efficacy of dexmedetomidine and fentanyl as an adjuvant to levobupivacaine.Aims:The aim of the study was to evaluate and compare the effect of dexmedetomidine versus fentanyl as an adjuvant with levobupivacaine in ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block.Settings and Design:This study design was a prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled study.Subjects and Methods:A total of 120 patients in the age group of 30–55 years with physical status American Society of Anesthesiologists Classes I and II undergoing elective upper limb surgeries under ultrasound-guided supraclavicular brachial plexus block were randomly divided into three groups of forty each after taking informed consent and approval from Hospital Ethics Committee: Group A received 25 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 5 ml normal saline (NS). Group B received 25 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 1 μg/kg dexmedetomidine diluted to the volume of 5 ml NS. Group C received 25 ml of 0.5% levobupivacaine with 1 μg/kg fentanyl diluted to the volume of 5 ml NS. Onset and duration of sensory and motor block and duration of analgesia were noted and any side effects were observed.Statistical Analysis:The distribution of variables tested with Shapiro–Wilk test. Group comparison of values was made by Kruskal–Wallis test followed by Mann–Whitney test.Results:There was fastest onset time as well as longer duration of sensory and motor block in dexmedetomidine group, intermediate in fentanyl group as compared to levobupivacaine group.Conclusion:This study concludes that addition of dexmedetomidine to levobupivacaine for supraclavicular brachial plexus block shortens the onset time and prolongs the duration of sensory and motor blockade as compared to the addition of fentanyl.

Purpose The purpose of this study was to compare the analgesic efficacy of a single-dose of preoperative intravenous tramadol versus diclofenac in preventing pain after third molar surgery. Materials and Methods Fifty patients undergoing elective third molar surgery were randomly assigned into one of the two groups (25 in each group): Group 1 received diclofenac 75 mg, and Group 2 received tramadol 50 mg intravenously preoperatively before the surgery. After injection of the study drugs, the impacted third molars were removed under local anesthetic agent. Results The difference in postoperative pain was assessed by four primary end-points: pain intensity as measured by a 100 mm visual analogue scale hourly for 12 h, median time to rescue analgesic, postoperative acetaminophen consumption, and patient's global assessment. Throughout the 12 h investigation period, patients reported significantly lower pain intensity scores in the diclofenac versus tramadol group (P = 0.0001, Mann-Whitney U-test). Patients also reported significantly longer median time to rescue analgesic (10 vs. 8 h, P \ 0.05, Student t test), lesser postoperative acetaminophen consumption (P \ 0.05, Student t test) for the diclofenac versus tramadol group. ConclusionPreoperative intravenous diclofenac 75 mg is more effective than tramadol 50 mg in the prevention of postoperative dental pain.

Purpose To evaluate the incidence and recovery of persistent sensory disturbances of the infraorbital (IO) nerve after isolated zygomatic complex fractures with various treatment methods. Methods and ResultsThe study was inclusive of isolated unilateral zygomatic complex fractures and fractures of IO rim .Tests performed were Pin prick and Electrical detection threshold test. The evaluation was done preoperatively, after 1 month and after 6 months of surgery. The results suggested that neurosensory disturbance was present in all the patients with zygomatic complex fractures. At 1 month post-operatively some sensory deficit was present in all the patients on the affected side. After 6 months all the patients showed near to normal improvement comparable to normal side. Conclusion Study shows that earlier the surgical intervention, more the recovery of the nerve injury is appreciable during the 1 and 6 months follow up period.