Background and Aims: In our study, we investigated the effectiveness of intravenous milrinone in life-threatening bronchial asthma as compared to conventional treatment. Methods: Fifty patients aged 18-50 years, presenting with life-threatening asthma were enrolled in a Randomised Controlled Trial (RCT). They were randomly allocated into Group C (25 patients): who received the standard pharmacotherapy and placebo, and Group M (25 patients): who in addition to the standard therapy, received 25 μg milrinone as an initial slow IV bolus diluted in 10 ml of normal saline. The following data were recorded: PEFR (Peak Expiratory Flow Rate) expressed as a percentage of the patient’s previous value, Respiratory Rate (RR), MABP (Mean Arterial Blood Pressure), arterial blood gases, and the number of patients requiring mechanical ventilation. Differences between groups were tested using Analysis of Variance (ANOVA) for quantitative variables with post hoc using the Least Significant Difference (LSD) test, and Chi square test for categorical variables. Results: Group M showed marked improvement in PEFR that was highly significant (P < 0.001) 10 min after injection and significant after one hour from the start of treatment in comparison to Group C. There was also an improvement in RR and PO2 that was significant in group M. Milrinone was associated with a reduction in MABP only after 10 min from injection, and showed a statistically significant decrease in the number of patients requiring mechanical ventilator support (P ˂ 0.05). Conclusion: Milronine is a promising agent as a rescue drug in the treatment of life-threatening bronchial asthma.

Background Central venous catheterization is a standard clinical practice for infusion of fluids, blood products, or vasoactive drugs to the central circulation and to monitor central venous pressure during perioperative periods. However, this procedure can lead to significant complications, including cardiac arrhythmia, vascular injury, hydrothorax, hemothorax, hydromediastinum, and cardiac tamponade. Such complications can occur when the catheter tip is inserted within the heart chamber or when it abuts the vascular wall at a steep angle. Objectives The primary aim of the current study is to examine the accuracy of the C-distance or surface landmarks in determining the length of CVC that is required to place the catheter tip at the mid-SCV as confirmed by transesophageal echocardiography (TEE). A secondary aim is to derive an equation or formula to calculate the depth of the CVC that is required in order to have the catheter tip placed at the mid-SVC. Patients and Methods After obtaining the approval from research ethical committee of Ain Shams University and obtaining informed consent from patients the study was conducted in The Academic Institute for Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery, Ain Shams University hospitals. 30 adult patients scheduled for elective cardiac surgeries were enrolled in the study after being selected by random simple method. Results We used the TEE to visualize the CVC tip 3 cm above SVC-RA junction and use this actual depth to compare between the accuracy of the expected depth by C-length method and expected measured depth by surface landmarks method; we found out that the two methods were nearly the same to the actual depth guided by TEE. The mean ± SD surface landmarks distance was 142 ± 12 mm (range, 120 - 162 mm) and the mean ± SD by C-length was 128 ± 18 mm (range, 95 - 174 mm). The mean ± SD TEE-guided CVC length needed to place CVC tip at mid-SVC was140 ± 13 mm (range, 110 - 162 mm). Also in none of the patients was the CVC tip placed below the carinal level on postoperative plain AP chest x-ray. The CVC tip was placed at a mean ± SD height of 12 ± 2 mm (range, 5 to 16 mm) above the carinal line, which concludes that the mid SVC region lies above the carina level by 0.5-1.5 cm and it’s a reliable landmark for postoperative confirmation of optimum placement of CVC tip. Conclusion TEE can be used to effectively determine the proper fixed catheter insertion depth for a patient through the right internal jugular vein. This study showed that both C-length and surface landmarks methods are accurate to determine the depth of the central venous catheter in the mid SVC region (3-3.5 cm) above SVC-RA junction above pericardial reflection. Another conclusion is that the mid SVC region is above carinal level in all cases by 5 mm -15 mm. From this study we formulated two regression equations depending on the expected surface landmarks and C-length with an accuracy of ± 11.662 mm and ± 10.643 mm respectively.

Background Noninvasive positive pressure ventilation (NIPPV) has been increasingly used in the management of respiratory failure in intensive care unit (ICU). Aim of the Work is to compare the efficacy and resource consumption of NIPPMV delivered through face mask against invasive mechanical ventilation (IMV) delivered by endotracheal tube in the management of patients with acute respiratory failure (ARF). Patients and Methods This prospective randomized controlled study included 78 adults with acute respiratory failure who were admitted to the intensive care unit. The enrolled patients were randomly allocated to receive either noninvasive ventilation or conventional mechanical ventilation (CMV). Results Severity of illness, measured by the simplified acute physiologic score 3 (SAPS 3), were comparable between the two patient groups with no significant difference between them. Both study groups showed a comparable steady improvement in PaO2:FiO2 values, indicating that NIPPV is as effective as CMV in improving the oxygenation of patients with ARF. The PaCO2 and pH values gradually improved in both groups during the 48 hours of ventilation. 12 hours after ventilation, NIPPMV group showed significantly more improvement in PaCO2 and pH than the CMV group. The respiratory acidosis was corrected in the NIPPV group after 24 hours of ventilation compared with 36 hours in the CMV group. NIPPV in this study was associated with a lower frequency of complications than CMV, including ventilator acquired pneumonia (VAP), sepsis, renal failure, pulmonary embolism, and pancreatitis. However, only VAP showed a statistically significant difference. Patients who underwent NIPPV in this study had lower mortality, and lower ventilation time and length of ICU stay, compared with patients on CMV. Intubation was required for less than a third of patients who initially underwent NIV. Conclusion Based on our study findings, NIPPV appears to be a potentially effective and safe therapeutic modality for managing patients with ARF.