Safe and efficient use of spinal drugs requires neurotoxicologic animal studies before ethical application. We have evaluated the neurotoxicologic interruptions of intrathecal administration of midazolam in rabbits. Eighteen white New Zealand rabbits were randomly assigned into three groups consisting of six rabbits each. In conscious animals, 0.3 ml 0.9% normal saline solution, 0.3 ml 0.1% midazolam (Roche, Dormicum) or 0.3 ml preservative free midazolam were intrathecally administered. Light and fluorescence microscopy evaluations were performed on transverse spinal cord sections by a neurohistopathologist in a blind fashion. Midazolam and preservative free midazolam treated rabbits showed significant histologic changes in light and fluorescence microscopy. The histologic and vascular lesions with the use of midazolam and preservative free midazolam suggested neurotoxic effects; thus chronic intrathecal administration of midazolam should be avoided in humans.
As long as it is applied with infiltration analgesia to the posterior capsule, CFNB is an effective and safe analgesia method resulting in better postoperative patient comfort and greater ROM. Furthermore, it produces better results in the early postoperative period with a favorable side effect profile.
This study investigated the possible local adverse effects of intra-articular administration of tenoxicam in the rat knee joint. A total of 50 rats were given 0.25 ml of a standard preparation of tenoxicam by injection into the right knee joint and 0.25 ml of 0.9% saline solution by injection into the left knee joint as a control. Groups of 10 rats were killed 24 h, 48 h, 7 days, 14 days and 21 days after tenoxicam administration. Two rats were sham operated; one was killed on the first day and the other on the second day after this procedure. All the joints were prepared and sectioned for histological examination. Tissue loss and oedema were observed in the specimens obtained 24 h and 48 h after treatment with tenoxicam. No pathological changes were observed in the 7-day, 14-day and 21-day specimens, or in the control joints. Caution should be exercised when using intra-articular tenoxicam for post-operative analgesia.
Introduction: The aim of this study is to compare two different anesthetic techniques in radical cystectomy with regard to blood loss, transfusional requirements, intraoperative complications and the quality of analgesia. Materials and Methods: 50 patients scheduled for radical cystectomy were randomized to two groups: group GA – general anesthesia, n = 25 and group CEGA – combined epidural and general anesthesia. The patients were monitored and hemodynamic changes, intraoperative bleeding, transfusional requirements, quality of analgesia and postoperative complications were evaluated. Results: There were no significant differences between the demographic characteristics of the two groups. Intraoperative bleeding which was 874.8 ± 190.7 ml in the CEGA group and 1,248.3 ± 343.4 ml in the GA group was statistically different (p < 0.05). Significantly more intraoperative blood transfusions in terms of units were required in the GA group. Analgesia was better in the CEGA group, with VAS values at 0, 1, 2, 4, 6, 12 and 24 h significantly (p < 0.05) lower than those observed in the GA group. No significant differences in intraoperative hemodynamic parameters or postoperative complications were noted between the two groups. Conclusions: Statistically significant differences in intraoperative bleeding were observed between the two groups: CEGA provides lower intraoperative bleeding and a better postoperative analgesia. Major operations such as radical cystectomy, which also is associated with considerable blood loss, a combination of general and epidural anesthesia may allow for less blood loss, with a better postoperative analgesia and without any increase in complications.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.