Intranasal dexmedetomidine is a better anxiolytic and sedative as compared to clonidine. Postoperative analgesic requirement was also significantly decreased after intranasal dexmedetomidine. Thus, it can be preferred as compared to clonidine for premedication in pediatric surgical patients.

No abstract

Background and Aims: Oropharyngeal seal pressure (OSP) achieved by a supraglottic airway device holds due importance as it indicates the feasibility of positive pressure ventilation, the degree of airway protection from supra-cuff soiling and also relates to postoperative morbidity. The primary outcome measure was to assess and compare OSP in different head and neck positions with Baska mask ® and I-gel™. Secondary outcome measures were to compare peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), exhaled tidal volume (ETV), ease of insertion, time taken for insertion, number of attempts, intraoperative manipulations, and postoperative airway morbidity with both the devices. Materials and Methods: Seventy consenting adults scheduled for a variety of surgical procedures under general anesthesia were allocated to Group B and Group G using Baska mask ® and I-gel™ respectively. All statistical calculations were done using SPSS (Statistical Package for the Social Science). The comparison of quantitative variables between the study groups was done using Student t -test and within the variables was done by paired t -test. For comparing categorical data, Chi-square (χ 2 ) test was performed. Results: OSP was significantly higher in group B than in group G in all head and neck positions (neutral 33 ± 2.8 vs. 23.2 ± 1.8, flexion 35.5 ± 2.5 vs. 25.2 ± 1.6, extension 30.6 ± 2.7 vs. 21.4 ± 1.7, right lateral 32.6 ± 2.8 vs. 23.0 ± 1.5. left lateral 32.6 ± 2.7 vs. 23.1 ± 1.7 cm H 2 O, respectively) ( P = 0.000). PIP increased significantly in group G as compared to group B in flexion. ( P = 0.009). Baska mask ® had significantly higher ETV in flexion compared to I-gel™. ( P = 0.009). Conclusion: Baska mask ® may provide a useful alternative to I-gel™ where the glottic seal has precedence over ease of insertion.

No abstract

Background: Certain anesthetic agents on account of their anticonvulsant property have a negative impact on motor seizure duration. Etomidate and propofol being devoid of the strong anticonvulsant property may be beneficial for use in electroconvulsive therapy (ECT). ECT requires sedation with a short-term anesthetic agent that does not interfere with seizure activity and has rapid onset and recovery to facilitate fast-tracking. Aims: The primary objective of this study was to compare motor seizure duration, and the secondary objective was to compare induction time, hemodynamic parameters, recovery time, and adverse effects between propofol and etomidate in modified ECT. Settings and Design: This is a prospective, double- blind, randomized, controlled study conducted in the Department of Anesthesia and Intensive care in a tertiary care hospital during 2018-2019. Materials and Methods: After ethical clearance from institutional ethics committee and written informed consent, a total of 70 patients, aged 18–65 years were randomly allocated using computer generated random number list into two groups - Group A - Propofol (1%) - 1.0 mg.kg −1 and Group B - Etomidate 0.2 mg.kg −1 as an intravenous induction agent. Intraoperatively, motor seizure duration, induction time, and hemodynamic parameters and at the end of procedure recovery parameters were assessed. Statistical Analysis Used: Data were described in terms of number (%) and mean ± standard deviation. Comparison of quantitative variables between the study groups was done using Student t -test and Mann Whitney U test for parametric and nonparametric variables respectively. For comparing categorical data, Chi -square (χ2) test was performed. Results: Mean motor seizure duration with etomidate (55.17 ± 19.06 s) was longer as compared to propofol (27.80 ± 17.33 s), and the difference was highly significant ( P < 0.001). Among hemodynamic parameters, there was a significant increase in heart rate ( P = 0.016) and significant fall in mean arterial pressure ( P = 0.005) after induction with propofol as compared to etomidate. Conclusion: Etomidate has the advantage of longer seizure duration and stable hemodynamics. It can be a useful alternative in patients achieving suboptimal therapeutic responses to ECT or where seizure duration is too short.