No abstract

Background: The incidence of moderate to severe pain is high among patients undergoing spinal surgery. Nefopam can be used as an adjuvant analgesic postoperatively after spine surgery. The study aimed to assess the analgesic efficacy and side effects of nefopam on 24-hour postoperative morphine consumption after spine surgery. Methods: The study is a randomized, double-blinded, placebo-controlled trial. A total of 96 patients were randomized into 4 treatment groups, 24 each. In group 1, patients received normal saline before surgical incision and before the end of surgery. In group 2, patients received 30 mg nefopam before surgical incision and normal saline before the end of surgery. In group 3, patients received normal saline before surgical incision and 30 mg of nefopam before the end of surgery. In group 4, patients received 30 mg of nefopam in both timings. Patient-controlled analgesia morphine was used for the postoperative period. Outcomes were to determine 24-hour morphine consumption and incidence of side effects.  Results: Of 96 patients enrolled, 21 in placebo-placebo, 22 in nefopam-placebo, 22 in placebo-nefopam and 21 in nefopam-nefopam groups completed the study.  Analysis of the Kruskal-Wallis test on the intention-to-treat basis shows no significant difference in 24-hour postoperative morphine consumption between four groups, which were 18 [IQR 13.5-29], 20 [IQR 11-28.3], 17 [IQR 11.5-28.5], 13 [IQR 8.5-18.5] mg., respectively (p = 0.223). Incidence of side effects, including tachycardia, sedation, sweating and nausea/ vomiting, did not differ. Conclusions: Adding perioperative nefopam to opioid analgesic does not improve analgesic efficacy in patients who underwent spine surgery. Registration: Thai Clinical Trials Registry ID TCTR20171115001; registered on 15 November 2017.

Background: An increasing number of patients are opting for spine surgery despite the associated risk of cardiovascular complications. The evidence regarding the incidence and risk factors of cardiovascular complications in spine surgery is insufficient. Therefore, we aimed to determine the incidence and risk factors for cardiovascular complications that occur perioperatively in spine surgery. Methods: This retrospective study included all patients who underwent spine surgery between January 2018 and December 2019 at a single center. Demographic, clinical, and operative data were collected from electronic medical records. The incidence of perioperative cardiac complications was determined. Univariate and multivariate analyses were performed to identify risk factors for the development of perioperative cardiovascular complications in the participants. Results: Of the 1,002 eligible patients enrolled in the study, six developed cardiac complications. Acute myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, and congestive heart failure occurred in one, two, and three patients, respectively. Risk factors for cardiovascular complications included scoliosis surgery (odds ratios (OR): 18.61; 95% confidence interval (CI): 1.346-257.35) and a history of congestive heart failure (OR: 120.97; 95% CI: 2.12-6898.80). Conclusion: The incidence of perioperative cardiovascular complications in patients who underwent spine surgery was 0.6%. High-risk patients should be closely monitored optimally managed throughout the perioperative period.

The aim of this study was to identify the characteristics of perioperative convulsion and to suggest possible correcting strategies. The multi-centre study was conducted prospectively in 22 hospitals across Thailand in 2015. The occurrences of perioperative adverse events were collected. The data was collated by site manager and forwarded to the data management unit. All perioperative convulsion incidences were enrolled and analysed. The consensus was documented for the relevant factors and the corrective strategies. Descriptive statistics were used. From 2,000 incident reports, perioperative convulsions were found in 16 patients. Six episodes (37.5%) were related to anaesthesia, 31.3% to patients, 18.8% to surgery, and 12.5% to systemic processes. The contributing factor was an inexperienced anaesthesia performer (25%), while the corrective strategy was improvements to supervision (43.8%). Incidents of perioperative convulsion were found to be higher than during the last decade. The initiation and maintenance of safe anaesthesia should be continued.

Background. There have not yet been any studies to validate the intubation difficulty scale (IDS) in obese parturients. Objectives of this study were to determine the performance of the IDS in defining difficult intubation (DI) and to identify the optimal cutoff points of the IDS among obese parturients. Methods. This was a prospective observational study. Parturients with a body mass index ≥ 30 kg/m2 who underwent cesarean section utilizing endotracheal intubation were enrolled. The intubating performers were asked to assess the difficulty of endotracheal intubation and categorize it as easy, somewhat DI, and DI. Main Results. A total of 517 parturients were recruited with a mean BMI of 33.9 kg/m2. The incidence of some degree of DI was 14.5%. The area under the receiver operating characteristic curves of the IDS for detecting somewhat DI and DI was 1.0. The optimal cutoff point to define somewhat DI was ≥3 and DI was ≥5, which both had sensitivity and specificity of 100%. Conclusions. The IDS scoring is a good tool for defining DI among obese parturients. The IDS scores of ≥3 and ≥5 are the optimal cutoff points to define somewhat DI and DI, respectively.