Purpose: This work aims to determine whether patient satisfaction with oral sedation is noninferior to intravenous (IV) sedation in vitrectomy surgery. Methods: This prospective, randomized, double-masked, noninferiority clinical trial measured patient satisfaction in 84 participants receiving oral or IV sedation during vitrectomy surgery under monitored anesthesia care. Patients were excluded if they were unable to receive benzodiazepines. Results: The primary outcome was patient satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included surgeon and anesthesia provider satisfaction, need for supplemental anesthesia, and surgical complications. Among the 84 patients (46 [54.8%] men; mean [SD] age, 57.0 [12.7 years]), mean patient satisfaction scores were 5.22 ± 0.81 (range, 3.08-6; scale 1-6) with oral and 5.25 ± 0.63 (range, 3.83-6; scale 1-6) with IV sedation. With an a priori noninferiority margin of 0.5 and a difference in mean scores between the groups of 0.03 (1-tailed 95% CI, infinity to 0.29), our results demonstrated the noninferiority of oral sedation ( P = .002). There were no significant differences in surgeon or anesthesia satisfaction or major intraoperative complications. Five patients receiving oral (11.9%) and 3 receiving IV (7.1%) sedation required supplemental IV sedation (difference, 4.8%; P = .46). Conclusions: Patient satisfaction for oral sedation was noninferior to IV sedation for vitrectomy surgery.

Background: Preoperative prediction of breast volume is very important in planning breast reconstruction. In this study, we assessed the usefulness of a novel method for preoperative estimation of mastectomy volume by comparing the weight of actual mastectomy specimens with the values predicted by the developed method using the Vectra H2. Methods: All patients underwent skin-sparing mastectomy and immediate autologous breast reconstruction. Preoperatively, the patient’s breast was scanned using the Vectra H2 and a postmastectomy simulation image was constructed on a personal computer. The estimated mastectomy volume was calculated by comparing the preoperative and postmastectomy three-dimensional simulation images. Correlation coefficients with the estimated mastectomy volume were calculated for the actual mastectomy weight and the transplanted flap weight. Results: Forty-five breasts of 42 patients were prospectively analyzed. The correlations with the estimated mastectomy volume were r = 0.95 (P < 0.0001) for actual mastectomy weight and r = 0.84 (P < 0.0001) for transplanted free-flap weight. The mastectomy weight estimation formula obtained by linear regression analysis using the estimated mastectomy volume was 0.98 × estimated mastectomy volume + 5.4 (coefficient of determination R2 = 0.90, P < 0.0001). The root-mean-square error for the mastectomy weight estimation formula was 38 g. Conclusions: We used the Vectra H2 system to predict mastectomy volume. The predictions provided by this method were highly accurate. Three-dimensional imaging is a noncontact, noninvasive measurement method that is both accurate and simple to perform. Use of this effective tool for volume prediction is expected to increase in the future.