ContextThe liver, one of the most important organs of the body, is known to be responsible for several functions. The functional contribution of the liver to the metabolism of carbohydrates, protein, drugs and toxins, fats and cholesterol and many other biological processes are still unknown. Liver disorders are classified into two types: acute and chronic. Different drugs are used in liver diseases to treat and control pain. Most pain relief medications such as opioids are metabolized via the liver; therefore, the adverse reactions of drugs are probably higher for patients with liver disease. The current study aimed to evaluate the effects of opioid drugs on patients with liver disease; therefore, it is necessary to select suitable opioids for such patients.Evidence AcquisitionThis review was written by referring to research literature including 70 articles and four textbooks published from 1958 to 2015 on various reputable sites. Searches were carried out on the key phrases of narcotic pain relievers (opioids), acute and chronic hepatic failure, opioid adverse drug reactions, drug-induced liver injury (DILI) and other similar keywords. References included a variety of research papers (descriptive and analytical), intervention and review articles.ResultsIn patients with liver disease, administration of opioid analgesics should be observed, accurately. As a general rule, lower doses of drugs should be administered at regular intervals based on the signs of drug accumulation. Secondly, the interactions of opioid drugs with different levels of substrates of the P450 cytochrome enzyme should be considered.ConclusionsPain management in patients with liver dysfunction is always challenging to physicians because of the adverse reactions of drugs, especially opioids. Opioids should be used cautiously since they can cause sedation, constipation and sudden encephalopathy effects. Since the clearance of these drugs in patients with hepatic insufficiency is decreased, the initial dose must be decreased, the intervals between doses should be increased and some patients need to be continuously assessed.

Introduction: Filling tracheal tube cuff (TTC) after intubation is necessary to provide a safe airway in intubated patients. On the other hand, excessive increase or decrease in the pressure of TTC’s balloon leads into the dangerous complications such as necrosis and/or aspiration. Accordingly, in the present study, we tried to evaluate the most two common fixed volume and pilot balloon palpitation methods to control TTC pressure. Methods: In a prospective cross-sectional study that was carried out in the emergency department of Tabriz Imam Reza hospital upon 194 patients who needed intubation and from April 2015 to June 2016. The patients were randomly allocated into two equal groups. For the first the Pilot Balloon Palpation technique and for the second group 10 cc fixed volume cuff filling technique was assigned. After that, the pressure was checked with manometer and data were analyzed using SPSS software. Results: TTC pressure average in fixed volume group was 44.96±21.77 cmH2O and for palpation group, it was 118.15±22.15 cmH2O. There was a meaningful difference between two groups in terms of cuff inside pressure (P value <0.001) and it was meaningfully lower in fixed volume group than the first one. Conclusion: The present study showed that pilot balloon palpation or fixed volume method was not appropriate methods to assess cuff pressure during intubation and the cuff pressure must be controlled by the manometer.

No abstract

Introduction: Dexmedetomidine is a sedative and analgesic medication that is frequently used postoperatively in children after liver transplantation, hepatic dysfunction and liver failure. Objectives: The aim of this systematic review was to determine the role of dexmedetomidine in liver disease. Methods: We systematically reviewed the literature from PubMed, Embase, Scopus, ProQuest, Web of Science, and The Cochrane Library from January 1980 to June 2019. The search strategy included a combination of Mesh and free keywords such as liver transplantation, liver diseases, liver failure, and dexmedetomidine. Results: From a total of 741 articles, 7 studies were included in this systematic review. In the selected studies, a total of 218 patients in the control and treatment groups were studied. Based on the Fixed effect model, MAP changes in the intervention group were 1.89 units less than the control group, which was not statistically significant (pooled mean difference =-1.89, 95% CI:-6.28 to 2.5, P value = 0.39). Conclusions: DEX injection prior to anesthesia potentially had a protective effect on liver and intestinal function during hepatectomy with vascular occlusion.

Background:Sedation is a condition of reduced level of consciousness (LOC) for a patient that is created to decrease irritability, anxiety, and restlessness.Objectives:In this study, we compared the sedative effect of oral administration of ketamine, midazolam, and atropine cocktail with diphenhydramine in the referent children to the emergency department.Patients and Methods:Based on the double-blind randomized clinical trial in this investigation, 80 children, who needed to repair their wounds with suture were randomly divided into two groups: group 1 and group 2, who have received oral diphenhydramine and oral ketamine, midazolam, and atropine cocktail, respectively. Behavioral changes were collected and recorded before, during intervention and two weeks after intervention. Statistical data were analyzed by SPSS-16 software and chi-square and Mann-Whitney U tests were employed to study the relations among variables. P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant.Results:There was no significant difference between two groups in terms of drug acceptance and anxiety degree in children before intervention. Group 2 had achieved better and deeper sedation than group 1 during 45-minute post-medication (P < 0.05, P = 0.01). Regarding pediatric general behavior such as crying or interruptive moves, there was also a significant statistical difference between group 2 and group 1 (P = 0.009) based on Houpt Classification. The mean recovery times in groups 1 and 2 were 34.37 ± 14.23 min and 27.25 ± 5.14 min, respectively (P = 0.003). In terms of behavioral changes, the rate of cumulative frequency was computed for behavioral changes two weeks after the discharge from emergency department in which there were less behavioral changes in group 2 than in group 1 (P = 0.04).Conclusions:Oral administration of ketamine, midazolam, and atropine cocktail induces better sedation than diphenhydramine with respect to its limited mood changes in children, who need a medical procedure at emergency department.