No abstract

Background Neuromuscular monitoring may not be monitored in oral surgery, because muscle relaxant effect is not required except for intubation maneuvers. In clinical anesthesia, we have extubated after recovery of enough spontaneous breathing, swallowing, and airway protection reflexes. The use of sugammadex depends on the preference of the anesthesiologist. Inhalational anesthetics enhances the effects of non-depolarizing neuromuscular blocking drugs and prolongs its duration of action and recovery. Then, we should pay attention to the prolonged muscle relaxant actin after prolonged anesthesia time. Then, we retrospectively investigated the effectiveness of sugammadex following general anesthesia (>2 hours). Methods We examined the anesthesia records of adult patients who underwent oral surgery under general anesthesia (>2 hours) using rocuronium for tracheal intubation and desflurane for maintenance. The following parameters were recorded: patient background, extubation time (i.e., time between desflurane cessation and extubation), and discharge time (i.e., time between desflurane cessation and operation room departure). Results Two hundreds twenty-five patients were divided into two groups (sugammadex group, n = 133, control group, n = 92). Patients in the sugammadex group received sugammadex (2–4 mg/kg) once desflurane was stopped. There were no significant differences in patient backgrounds between the groups. Although it did not reach the level of significance (p = 0.32), the extubation time in the sugammadex group (10 minutes) was shorter than that of the control group (10 minutes). The discharge time in the sugammadex group (18 minutes) was significantly shorter than that of the control group (20 minutes; p = 0.0087). Conclusion The use of sugammadex could shorten operation room stay after desflurane anesthesia (>2 hours) in adult patients undergoing oral maxillofacial surgery. We found that it was possible to make quick muscle recovery with the use of sugammadex, then the patients could return to the hospital ward.

Background To evaluate, how the influence of different with and without a support stool, impacts chest compressions on the dental chair. Methods Experiments were conducted on CPR training manikin on a dental chair. A stool was placed under the backrest of a dental chair to stabilize it. Chest compressions were performed for 5 minutes with or without a stool. Six values in chest compressions and the degree of fatigue were measured. Results According to the analysis of the quality of chest compressions without a stool or with a stool under the dental chair. The mean chest compression depth of With (57.29 ± 6.24mm) was significantly deeper than that of Without (53.86 ± 8.48 mm; p < 0.001). The mean chest compression rate and total chest compressions of With were significantly higher than that of Without. QCPR score of With (94.28 ± 10.57) was significantly higher than that of Without (72.0 ± 46.66; p < 0.001). The rating of perceived exertion of With (6.75 ± 1.20) was significantly lower than that of Without (8.75 ± 0.66; p < 0.001). Only the chest compression fraction and the chest compression rebound rate does not reach a significant difference. Conclusions The use of a support stool improved the quality of chest compressions on the dental chair and reduced rescuer fatigue. To perform effective CPR on a dental chair, it is important to stabilize the chair against chest compressions. Clinical relevance: Effective chest compressions could be performed in dental chairs by using a stool when cardiac arrest occurs during dental treatments.