BackgroundIntrathecal morphine is commonly used for post caesarean analgesia. However, their use is frequently associated with the incidence of troublesome side effects such as nausea, vomiting and pruritus. Various mechanisms have been postulated for the opioid-induced pruritus, with a variety of medications with different mechanisms of actions formulated for the prevention and treatment. But, the results are inconsistent and hence the prevention and treatment of opioid-induced pruritus still remains a challenge. Ondansetron which is antiemetic, non-sedative and has no antianalgesic effect is an antagonist to 5-HT3 receptor, the receptor with which opioids interacts and imparts its effects. Ondansetron, thus, would be an attractive treatment strategy for both opioid-induced pruritus and post-operative nausea and vomiting.MethodsAfter the approval from institutional review committee and written consent received from the patient, 50 healthy parturients of ASA I and II physical status undergoing caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia were enrolled for the study. They were randomly categorized into placebo group (2 ml normal saline) and treatment group (2 ml of 4 mg ondansetron), each group containing 25 patients. Pruritus and post-operative nausea and vomiting scores were recorded up to 24 hours after the administration of intrathecal morphine. Statistical analysis was performed using chi-square test.ResultsThe incidence, severity and necessity of treatment for pruritus in the treatment group was significantly reduced compared to the placebo group (16% vs 88%). Similarly, the risk of post-operative nausea and vomiting in the treatment group was less compared to the placebo group (8% vs 56%).ConclusionProphylactic administration of ondansetron to parturients receiving intrathecal morphine for post-operative analgesia provides a significant reduction of intrathecal morphine-induced pruritus and nausea and vomiting.Trial registrationCTRI/2015/01/005362 registered on 07/01/2015 in Clinical Trials Registry – India (ctri.nic.in).

Background: In the era of minimal invasive surgery, hernia repair has seen a paradigm shift from open to laparoscopic technique. However, superiority of laparoscopic repair over open repair is still controversial. Available literatures have shown laparoscopic technique to be better in term of post-operative pain and early return to work.Methods: In this prospective study, a total of 102 patients aged 21-78 years with inguinal hernia were recruited and enrolled into two comparative groups, namely Lichtenstein’s and Transabdominal pre-peritoneal, and each group containing 51 participants. Hospital ethical committee approval and written informed consent from patients was obtained. Primarily, the duration of operation, post-operative pain and complication, and quality of life after surgery was compared between the two different approaches of hernia repair.Results: The study results demonstrated a statistically significant superiority of trans abdominal pre-peritoneal repair over Lichtenstein’s hernioplasty in terms of post operative pain (2.00±0.63 vs 3.90±0.74 VAS score, P value<0.001), hospital stay (2.33±0.62 vs 2.96±0.20 days, P value <0.001) and quality of life with early return to normal work (13.39±0.60 vs 17.88±0.86 days, P value <0.001); whereas a prolonged operative time was seen in transabdominal pre-peritoneal repair (96.08±27.08 vs 42.55±5.95 mins, P value <0.001). Conclusions: This study has shown that transabdominal pre-peritoneal repair is better than Lichtenstein’s in respect to post-operative pain, quality of life and post-operative complication. However, it has prolonged operative duration than conventional method.

Introduction: Transient hemodynamic instability is an inevitable outcome of laryngoscopy and intubation which can have serious effects in patients with COPD, heart disease and hypertension. Hemodynamic stability is one of the main goals of the anesthesiologist. This study was performed to compare the safety and effectiveness of lidocaine and esmolol in comparison to placebo-control group, in modifying the hemodynamic response to laryngoscopy and intubation.