Background: Postoperative pulmonary dysfunction is a prevalent complication after cardiac surgery; it has many contributing considerations due to either the surgery itself, anomalies to gas exchange or maybe as a result of alterations in lung mechanics. The aim of this study was to compare pressure-controlled ventilation versus volume-controlled ventilation in the presence of no ventilation group as a control group during cardiopulmonary bypass and its effect on postoperative pulmonary dysfunction. Patients and Methods: Sixty-six patients going through open-heart surgeries were included in the study. They divided into three groups (Group P: Pressure-controlled ventilation, Group V: Volume-controlled ventilation, and Group C: Control group with no ventilation) in accordance with the mode of ventilation. Patients studied for chest X-ray, lung ultrasound, arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratio, alveolar–arterial oxygen gradient, static lung compliance, and dynamic lung compliance, taken after induction of anesthesia, 1-h post-CPB, and 1 h after arrival to cardiac surgical unit. Results: There was no significant difference regarding the chest X-ray and lung ultrasonography results among the three groups of the study. Regarding arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen ratio, alveolar–arterial oxygen gradient, static lung compliance, and dynamic lung compliance, the results showed lower values in the postbypass period, and the postoperative period compared to the postinduction period among the three groups of the study with no significant difference. Conclusions: The evidence of clear benefits of maintaining ventilation alone during cardiopulmonary bypass is inconsistent. More studies are required to determine the precise role of different lung protective strategies during cardiopulmonary bypass.

Objectives. This study was established to compare single-dose lornoxicam 8 mg (NSAID) in addition to 0.15 mg.kg−1 ketamine with single-dose pethidine 50 mg, both administered intravenously (IV), on the quickness and extent of analgesia, disadvantage, and consequence on utilitarian situation. Patients and Methods. One hundred and twenty patients with acute renal colic pain received in emergency room were included in this prospective, randomized, and double blind clinical study. They were aimlessly designated into one of two groups using a computer-generated table. Group L received lornoxicam 8 mg IV plus 0.15 mg.kg−1 ketamine and Group P received pethidine 50 mg IV. Parameters were noticed at baseline and after 0, 15, 30, and 45 minutes and 1 hour after drug administration. The efficiency of the drug was determined by observing: patient rated pain, time to pain relief, rate of pain recurrence, the need for rescue analgesia, adverse events, and functional status. Results. The visual analogue scale was significantly lower in Group L after 30 minutes in comparison to Group P. In addition, there was statistically significant increase in Group P regarding their need for rescue analgesia after 30 min in comparison to Group L. Group P showed nonsignificantly increased sedation score compared to Group L. Conclusion. Patients receiving lornoxicam-ketamine attained greater reduction in pain scores and less side effects with better functional state and also are less likely to require further analgesia than those administered pethidine to control acute renal colic pain.

No abstract

No abstract

Objectives: Abdominoplasty is a very common surgery nowadays and mainly performed as an office-based procedure. Spinal anesthesia is assumed to be safer than general anesthesia in such operations. The aim of this study is to compare between spinal and general anesthesia for abdominoplasty. Patients and Methods: Two hundred patients undergoing abdominoplasty, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classes I and II, were enrolled in this randomized prospective study. One hundred patients were operated upon under general anesthesia (Group G) and another one hundred patients under spinal anesthesia (Group S). Any intraoperative complications such as hypotension, bradycardia, pain, shivering, nausea, and vomiting related to anesthesia were managed and recorded. Visual analog scale was used to assess postoperative pain severity and the need for analgesia to be administered till 12 h postoperatively. Results: There was no significant difference as regards patient's satisfaction in both groups although it was lower in Group G than in Group S. There were significant differences in between both groups as regards postoperative nausea and vomiting, early demand for analgesic and total dose of pain killer consumed in 12 h postoperatively which were higher in Group G than in Group S. Conclusion: Spinal anesthesia can be an effective anesthetic technique for office-based abdominoplasty with less postoperative complications when compared with general anesthesia for short procedures with no extensive dissection and positioning.