Background New Oral Anticoagulants (NOACs) such as Rivaroxaban are introduced as alternatives to conventional vitamin-K antagonists in the long-term treatment of thrombotic events due to their lower bleeding risk. There is a lack of evidence on the effectiveness and safety of Rivaroxaban in Cerebral venous thrombosis (CVT). This study aims to assess the effectiveness and bleeding risk of Rivaroxaban in comparison with Warfarin for the treatment of CVT. Materials and methods 36 patients with diagnosis of CVT were included. Clinical and background information was assessed on admission and patients were followed for at least 12 months. Measured outcomes were modified Rankin Scale (mRS), evidence of recanalization on contrast-enhanced Brain MR venography (MRV) and major or minor bleeding. Patients were divided into two groups according to the type of oral anticoagulant (Rivaroxaban vs Warfarin). Groups were compared in terms of final outcomes and side effects. Result Overall, 13 (36.11%) patients received Warfarin and 23 (63.89%) received Rivaroxaban. Optimal mRS score (0–1) was attained in 9 of 10 (90%) of patients treated with Rivaroxaban and 19 of 22 (86.36%) of patients received Warfarin. MRV showed complete or partial recanalization in 12 of 14 (85.71%) patients treated with Rivaroxaban and all patients in the Warfarin group. There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of major and minor hemorrhage. Conclusion Rivaroxaban holds promise for the treatment of CVT.

Proper pain management, particularly postoperative pain management, is a major concern for clinicians as well as for patients undergoing surgery. Although many advances have been made in the field of pain management, particularly during the past decades, not all patients achieve complete relief from postoperative pain. In this paper, we have emphasized the importance of postoperative analgesia and discussed the new developments in this field.

No abstract

Despite recent advances in anesthesiology and postoperative care, postoperative nausea and vomiting are common complaints. Although acupuncture techniques have received attention in anesthesiology, the ideal technique and selection of the most appropriate acupuncture points are still under debate. This study compared the efficacy of two simultaneous acupuncture points with that of a single point in the prevention and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting following general anesthesia through a double-blind, randomized, controlled trial involving 227 surgical patients undergoing general anesthesia who were randomly assigned into two groups. The first group received acupuncture by stimulation only on the PC6 point (single group), and the second group underwent concomitant stimulation of the PC6 and the L14 acupuncture points (combined group) during surgery under general anesthesia. The prevalences of postoperative nausea and vomiting were compared between the two groups. No significant differences were observed between the two groups (p>0.05). Of 115 patients in the combined group, 80 (69.6%) complained about nausea and vomiting compared with 96 (85.7%) in the single group, a significantly lower proportion (p<0.05). Our findings favor a combination of PC6 and LI4 stimulation for the treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting.