Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR-IPR-15006914.

Background: Few studies have investigated the effect of dexmedetomidine on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in patients underwent gynecological laparoscopic surgery. We investigated if adding dexmedetomidine to a morphine-based patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) could decrease the incidence of PONV in this high-risk patient population. Methods: In this prospective, randomized, double-blind and placebo-controlled study, 122 patients underwent gynecological laparoscopic surgery were assigned into two groups. Patients in the dexmedetomidine group (Group Dex) received a loading dose of dexmedetomidine 0.4 μg/kg before the end of surgery, followed by morphine 0.5 mg/ml plus dexmedetomidine 1 μg/ml for postoperative i.v. PCA. Patients in the control group (Group Ctrl) received normal saline before the end of surgery, followed by morphine 0.5 mg/ml alone for postoperative i.v. PCA. PCA pump was programmed as followed: bolus dose 2 ml, lockout interval 8 min and background infusion at a rate of 1 ml/h. The primary outcome was the incidence of nausea and vomiting within the first postoperative 24 h. Results: Although there were no significant differences in regard to the total incidence of PONV (41.0% vs 52.5%, P = 0.204), PONV score, time to first onset of PONV, or the need for rescue antiemetics within the first postoperative 24 h between the two groups, the incidence of nausea and total PONV during the first 2 h period was significantly lower in the Group Dex than in the Group Ctrl (9.8% vs 24.6%, P = 0.031 and 0.031, respectively). More patients in Group Dex were over sedated or had bradycardia during the PACU compared with Group Ctrl (P = 0.040 and 0.036, respectively). Conclusion: Our protocol in which dexmedetomidine was administered postoperativelyafter a loading doseto intravenous PCA morphine in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery, had only early antiemetic effects, while no clinically meaningful antiemetic effect could be evidenced within the first 24 h after surgery.

Background:The laryngeal mask airway (LMA) is the most commonly used rescue airway in obstetric anesthesia. The aim of this retrospective cohort study was to evaluate the application of the LMA in parturients undergoing cesarean delivery (CD) for 5 years in our hospital. As a secondary objective, we investigated the incidence of airway-related complication in obstetric general anesthesia (GA).Methods:We collected electronic data for all obstetric patients who received GA for CD between January 2010 and December 2014 in Peking University First Hospital. Based on the different types of airway device, patients were divided into endotracheal intubation (ET) group and LMA group. The incidences of regurgitation and aspiration, as well as maternal and neonatal postoperative outcomes were compared between groups.Results:During the 5-year study, GA was performed in 192 cases, which accounted for 2.0% of all CDs. The main indications for GA were contraindication to neuraxial anesthesia or a failed block. Among these, ET tube was used in 124 cases (68.9%) and LMA in 56 cases (31.1%). The percentage of critical patients above the American Society of Anesthesiologists' Grade II was 24/124 in ET group and 4/56 in LMA group (P = 0.036). The emergent delivery rate was 63.7% for ET group and 37.5% for LMA group (P = 0.001). None of the patients had regurgitation or aspiration. There were no significant differences in terms of neonatal Apgar scores, maternal and neonatal postoperative outcomes between the two groups.Conclusions:Our results suggested that GA was mainly used for contraindication to neuraxial anesthesia or a failed block, and emergent CDs accounted for most cases. The second-generation LMA could be used for obstetric anesthesia, but correct position to achieve a good seal is the key to prevent reflux and aspiration. Whether they could replace the tracheal tube in routine practice needs further large prospective studies.

No abstract