scholarly journals Acetaminophen pre-treatment for Closed Nose Reduction under local anesthesia: a triple-blind placebo-controlled randomized clinical trial

Author(s):  
Saeed Sohrabpour ◽  
Mozhgan Safaeyan ◽  
Keyvan Aghazadeh ◽  
Mohammadreza Firouzifar ◽  
Benyamin Mousavi asl
2010 ◽  
Vol 47 (3) ◽  
pp. 270-274 ◽  
Author(s):  
Rone Antônio Alves de Abreu ◽  
Filinto Anibal Alagia Vaz ◽  
Ricardo Laurino ◽  
Manlio Basilio Speranzini ◽  
Luís Cesar Fernandes ◽  
...  

CONTEXT: Recent studies have shown that local anesthesia for loop colostomy closure is as safe as spinal anesthesia for this procedure. OBJECTIVES: Randomized clinical trial to compare the results from these two techniques. METHODS: Fifty patients were randomized for loop colostomy closure using spinal anesthesia (n = 25) and using local anesthesia (n = 25). Preoperatively, the bowel was evaluated by means of colonoscopy, and bowel preparation was performed with 10% oral mannitol solution and physiological saline solution for lavage through the distal colostomy orifice. All patients were given prophylactic antibiotics (cefoxitin). Pain, analgesia, reestablishment of peristaltism or peristalsis, diet reintroduction, length of hospitalization and rehospitalization were analyzed postoperatively. RESULTS: Surgery duration and local complications were greater in the spinal anesthesia group. Conversion to general anesthesia occurred only with spinal anesthesia. There was no difference in intraoperative pain between the groups, but postoperative pain, reestablishment of peristaltism or peristalsis, diet reintroduction and length of hospitalization were lower with local anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: Local anesthesia plus sedation offers a safer and more effective method than spinal anesthesia for loop colostomy closure.


2014 ◽  
Vol 17 (5) ◽  
pp. 427 ◽  
Author(s):  
SergioLima Santiago ◽  
Regina ClaudiaRamos Colares ◽  
AndreMattos Brito de Souza ◽  
JulianoSartori Mendonca ◽  
Lidiany KarlaAzevedo Rodrigues

Author(s):  
Sholeh Ghabraei ◽  
Behnam Bolhari ◽  
Hasan Mohammad Nashtaie ◽  
Mohammad Noruzian ◽  
Soheil Niavarzi ◽  
...  

2014 ◽  
Vol 27 (01) ◽  
pp. 20-26 ◽  
Author(s):  
D. Chase ◽  
T. Parkin ◽  
D. Bennett ◽  
R. M. Sul

Summary Objectives: To compare the efficacy of meloxicam and a glucosamine-chondroitin (Glu-Ch) supplement in the management of feline osteoarthritis (OA). Methods: Prospective, blinded, randomized clinical trial. Cats over eight years of age with clinical signs of chronic OA were assigned to one of two groups and Glu-Ch or meloxicam was administered orally for 70 days, followed by a placebo until day 98. Cats were assessed by a veterinarian on five occasions and the owner completed an assessment form at the same time. Results: Data were collected from thirty cats. Pre-treatment disease scores were significantly higher in the meloxicam group for owner mobility (p = 0.01) and veterinary lameness (p = 0.02). Owner mobility scores at day 14 (p = 0.01) and day 42 (p = 0.002) were significantly improved compared to pre-treatment scores for the meloxicam group. When meloxicam and Glu-Ch were discontinued and the placebo commenced, a significant proportion of the meloxicam group showed worsening of all the ownerassessed scores between day 70 and day 98, when compared to the Glu-Ch group (mobility p = 0.01; activity p = 0.02; temperament p = 0.04; lifestyle p = 0.01). Clinical significance: Treatment with meloxicam resulted in a significant improvement in mobility and activity levels of cats with OA until the placebo was introduced. A greater proportion of cats receiving meloxicam medication showed a significant worsening of owner assessment scores once the placed was introduced, when compared to the Glu-Ch group.


Author(s):  
A. Valencia Moya ◽  
R. Navarro Suay ◽  
J.A. Fernández González ◽  
C. Gutiérrez Ortega ◽  
T. Panadero Useros ◽  
...  

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document