Search

Anamnesis: We saw a previously healthy 30-year-old Southeast-Asian sailor with progredient coughing and fever., Examination: We found an atypical pneumonia along with a positive HIV-test. We performed a bronchial lavage and further diagnostics for opportunistic infections. The lab work showed a viral load of 3340 000 copies/ml and a CD4-cell-count of 36/µl., Diagnosis: HIV late presenter in CDC stadium C3 with Pneumocystis jirovecii and CMV pneumonia., Therapy: We treated with Meropenem, Moxifloxacin, Cotrimoxazol, Ganciclovir and Genvoya., Clinical Course: Due to a cardio-pulmonal deterioration invasive ventilation was necessary. In the end the patient died of multi organ failure twelve days after admission despite intensive care, hemodialysis and prone positioning., Conclusion: This case demonstrates the difficulties in the pharmacotherapy and with drug interactions in a HIV late presenter with multi organ failure. Consultation and advice of the hospital pharmacy and the antibiotic stewardship team was vital for treating this patient. In the end cases like the portrayed should be treated in specialized clinics., Competing Interests: Die Autorinnen/Autoren geben an, dass kein Interessenkonflikt besteht., (Thieme. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: The purpose of this study was to determine if pain level was associated with demographic or surgery-specific characteristics among patients recovering from ambulatory surgery; and to assess the relationship between pain level and nausea over the 7-day postoperative period, controlling for demographic and surgery-related covariates., Materials and Methods: This longitudinal study assessed the pain and nausea of 248 eligible patients during the day of surgery (DOS) and the 7 days following ambulatory surgery. Postoperative data were assessed using standardized questions about severity of pain and nausea symptoms. Participants who had a cumulative pain score of ≥24 over the 8-day period were categorized as having high pain. Repeated-measures analysis of variance was used to assess differences in nausea by pain group over time, controlling for demographic, surgical variables, and antiemetic and analgesic use., Results: There were significant differences between 2 pain groups in age, surgical procedure, cumulative morphine equivalent dose, and use of antiemetics postdischarge. The longitudinal analysis demonstrated that patients in the high-pain group reported a greater degree of nausea on DOS and on each of the first 5 days postsurgery, controlling for differences in age, sex, education, use of antiemetics presurgery and postsurgery, use of acetaminophen postsurgery, daily morphine equivalent dose, and surgical procedure., Discussion: Younger patients and those receiving orthopedic procedures may be at greatest risk for postoperative pain. Patients with high pain reported a significantly greater degree of nausea on DOS through the first 5 days postdischarge. As the majority of surgeries are now conducted in the ambulatory setting, it is imperative that we determine pain management regimens and patient education practices that will allow for a more comfortable recovery for our patients.

Headache following dural puncture is a typical complication of neuraxial analgesia and can impair the ability to perform activities of daily living up to incapacitation. The use of thin, atraumatic needles and special puncture techniques (e.g. reinsertion of the stylet) can prevent the majority of post-dural puncture headaches (PDPH). One of the most effective measures to prevent headache after accidental dural puncture is the intrathecal or epidural administration of morphine. When the diagnosis of PDPH is confirmed after excluding relevant differential diagnoses, some of which are potentially life-threatening, caffeine, theophylline and non-opioid analgesics are effective agents to reduce the severity of the symptoms. Traditional measures, such as strict bed rest and hyperhydration can no longer be recommended. If invasive treatment of the headache is warranted an epidural blood patch is still the method of choice with a high rate of success.

Background: Thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban (R) is superior to enoxaparin in patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery (MOS). However, rivaroxaban has never been directly compared with fondaparinux (F), which also shows superior efficacy over enoxaparin. The clinical impact of switching from fondaparinux to rivaroxaban thromboprophylaxis is unclear., Objectives: To evaluate the efficacy and safety of rivaroxaban or fondaparinux thromboprophylaxis in unselected patients undergoing MOS., Patients/methods: This is a monocentric, retrospective cohort study in 5061 consecutive patients undergoing MOS at our centre, comparing rates of symptomatic VTE, bleeding and surgical complications, length of hospital stay and risk factors for VTE., Results: Rates of symptomatic VTE were 5.6% (F) and 2.1% (R; P < 0.001), with rates for distal DVT being 3.9 vs. 1.1% (P < 0.001). Rates of major VTE were numerically higher with fondaparinux (1.8 vs. 1.1%), but not statistically significant. Rates of severe bleeding (bleeding leading to surgical revision or death, occurring in a critical site, or transfusion of at least two units of packed red blood cells) were statistically lower with rivaroxaban compared with fondaparinux (2.9 vs. 4.9%; P = 0.010). The mean length of hospital stay was significantly shorter in the rivaroxaban group (8.3 days, 95% CI 8.1-8.5 vs. 9.3 days, 9.1-9.5; P < 0.001)., Conclusion: Based on an indirect comparison of two consecutive cohorts, our data suggest that thromboprophylaxis with rivaroxaban is associated with less VTE and bleeding events than fondaparinux in unselected patients undergoing MOS. Prospective comparisons are warranted to confirm our findings., (© 2012 International Society on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.)

Background: Two anaesthetic machines, the "Primus®" and the "Zeus®" (Draeger AG, Lübeck, Germany), were subjected to a cost analysis by evaluating the various expenses that go into using each machine., Methods: These expenses included the acquisition, maintenance, training and device-specific accessory costs. In addition, oxygen, medical air and volatile anaesthetic consumption were determined for each machine., Results: Anaesthesia duration was 278 ± 140 and 208 ± 112 minutes in the Primus® and the Zeus®, respectively. The purchase cost was €3.28 and €4.58 per hour of operation in the Primus® and the Zeus®, respectively. The maintenance cost was €0.90 and €1.20 per hour of operation in the Primus® and the Zeus®, respectively. We found that the O2 cost was €0.015 ± 0.013 and €0.056 ± 0.121 per hour of operation in the Primus® and the Zeus®, respectively. The medical air cost was €0.005 ± 0.003 and €0.016 ± 0.027 per hour of operation in the Primus® and the Zeus®, respectively. The volatile anaesthetic cost was €2.40 ± 2.40 and €4.80 ± 4.80 per hour of operation in the Primus® and the Zeus®, respectively., Conclusion: This study showed that the "Zeus®" generates a higher cost per hour of operation compared to the "Primus®".

A 22-year-old patient underwent surgery for a glass wound incision of the hand and anesthesia was carried out using an axillary brachial plexus block with prilocaine. Following surgery the patient developed methemoglobinemia which was treated with tolonium chloride. After administration of the drug the sinus rhythm changed into ventricular fibrillation. The current treatment options of methemoglobinemia will be discussed.

Objective: To systematically determine the most efficacious approach for preventing pain on injection of propofol., Design: Systematic review and meta-analysis., Data Sources: PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library, www.clinicaltrials.gov, and hand searching from the reference lists of identified papers., Study Selection: Randomised controlled trials comparing drug and non-drug interventions with placebo or another intervention to alleviate pain on injection of propofol in adults., Results: Data were analysed from 177 randomised controlled trials totalling 25,260 adults. The overall risk of pain from propofol injection alone was about 60%. Using an antecubital vein instead of a hand vein was the most effective single intervention (relative risk 0.14, 95% confidence interval 0.07 to 0.30). Pretreatment using lidocaine (lignocaine) in conjunction with venous occlusion was similarly effective (0.29, 0.22 to 0.38). Other effective interventions were a lidocaine-propofol admixture (0.40, 0.33 to 0.48); pretreatment with lidocaine (0.47, 0.40 to 0.56), opioids (0.49, 0.41 to 0.59), ketamine (0.52, 0.46 to 0.57), or non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (0.67, 0.49 to 0.91); and propofol emulsions containing medium and long chain triglycerides (0.75, 0.67 to 0.84). Statistical testing of indirect comparisons showed that use of the antecubital vein and pretreatment using lidocaine along with venous occlusion to be more efficacious than the other interventions., Conclusions: The two most efficacious interventions to reduce pain on injection of propofol were use of the antecubital vein, or pretreatment using lidocaine in conjunction with venous occlusion when the hand vein was chosen. Under the assumption of independent efficacy a third practical alternative could be pretreatment of the hand vein with lidocaine or ketamine and use of a propofol emulsion containing medium and long chain triglycerides. Although not the most effective intervention on its own, a small dose of opioids before induction halved the risk of pain from the injection and thus can generally be recommended unless contraindicated.

No clear consensus exists on how to best prevent severe headache from occurring after accidental dural puncture. We conducted a quantitative systematic review to identify all available evidence for the prevention of postdural puncture headache (PDPH) and included 17 studies with 1264 patients investigating prophylactic epidural blood patch (PEBP), epidural morphine, intrathecal catheters, and epidural or intrathecal saline. The relative risk (RR) for headache after PEBP was 0.48 [95% confidence interval (CI): 0.23-0.99] in five non-randomized controlled trials (non-RCTs) and 0.32 (0.10-1.03) in four randomized controlled trials (RCTs). The RR for epidural morphine (based on a single RCT) was 0.25 (0.08-0.78). All other interventions were based on non-RCTs and failed statistical significance, including long-term intrathecal catheters with an RR of 0.21 (0.02-2.65). There are a number of promising options to prevent PDPH, yet heterogeneity between the studies and publication bias towards small non-RCTs with positive results limits the available evidence. Thus, a large multicentre RCT is needed to determine the best preventative practices.

Ondansetron is widely believed to prevent postoperative vomiting more effectively than nausea. We analysed data from 5161 patients undergoing general anaesthesia who were randomly stratified to receive a combination of six interventions, one of which was 4 mg ondansetron vs placebo. For the purpose of this study a 20% difference in the relative risks for the two outcomes was considered clinically relevant. Nausea was reduced from 38% (969/2585) in the control to 28% (715/2576) in the ondansetron group, corresponding to a relative risk of 0.74, or a relative risk reduction of 26%. Vomiting was reduced from 17% (441/2585) to 11% (293/2576), corresponding to a relative risk of 0.67, or a relative risk reduction of 33%. The relative risks of 0.67 and 0.74 were clinically similar and the difference between them did not reach statistical significance. We thus conclude that ondansetron prevents postoperative nausea and postoperative vomiting equally well.

We performed a quantitative systematic review of randomised, controlled trials that compared remifentanil to short-acting opioids (fentanyl, alfentanil, or sufentanil) for general anaesthesia. Eighty-five trials were identified and these included a total of 13 057 patients. Intra-operatively, remifentanil was associated with clinical signs of deeper analgesia and anaesthesia, such as fewer responses to noxious stimuli (relative risk 0.65, 95% CI 0.48-0.87), more frequent episodes of bradycardia (1.46, 1.04-2.05), more hypotension (1.68, 1.36-2.07) and less hypertension (0.60, 0.46-0.78). Postoperatively, remifentanil was associated with faster recovery (difference in extubation time of -2.03, 9.5% CI, -2.92 to -1.14 min), more frequent postoperative analgesic requirements (1.36, 1.21-1.53) and fewer respiratory events requiring naloxone (0.25, 0.14-0.47). Remifentanil had no overall impact on postoperative nausea (1.03, 0.97-1.09) or vomiting (1.06, 0.96-1.17), but was associated with twice as much shivering (2.15, 1.73-2.69). Remifentanil does not seem to offer any advantage for lengthy, major interventions, but may be useful for selected patients, e.g. when postoperative respiratory depression is a concern.

In emergency medicine accidental hypothermia in non-traumatized patients is a rare situation. To emphasize the need for a precise preclinical temperature measurement, two cases of accidental hypothermia (28.2 degrees C and 29.3 degrees C core temperature) are presented which occurred under conditions that did not give a direct suspicion of hypothermia. In one case the immediate diagnosis lead to complete convalescence, the other patient died of multiple organ failure. The primary diagnosis, diagnostic methods and therapy as well as the primary treatment are discussed.

We present a case of severe accidental hypothermia (core temperature 22 degrees C) after a suicide attempt. The initial symptoms and the pre-hospital and hospital treatment are discussed. Additionally, different rewarming strategies for patients with severe accidental hypothermia are compared.

Background and Objective: The transcerebral double-indicator dilution technique is a recently developed method to measure global cerebral blood flow at bedside. It is based on bolus injection of ice-cold indocyanine green dye and simultaneous recording of resulting thermo- and dye-dilution curves in the aorta and the jugular bulb. However, with this method 40 mL of ice-cold solution is administered as a bolus. Therefore, this prospective clinical study was performed to elucidate the effects of repeated administration of indicator on absolute blood temperature and on cerebral blood flow and metabolism., Methods: The investigation was performed in nine male patients scheduled for elective coronary artery bypass grafting. Absolute blood temperature was measured in the jugular bulb and in the aorta before and after repeated measurements using the transcerebral double-indicator dilution technique., Results: During the investigated time course, the blood temperature in the jugular bulb, compared to the aorta, was significantly higher with a mean difference of 0.21 degrees C. The administration of an ice-cold bolus reduced the mean blood temperature by 0.06 degrees C in the jugular bulb as well as in the aorta. After the transcerebral double-indicator dilution measurements a temperature recovery to baseline conditions was not observed during the investigated time period. Cerebral blood flow and cerebral metabolism did not change during the investigated time period., Conclusions: Repeated measurements with the transcerebral double-indicator dilution technique do not affect absolute jugular bulb blood temperatures negatively. Global cerebral blood flow and metabolism measurements remain unaltered. However, accuracy and resolution of this technique is not high enough to detect the effect of minor changes of physiological variables.

Remifentanil may be an alternative to conventional opioids for minimally invasive direct coronary artery bypass surgery because of its extremely short duration of action. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of remifentanil on myocardial blood flow, metabolism and systemic haemodynamic variables in patients with coronary artery disease. After approval by the local ethics committee, 12 male patients were investigated before elective coronary artery bypass grafting. Systemic haemodynamic variables, myocardial blood flow and metabolism were measured when patients were awake and when they were anaesthetized with high-dose remifentanil (2.0 micrograms kg-1 min-1), or with remifentanil 0.5 microgram kg-1 min-1 combined with propofol (target-controlled infusion aiming at a plasma concentration of 2.0 micrograms ml-1). Myocardial blood flow was measured using a modified Kety-Schmidt technique. High-dose remifentanil anaesthesia significantly reduced cardiac index (CI) (-25%) as a consequence of a decrease in stroke volume index (SVI) (-14%) and heart rate (-13%). Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was 30% lower than that in the awake patient. Myocardial blood flow and myocardial oxygen uptake (MVO2) decreased by 30% and 42%, respectively. In contrast to high-dose remifentanil anaesthesia, systemic vascular resistance index (-14%) during remifentanil/propofol anaesthesia was significantly lower than that in the awake patient. Other haemodynamic variables, and myocardial blood flow and MVO2, did not significantly differ from the high-dose remifentanil period. In conclusion, high-dose remifentanil reduces SVI, heart rate, MAP, myocardial blood flow and MVO2 and its effects do not differ from those of remifentanil/propofol anaesthesia.