METHODS: An electronic search was performed via PubMed, SCOPUS, Google Scholar, and Cochrane from inception to June 2022. The included trials were evaluated according to the recommendations of the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews. The primary outcome assessed was the intraoperative bleeding score of the surgical field. The mean arterial pressure, duration of the surgery, amount of blood loss and surgeon's satisfaction score were assessed as the secondary outcomes. The risk of bias for each study was evaluated using the Cochrane risk of bias tool.
RESULTS: A total of 254 records were identified after removal of duplicates. Based on the title and abstract 246 records were excluded, leaving seven full texts for further consideration. Five records were excluded following full text assessment. Three trials with a total of 212 patients were selected. Hot saline irrigation was superior to control in the intraoperative bleeding score (MD - 0.51, 95% CI - 0.84 to - 0.18; P < 0.001; I2 = 72%; very low quality of evidence) and surgeon's satisfaction score (RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.09 to 0.33; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%; low quality of evidence). The duration of surgery was lengthier in control when compared to HSI (MD - 9.02, 95% CI - 11.76 to - 6.28; P < 0.001; I2 = 0; very low quality of evidence). The volume of blood loss was greater in control than HSI (MD - 56.4, 95% CI - 57.30 to - 55.51; P < 0.001; I2 = 0%; low quality of evidence). No significant difference between the two groups for the mean arterial pressure was noted (MD - 0.60, 95% CI - 2.17 to 0.97; P = 0.45; I2 = 0%; low quality of evidence).
CONCLUSIONS: The practice of intranasal HSI during ESS is favorable in controlling intraoperative bleeding and improving the surgical field quality. It increases the surgeon's satisfaction, reduces blood loss, shortens operative time and has no effect on intraoperative hemodynamic instability.
TRIAL REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019117083.
OBJECTIVE: We report end-of-trial efficacy and safety of N8-GP from pathfinder2.
METHODS: pathfinder2 main phase and extension phase part 1 results have been previously reported. During extension phase part 2, patients could switch from N8-GP prophylaxis 50 IU/kg every fourth day (Q4D) or 75 IU/kg once weekly (Q7D), depending on bleeding status. Extension phase part 2 collected long-term safety and efficacy data for all regimens until trial end (first patient in main phase, 30 January 2012; trial end, 10 December 2018).
RESULTS: Overall, 186 patients were exposed to N8-GP for up to 6.6 years (median 5.4 years). The estimated annualized bleeding rate (ABR) was 2.14 (median 0.84) for the Q4D prophylaxis arm and 1.31 (median 1.67) for the Q7D prophylaxis arm. Nearly 30% of patients experienced zero bleeds throughout the entire duration of the trial, the hemostatic response was 83.2% across all treatment arms, and patient-reported outcomes were maintained or slightly improved. No safety concerns were detected.
CONCLUSION: Data from the completed pathfinder2 trial, one of the largest and longest-running clinical trials to investigate treatment of severe hemophilia A, demonstrate the efficacy and safety of N8-GP in previously treated adolescent and adult patients.
MATERIALS AND METHODS: Male patients, ≤65 years old with severe haemophilia B (FIX activity ≤2%) requiring non-emergency surgery were enrolled in the surgical substudy of PROLONG-9FP. Dosing was based on World Federation of Hemophilia guidelines and patients' pharmacokinetics. Haemostatic efficacy was assessed on a 4-point scale. rIX-FP consumption and safety were monitored throughout the perioperative period.
RESULTS: This updated dataset reports on thirty (8 minor and 22 major) surgeries conducted in 21 patients. A single preoperative bolus was used in 96.7% (n = 29) of surgeries. After minor surgery, patients received a median (range) of 0 (0-3) infusions with a median (range) consumption of 0 (0-178.89) IU/kg in the 14-day postoperative period. In patients who underwent major surgery (including 15 patients undergoing joint replacement surgery), the median (range) number of infusions in the 14-day postoperative period was 5 (0-11) and median consumption was 221.7 (0-444.07) IU/kg. Haemostatic efficacy was rated as excellent or good in 87.5% (7/8) of minor surgeries and 95.5% (21/22) of major surgeries.
CONCLUSION: Surgical procedures can be performed using a single preoperative bolus of rIX-FP in nearly all patients. During postoperative care, use of rIX-FP necessitated infrequent infusions and low FIX consumption. Overall, data suggest rIX-FP simplifies perioperative care in patients with haemophilia B.
Result: All four patients revealed a good esthetic outcome and reported no pain postoperatively. Healing was uneventful, and definitive restoration was delivered within two to four weeks postoperatively.
Conclusion: Within the limitation of these case series, the dual-wavelength super pulsed diode laser has the capacity to deliver peak powers resulting in efficient cutting and less tissue charring and also as an alternative tool for removal of gingival pigmentation. Prospective clinical research with larger sample size is needed for conclusive results.
Case Report: We report a rare case of nasal angiomyolipoma in a young male. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first documented case of angiomyolipoma originating from the posterior end of the inferior turbinate, clinically mimicking juvenile nasopharyngeal angiofibroma (JNA). The tumor was removed completely via coblator-assisted endoscopic sinus surgery. The patient was asymptomatic at a 2-year follow-up.
Conclusion: Nasal AML located in the posterior nasal cavity in a male patient can mimic the presentation of JNA. A computed tomography scan of the paranasal sinuses played an important role in differentiating nasal AML from JNA. The coblator-assisted endoscopic technique is useful in controlling intraoperative hemostasis in the removal of a suspicious vascular tumor.
METHODS:: Eighty-six patients scheduled for trigger finger release between July 2016 and December 2017 were randomized into a control group (1% lignocaine and 8.4% sodium bicarbonate with arm tourniquet; given 10 min prior to procedure) and an intervention group (1% lignocaine, 1:100,000 of adrenaline and 8.4% sodium bicarbonate; given 30 min prior to procedure), with a total of 4 ml of solution injected around the A1 pulley. The onset of anesthesia and pain score upon injection of the first 1 ml were recorded. After the procedure, the surgeon rated for the hemostasis score (1-10: 1 as no bleeding and 10 being profuse bleeding). Duration of surgery and return of sensation were recorded.
RESULTS:: Hemostasis score was grouped into visibility score as 1-3: good, 4-6: moderate, and 7-10: poor. The intervention group (with adrenaline) had a 74% of good surgical field visibility compared to 44% from the controlled group (without adrenaline; p < 0.05). Duration of anesthesia was longer in the intervention group (with adrenaline), with a 2.77-h difference.
CONCLUSION:: WALANT provides excellent surgical field visibility and is safe and on par with conventional methods but without the usage of a tourniquet and its associated discomfort.
Methods: A prospective observational study including 223 patients receiving the branded medicine Exjade® and 101 patients receiving the copy Osveral® was carried out. Data were assessed for a 1-year period and included clinical symptoms, serum ferritin (SF), serum creatinine (SC), and alanine aminotransferase (ALT). Data were analyzed with SPSS version 22 software (SPSS, Chicago, IL, USA).
Results: The median age of the sample was 8 years. There was no significant difference in gender distribution between the two groups (p = 0.625). Nausea was the most frequently reported adverse effect followed by diarrhea and abdominal pain in both groups. Patients receiving Exjade® had a higher relative reduction of SF at the end of the study compared with the Osveral® group (19.9% versus 9.93%, p = 0.028). SC was found to be significantly higher in the Osveral® group than in the Exjade® group throughout the study period. The mean platelet count was higher in the Exjade® group. ALT was significantly higher among patients receiving Osveral® over the last three months of the study.
Conclusions: Exjade® showed a better ability to reduce SF, with less liver toxicity, and better hemostasis profile. No congenital anomalies associated with short-term use of both drugs during pregnancy were observed or reported.
Methods: Cirrhotic patients with suspected EVB were screened (n = 352). Eligible patients were assigned based on the physician's preference to either somatostatin (group S) or terlipressin (group T) followed by EVL. In group S, intravenous bolus (250 µg) of somatostatin followed by 250 µg/hour was continued for three days. In group T, 2 mg bolus injection of terlipressin was followed by 1 mg infusion every 6 h for three days.
Results: A total of 150 patients were enrolled; 41 in group S and 109 in group T. Reasons for physician preference was convenience in administration (77.1%) for group T and good safety profile (73.2%) for group S. Very early rebleeding within 49-120 h occurred in one patient in groups S and T (p = 0.469). Four patients in group S and 14 patients in group T have variceal rebleeding episodes within 6-42 d (p = 0.781). Overall treatment-related adverse effects were compatible in groups S and T (p = 0.878), but the total cost of terlipressin and somatostatin differed i.e., USD 621.32 and USD 496.43 respectively.
Conclusions: Terlipressin is the preferred vasoactive agent by physicians in our institution for acute EVB. Convenience in administration and safety profile are main considerations of physicians. Safety and hemostatic effects did not differ significantly between short-course somatostatin or terlipressin, although terlipressin is more expensive.
Methods: This multicentre randomised controlled trial included 244 patients, of whom 86 were treated with chitosan derivative film and 84 with hydrocolloid. The percentage of epithelisation, as well as patient comfort, clinical signs, and patient convenience in application and removal of the dressings were assessed.
Results: The primary outcome of this study was the percentage of epithelisation. Except for race (p = 0.04), there were no significant differences between groups in sex, age, antibiotic usage, or initial wound size (p > 0.05). There was no significant difference in the mean epithelisation percentage between groups (p = 0.29). Patients using chitosan derivative film experienced more pain during removal of dressing than those in the hydrocolloid group (p = 0.007). The chitosan derivative film group showed less exudate (p = 0.036) and less odour (p = 0.024) than the control group. Furthermore, there were no significant differences between groups in terms of adherence, ease of removal, wound drainage, erythema, itchiness, pain, and tenderness. No oedema or localised warmth was observed during the study.
Conclusion: This study concluded that chitosan derivative film is equivalent to hydrocolloid dressing and can be an option in the management of superficial and abrasion wounds.
Clinical trial No: NMRR-11-948-10565.