Submitted:
05 May 2024
Posted:
06 May 2024
You are already at the latest version
Abstract
Keywords:
1. Introduction
| Annual Birth Rate | Cesarean Section | Regional Anesthesia | Intubation |
|---|---|---|---|
| 40 896 | 8795 (21.5%) | 8634 (98.1%) (peridural) | 161 (1.9 %) |
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. Study Group
2.2. Technique of Spinal Anesthesia
2.3. Special Technique of Laparoscopic Surgery under Spinal Anesthesia
2.4. Describing as a Statistical Model
3. Results
- (1)
- No pain – 0;
- (2)
- Weak - up to 40%;
- (3)
- Moderate - 40–70%;
- (4)
- Severe - more than 70%;
- (5)
- Unbearable - 100%. [34,35].
| Group-1 No pain –n-847 | Group 2 Little\Middle Pain n-68 | P Value* | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Age of operation –years | 29.3±6.49 | 30.2±6.29 | 0.2571 a |
| 2 | Body mass index – kg\m2 | 24.1±3.72 | 25.4±5.12 | 0.07664 a |
| 3 | Obesity BMI ˃30 | 63 7,44% | 13 19,12% | 0.003 b |
| 4 | COMORBID DISEASES | |||
| 5 | Anemia | 713-84% | 60 88% | 0.6093 b |
| 6 | Adhesions | 18 2.1% | 6 8.8% | 0.0062 b |
| 7 | Hepatitis B | 11 2.2% | 2 2.9% | 0.2508 b |
| 8 | Hepatitis C | 19 2.2 % | 3 4.4% | 0.2204 b |
| 9 | Parity | 440 52% | 32 47 % | 0.3726 b |
| First group | Second group | p-value | |||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| n=847 | P (%) | m (±) | n=68 | P (%) | m (±) | ||||
| 1 | Abdominal status | I | 4 | 0,47 | 0,236 | 3 | 4,41 | 2,49 | |
| II | 241 | 28,45 | 1,55 | 7 | 10,29 | 3,69 | |||
| III | 578 | 68,24 | 1,60 | 55 | 80,88 | 4,77 | |||
| IV | 24 | 2,83 | 0,57 | 3 | 4,41 | 2,49 | p<0,001 | ||
| 2 | Lengths of operation | >30 | 99 | 11,6 | 1,10 | 4 | 5,88 | 2,85 | |
| 31-60 | 648 | 76,51 | 1,46 | 38 | 55,88 | 6,02 | |||
| < 60 | 100 | 11,81 | 1,11 | 26 | 38,24 | 5,89 | p<0,001 | ||
| 3 | Bleeding | 0-50 | 801 | 94,57 | 0,78 | 61 | 89,71 | 3,69 | |
| ˃ 50 | 46 | 5,43 | 0,78 | 7 | 10,29 | 3,69 | p<0,001 | ||
| 4 | BMI | >25 | 531 | 62,69 | 1,66 | 35 | 51,47 | 6,06 | |
| 25-30 | 253 | 29,87 | 1,57 | 20 | 29,41 | 5,53 | |||
| ˃30 | 63 | 7,44 | 0,90 | 13 | 19,12 | 4,77 | p=0.003 | ||
| 5 | Hg | 0-4 | 150 | 17,71 | 1,31 | 4 | 5,88 | 2,85 | |
| 5-8 | 697 | 82,29 | 1,31 | 64 | 94,12 | 2,85 | p=0.013 | ||
- -
- the use of intravenous infusion solutions in the amount of 1 liter,
- -
- 8 mg of Dexamethasone solution,
- -
- thereafter use of subcutaneous application of a solution of caffeine sodium benzoate 200 mg-1 ml every 8 hours.
- -
- oral administration of Paracetamol tablets 500 mg every 8 hours.
3. Discussion:
4. Conclusions and Recommendations
| 1 | Thanks to a special technique of spinal anesthesia (puncture of the spinal space at the L2-L4 level, immediate transfer of the patient to the Trendelenburg position, to ensure anesthesia to the Th10-11 level) and a low intra-abdominal pressure (below 8 mm Hg), a decrease in the frequency of intra-and postoperative pain could be observed. |
| 2 | The patient is conscious during the entire operation. This allows the patient to see their organs on the screen, observe the progress of the operation, ask the surgeon questions of interest to her or answer the questions of medical personnel, and also actively participate in decision-making. |
| 3 | A good view for the surgeon is provided by strengthening the Trendelenburg position (30-45 degrees, which is ensured by the use of advanced spinal anesthesia techniques) and choosing the region of insertion of small trocars lower in the abdomen (not higher than umbilicus). |
| 4 | Using the Trendelenburg position - by mobilizing the intestines towards the diaphragm, it is possible to work in the small pelvis with low intra-abdominal insufflation, which in turn reduces postoperative pain, hyperbaria, PE, diaphragm irritation and feeling of lack of air. |
| 5 | Informing patients which kind of diet to use few days before operations in order to diminish secretion and accumulation of liquid in the stomach and thereby diminishing nausea and the risk of vomitus during surgery |
| 6 | Using anti-emetic and psychotropic treatment with new compounds of drug to diminish pain, nausea and vomitus during surgery |
Author Contributions
Funding
Institutional Review Board Statement
Informed Consent Statement
Data Availability Statement
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- Jumaniyazov, K. Spinal Anesthesia in Laparoscopic Surgeries. In Proceedings of the International Conference on “Laparoscopic Surgery Using Spinal Anesthesia in Gynecology during COVID-19 Period” Urgench branch of Tashkent Medical Academy, Urgench, Uzbekistan, 3 June 2021. [Google Scholar]
- Spielman, F.J.; Corke, B.C. Advantages and disadvantages of regional anesthesia for cesarean section. A review.. 1985, 30, 832–40. [Google Scholar]
- Guglielminotti, J.; Landau, R.; Li, G. Adverse Events and Factors Associated with Potentially Avoidable Use of General Anesthesia in Cesarean Deliveries. Anesthesiology 2019, 130, 912–922. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Riley, E.T. Regional anesthesia for cesarean section. Tech. Reg. Anesthesia Pain Manag. 2003, 7, 204–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Major, A.L.; Jumaniyazov, K.; Yusupova, S.; Jabbarov, R.; Saidmamatov, O.; Mayboroda-Major, I. Laparoscopy in Gynecologic and Abdominal Surgery in Regional (Spinal, Peridural) Anesthesia, the Utility of the Technique during COVID-19 Pandemic. Medicines 2021, 8, 60. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Shahriari, A.; Khooshideh, M.; Heidari, R.; Haddady Abianeh, S.; Sheikh, M.; Ghazizadeh, S.; Rahmati, J. The Effect of Trendelenburg Posture on Sensory Block Level in Spinal Anesthesia with Intrathecal Hyperbaric Bupivacaine for Hernia Repair. Arch. Anesth. Crit. Care 2015, 1, 55–58. [Google Scholar]
- Sinha, R.; Gurwara, A.K.; Gupta, S.C. Laparoscopic Surgery Using Spinal Anesthesia. JSLS J. Soc. Laparoendosc. Surg. 2008, 12, 133–138. [Google Scholar]
- Imbelloni, L.E.; Sant'Anna, R.; Fornasari, M.; Fialho, J.C. Laparoscopic cholecystectomy under spinal anesthesia: comparative study between conventional-dose and low-dose hyperbaric bupivacaine. Local Reg. Anesthesia 2011, 4, 41–46. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Power, I.; McCormack, J.G.; Myles, P.S. Regional anaesthesia and pain management. Anaesthesia 2010, 65, 38–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Wagner, E.; Chandler, J.N.; Mihalov, L.S. Minimizing Trendelenburg Position for Laparoscopic Gynecologic Surgery [6L]. Obstetrics & Gynecology 2019, 133, 130S–130S. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Albrecht, E.; Chin, K.J. Advances in regional anaesthesia and acute pain management: a narrative review. Anaesthesia 2020, 75, E101–E110. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kessler, J.; Marhofer, P.; Hopkins, P.; Hollmann, M. Peripheral regional anaesthesia and outcome: lessons learned from the last 10 years. Br. J. Anaesth. 2015, 114, 728–745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Gerges, F.J.; Kanazi, G.E.; Jabbour-Khoury, S.I. Anesthesia for laparoscopy: a review. J. Clin. Anesthesia 2006, 18, 67–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Turkstani, A.; Ibraheim, O.; Khairy, G.; Alseif, A.; Khalil, N. Spinal versus general anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A comparative study of cost effectiveness and side effects. Anaesth Pain Intensive Care 2009, 13, 9–14. [Google Scholar]
- Gonzalez R, Smith CD, McClusky DA 3rd, Ramaswamy A, Branum GD, Hunter JG, Weber CJ. 2004. Laparoscopic approach reduces likelihood of perioperative complications in patients undergoing adrenalectomy. Am Surg, 70(8): 668-74. [PubMed]
- Brown, E.N.; Pavone, K.J.; Naranjo, M. Multimodal General Anesthesia: Theory and Practice. Obstet. Anesthesia Dig. 2018, 127, 1246–1258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Raimondo, D.; Borghese, G.; Mastronardi, M.; Mabrouk, M.; Salucci, P.; Lambertini, A.; Casadio, P.; Tonini, C.; Meriggiola, M.C.; Arena, A.; et al. Laparoscopic surgery for benign adnexal conditions under spinal anaesthesia: Towards a multidisciplinary minimally invasive approach. J. Gynecol. Obstet. Hum. Reprod. 2020, 49, 101813–101813. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Major, A.L.; Jumaniyazov, K.; Yusupova, S.; Jabbarov, R.; Saidmamatov, O.; Mayboroda-Major, I. Removal of a Giant Cyst of the Left Ovary from a Pregnant Woman in the First Trimester by Laparoscopic Surgery under Spinal Anesthesia during the COVID-19 Pandemic. Med Sci. 2021, 9, 70. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McCullagh, P and Nelder, J.A (1983). Generalized Linear Models. Chapman and Hall, New York.
- Rutherford, A. (2001). Introducing ANOVA and ANCOVA: A GLM Approach. Sage Publishing, London.
- Hilbe, J.M. Practical Guide to Logistic Regression; CRC Press: London, United Kingdom, 2016. [Google Scholar]
- Power, I.; McCormack, J.G.; Myles, P.S. Regional anaesthesia and pain management. Anaesthesia 2010, 65, 38–47. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Asgari, Z.; Rezaeinejad, M.; Hosseini, R.; Nataj, M.; Razavi, M.; Sepidarkish, M. Spinal Anesthesia and Spinal Anesthesia with Subdiaphragmatic Lidocaine in Shoulder Pain Reduction for Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgery: A Randomized Clinical Trial. Pain Res. Manag. 2017, 2017, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Kaufman, Y.; Hirsch, I.; Ostrovsky, L.; Klein, O.; Shnaider, I.; Khoury, E.; Pizov, R.; Lissak, A. Pain Relief by Continuous Intraperitoneal Nebulization of Ropivacaine during Gynecologic Laparoscopic Surgery–A Randomized Study and Review of the Literature. J. Minim. Invasive Gynecol. 2008, 15, 554–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Scheib SA, Tanner E 3rd, Green IC, Fader AN. Laparoscopy in the morbidly obese: physiologic considerations and surgical techniques to optimize success. J Minim Invasive Gynecol. 2014 Mar-Apr;21(2):182-95.
- Jiang, Y.; Wu, Y.; Lu, S.; Que, Y.; Chi, Y.; Liu, Q. Patients with low body mass index are more likely to develop shoulder pain after laparoscopy. Acta Obstet. et Gynecol. Scand. 2023, 102, 99–104. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Veronica, T. Lerner, MD, Grover May, MD, and Cheryl B. Iglesia, MD Vaginal Natural Orifice Transluminal Endoscopic Surgery Revolution: The Next Frontier in Gynecologic Minimally Invasive Surgery. JSLS, 2023 Jan-Mar;27(1).
- Donatiello, V.; Alfieri, A.; Napolitano, A.; Maffei, V.; Coppolino, F.; Pota, V.; Passavanti, M.B.; Pace, M.C.; Sansone, P. Opioid sparing effect of intravenous dexmedetomidine in orthopaedic surgery: a retrospective analysis. J. Anesthesia, Analg. Crit. Care 2022, 2, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Bao, N.; Shi, K.; Wu, Y.; He, Y.; Chen, Z.; Gao, Y.; Xia, Y.; Papadimos, T.J.; Wang, Q.; Zhou, R. Dexmedetomidine prolongs the duration of local anesthetics when used as an adjuvant through both perineural and systemic mechanisms: a prospective randomized double-blinded trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2022, 22, 176. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Stabile, M.; Lacitignola, L.; Acquafredda, C.; Scardia, A.; Crovace, A.; Staffieri, F. Evaluation of a constant rate intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine on the duration of a femoral and sciatic nerve block using lidocaine in dogs. Front. Veter- Sci. 2023, 9, 1061605. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
| CO2 | OR (Obese v Nonobese) | OR (Healthy Weight v Underweight) |
|---|---|---|
| 4 | 0.097881276 | 2.161062502 |
| 5 | 0.195538107 | 1.349858808 |
| 6 | 0.390627835 | 0.84315877 |
| 7 | 0.780359943 | 0.526660053 |
| 8 | 1.558930486 | 0.328966289 |
| 9 | 3.114286273 | 0.205481351 |
| 10 | 6.221431345 | 0.128349278 |
| Intraoperative Side Effects | Number of Patients Symptoms from 915 | % | |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | Pain | 22 | 2% |
| 2 | Nausea | 48 | 5,2% |
| 3 | Nausea and vomitus | 13 | 1,4% |
| 4 | Pain nausea and vomitus | 11 | 1,2% |
Disclaimer/Publisher’s Note: The statements, opinions and data contained in all publications are solely those of the individual author(s) and contributor(s) and not of MDPI and/or the editor(s). MDPI and/or the editor(s) disclaim responsibility for any injury to people or property resulting from any ideas, methods, instructions or products referred to in the content. |
© 2024 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).