|
|
|
 |
Search published articles |
 |
|
Showing 2 results for Laparoscopic Cholecystectomy
Hasan Talebzadeh-Farooji , Abdolhosein Davoodabadi, Esmaeil Abdolrahim-Kashi, Mojtaba Sehat, Mohammad Eydi ,
Volume 16, Issue 6 (1-2013)
Abstract
Background: Although laparoscopic cholecystectomy is the preferred method for cholecystectomy, performing routine drainage after laparoscopic cholecystectomy is an issue of considerable debate. Therefore, the present study aimed to evaluate the effect of using a drain on complications following an uncomplicated laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Materials and Methods: In this study, 86 patients with biliary colic were candidates for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The patients were randomly divided into two (the intervention and control) groups. In the intervention group, a drain was placed postoperatively, but the control group did not receive any intervention. The amount of fluid collection, length of hospital stay, recovery rate and the visual analog scale (VAS) for pain were recorded in all patients. Results: Mean age of patients was 46.33±12.53 and 45.88±10.66 years in the drain and non-drain groups. The drain group was hospitalized 0.76 days more than the non-drain group (P=0.001). Complications were seen in the drain (7%) and non-drain (4.7%) groups. VAS was significantly higher in the drain group than the non-drain group (P=0.001). Conclusion: Drainage does not have a positive effect on the postoperative abdominal secretions, recovery and the probable complications. Moreover, it can cause a significant increase in both length of hospital stay and pain score.
Mehdi Rajabi, Mehrdad Mahdian, Hossin Akbari, Emad Khan Ahmad,
Volume 27, Issue 1 (3-2023)
Abstract
Background: Evolution of laparoscopic surgery has been enormous help to both patient and surgeon, although incidence of pneumoperitoneum as consequence of laparoscopic surgery would cause hemodynamic instability. In this study, effect of dexmedetomidine and magnesium sulfate on hemodynamic status during laparoscopic cholecystectomy has been assessed.
Materials and Methods: This study was a double-blind randomized clinical trial that was conducted on 61 patients. Patients were randomly assigned to 3 groups. Control group (C) saline infusion, dexmedetomidine group (D) 1 μg/kg and then 0.5 μg/kg/h of dexmedetomidine and magnesium sulfate group (M) 2 g and then 0.9 mg/kg/h of magnesium sulfate they received. Heart rate, systolic and diastolic blood pressure and mean arterial pressure were recorded at different times before and after taking the drug. Independent T-test, ANOVA, and chi-square were used for univariate analysis and ANOVA with repeated measures for multivariate analysis.
Results: The distribution of patients in terms of demographic factors and surgery were the same in the three groups of the study (P<0.05). The lowest values of systolic, diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure in all three groups were seen at the time of the induction. No statistically significant difference was seen in most of the measurement times between the three intervention groups. Analysis of variance with repeated measurement did not show the interaction effect of time and group on blood pressure (P<0.05), but the effect of treatment groups on heart rate was significant (P=0.018).
Conclusion: Dexmedetomidine infusion was generally not effective on the patient's blood pressure changes, but it was significantly more effective on heart rate changes than magnesium sulfate and the control group in almost the entire measurement process. Therefore, in terms of the heart rates, in the dexmethomidine group, the patients experienced more stable conditions.
|
|
_-_Copy.png)
.png){kind=logo}
