Ahmed Hasanin

OBJECTIVE: Bleeding is a leading cause of death among trauma patients. Delayed assessment of blood hemoglobin level might result in either unnecessary blood transfusion in nonindicated patients or delayed blood transfusion in critically bleeding patients. In this study, we evaluate the precision of noninvasive hemoglobin monitoring in trauma patients with low hemoglobin levels.

METHODS: We included trauma patients with low hemoglobin levels (less than 8 g/dL) scheduled for surgical intervention. Blood samples were obtained on admission and after each blood unit with concomitant measurement of serum hemoglobin using radical-7 Masimo device. The change in blood hemoglobin after every transfused blood unit was also assessed by both methods (change in noninvasive Masimo hemoglobin [Delta-Sp-Hb] and change in laboratory hemoglobin [Delta-Lab-Hb]). The precision of Masimo hemoglobin level (Sp-Hb) compared with Laboratory hemoglobin level (Lab-Hb) was determined using both Bland-Altman and Pearson correlation analyses.

RESULTS: One hundred eighty-four time-matched samples were available for final analysis. Bland-Altman analysis showed excellent accuracy of Sp-Hb compared with Lab-Hb with mean bias of 0.12 g/dL and limits of agreement between -0.56 g/dL and 0.79 g/dL. Excellent correlation was reported between both measures with Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.872. Excellent agreement was also reported between both Delta-Sp-Hb and Delta-Lab-Hb with mean bias of -0.05 and limits of agreement from -0.62 to 0.51 CONCLUSIONS:: Sp-Hb showed accurate precision in both absolute values and trend values compared with Lab-Hb measurement in trauma patients with low hemoglobin levels.

BACKGROUND: Endotracheal intubation requires optimum position of the head and neck. In obese females, the usual ramped position might not provide adequate intubating conditions. We hypothesized that a new position, termed modified-ramped position, during induction of anesthesia would facilitate endotracheal intubation through bringing the breasts away from the laryngoscope and would also improve the laryngeal visualization.

METHODS: Sixty obese female patients scheduled for general anesthesia were randomly assigned into either ramped or modified-ramped position during induction of anesthesia. In the ramped position (n = 30), the patient head and shoulders were elevated to achieve alignment of the sternal notch and the external auditory meatus; while in the modified-ramped position (n = 30), the patient shoulders were elevated using a special pillow, and the head was extended to the most possible range. Our primary outcome was the incidence of failed laryngoscopic insertion in the oral cavity (the need for patient repositioning). Other outcomes included time till vocal cord visualization, time till successful endotracheal intubation, difficulty of the mask ventilation, and Cormack-Lehane grade for laryngeal view.

RESULTS: Fourteen patients (47%) in ramped group required repositioning to facilitate introduction of the laryngoscope in the oral cavity in comparison to one patient (3%) in the modified-ramped position (p < 0.001). Modified-ramped position showed lower incidence of difficult mask ventilation, shorter time for glottic visualization, and shorter time for endotracheal tube insertion compared to the ramped position. The Cormack-Lehane grade was better in the modified-ramped position.

CONCLUSION: Modified-ramped position provided better intubating conditions, improved the laryngeal view, and eliminated the need for repositioning of obese female patients during insertion of the laryngoscope compared to ramped position.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: Identifier: NCT03640442. Date: August 2018.

BACKGROUND: Patients with septic shock commonly require endotracheal intubation under general anaesthesia in the operating theatre, the emergency department, and the intensive care unit. Hypotension is a serious complication after induction of general anaesthesia, especially in patients with circulatory failure. No randomised controlled trials had previously investigated protocols for induction of anaesthesia in septic shock patients. The aim of the current work is to compare two protocols, lidocaine-ketamine combination versus ketamine full-dose for rapid-sequence endotracheal intubation in patients with septic shock.

METHODS: Forty-four adult patients, with septic shock, scheduled for emergency surgical intervention were enrolled in this randomised, double-blinded, controlled study. Patients were randomised to receive either 1 mg/kg ketamine (ketamine group, n = 22) or 0.5 mg/kg ketamine plus 1 mg/kg lidocaine (ketamine-lidocaine group, n = 22) for induction of anaesthesia in addition to 0.05 mg/kg midazolam (in both groups). Our primary outcome was the mean arterial pressure (MAP). Other outcomes included frequency of post-induction hypotension, heart rate, and cardiac output.

RESULTS: Forty-three patients were available for final analysis. The average MAP reading in the first 5 min post-induction was higher in ketamine-lidocaine group than in the ketamine group {82.8 ± 5.6 mmHg and 73 ± 10.2 mmHg, P < 0.001}. Furthermore, the incidence of post-intubation hypotension was lower in the ketamine-lidocaine group than in the ketamine group {1 patient (5%) versus 17 patients (77%), P < 0.001}. The ketamine-lidocaine group showed higher MAP in almost all the readings after induction compared to ketamine group. Other haemodynamic variables including cardiac output and heart rate were comparable between both study groups.

CONCLUSION: Lidocaine-ketamine combination showed less incidence of hypotension compared to ketamine full-dose when used for rapid-sequence endotracheal intubation in patients with septic shock. REGISTRATION URL: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT03844984?cond=NCT03844984&amp;rank=1.