Explore the vast range of titles available.

To investigate parents’ experiences of being present during anesthesia induction in young infants. Design. A mixed randomized controlled study. Parents of the included infants were randomized to either one parent present during induction or control (not present). In the holding area, parents completed the Amsterdam Preoperative Anxiety and Information Scale (APAIS) before and after the induction. Differences in APAIS between groups as well as before and after scores were analyzed. Postoperatively, available parents were interviewed, and data were analysed using meaning-oriented thematic analysis. Pre-induction anxiety was common in both fathers (51 %) and mothers (73 %) but there was no difference in the full APAIS score between present and absent groups. However, the qualitative data revealed that parents preferred to be present despite different levels of anxiety. Being present was to gain certainty, to be able to protect and to be a resource. Being absent was to be floating in uncertainty, not being allowed to protect or to be a resource. Pre-induction anxiety was common, especially in mothers. If given the choice, most parents would prefer to be present. Parents can be a resource for both the infant and anesthesia team during induction. Setting up routines for parental presence during anesthesia induction is important. The parents’ message to the anesthesia team and to the organization is let the parents of small infants be present during induction.

Background It is unknown to what extent hypotension frequently observed following administration of propofol for induction of general anesthesia is caused by overdosing propofol. Unlike clinical signs, electroencephalon-based cerebral monitoring allows to detect and quantify an overdose of hypnotics. Therefore, we tested whether the use of an electroencephalon-based cerebral monitoring will cause less hypotension following induction with propofol. Methods Subjects were randomly assigned to a bispectral index (BIS)-guided (target range 40–60) or to a weight-related (2 mg.kg − 1 ) manual administration of propofol for induction of general anesthesia. The primary endpoint was the incidence of hypotension following the administration of propofol. Secondary endpoints included the degree of hypotension and correlations between BIS and drop in mean arterial pressure (MAP). Incidences were analyzed with Fisher’s Exact-test. Results Of the 240 patients enrolled into this study, 235 predominantly non-geriatric (median 48 years, 25th – 75th percentile 35–61 years) patients without severe concomitant disease (88% American Society of Anesthesiology physical status 1–2) undergoing ear, nose and throat surgery, ophthalmic surgery, and dermatologic surgery were analyzed. Patients who were manually administered propofol guided by BIS ( n  = 120) compared to those who were given propofol by weight ( n  = 115) did not differ concerning the incidence of hypotension (44% vs. 45%; p  = 0.87). Study groups were also similar regarding the maximal drop in MAP compared to baseline (33% vs. 30%) and the proportion of hypotensive events related to all measurements (17% vs. 19%). Final propofol induction doses in BIS group and NON-BIS group were similar (1.93 mg/kg vs. 2 mg/kg). There was no linear correlation between BIS and the drop in MAP at all times ( r  < 0.2 for all) except for a weak one at 6 min ( r  = 0.221). Conclusion Results of our study suggest that a BIS-guided compared to a weight-adjusted manual administration of propofol for induction of general anesthesia in non-geriatric patients will not lower the incidence and degree of arterial hypotension. Trial registration German Registry of Clinical Trials ( DRKS00010544 ), retrospectively registered on August 4, 2016.

Background and Objectives: Vaginal natural orifice transluminal endoscopic surgery, vNOTES, has become an increasingly preferred minimally invasive option for benign hysterectomy. General anesthesia is still the routine choice, yet regional methods such as combined spinal epidural anesthesia may support a smoother postoperative course. Although the use of vNOTES is expanding, comparative information on anesthetic approaches remains limited, and its unique physiologic setting requires dedicated evaluation. To compare combined spinal epidural anesthesia with general anesthesia for benign vNOTES hysterectomy, focusing on postoperative nausea and vomiting, recovery quality, and intraoperative physiologic safety. Materials and Methods: This retrospective cohort study was conducted in a single center and identified women who underwent benign vNOTES hysterectomy between March 2024 and August 2025 from electronic medical records. Participants received either combined spinal epidural anesthesia or general anesthesia according to routine clinical practice. All patients were managed within an enhanced recovery pathway that incorporated standardized analgesia and prophylaxis for postoperative nausea and vomiting. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting during the first day after surgery. Secondary outcomes included time to discharge from the recovery unit, pain scores at set postoperative intervals, early functional recovery, patient satisfaction and physiologic parameters extracted from intraoperative monitoring records. Analyses were performed according to the anesthesia group documented in the medical files. Results: One hundred forty patients met inclusion criteria and were included in the analysis. Combined spinal epidural anesthesia was linked to a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, a shorter stay in the post-anesthesia care unit, and reduced pain scores in the first 24 h (adjusted odds ratio 0.32, ninety five percent confidence interval 0.15 to 0.68). Early ambulation and oral intake were reached sooner in the combined spinal epidural group, with higher overall satisfaction also noted. Adherence to ERAS elements was similar between groups, with no meaningful differences in early feeding, mobilization, analgesia protocols or PONV prophylaxis. During the procedure, combined spinal epidural anesthesia produced more episodes of hypotension and bradycardia, while general anesthesia was linked to higher airway pressures and lower oxygen saturation. Complication rates within the first month were low in both groups. Conclusions: In this observational cohort study, combined spinal epidural anesthesia was associated with lower postoperative nausea, earlier recovery milestones and greater patient comfort compared with general anesthesia. Hemodynamic instability occurred more often with neuraxial anesthesia but was transient and manageable. While these findings point to potential recovery benefits for some patients, the observational nature of the study and the modest scale of the differences necessitate a cautious interpretation. They should be considered exploratory rather than definitive. The choice of anesthesia should therefore be individualized, weighing potential recovery benefits against the risk of transient hemodynamic effects. Larger and more diverse studies are needed to better define patient selection and clarify the overall risk benefit balance. These findings should be interpreted cautiously and viewed as hypothesis-generating rather than definitive evidence supporting one anesthetic strategy over another.

Background and Objectives: The association between different anesthesia modalities and spermiogram parameters and reproductive outcomes in patients undergoing microscopic subinguinal varicocelectomy (MSV) remains unclear. In this retrospective cohort study, we aimed to compare spermiogram parameters and pregnancy rates between patients receiving general anesthesia (GA) versus spinal anesthesia (SA) for MSV with 2-year follow-up data. Materials and Methods: Male patients aged between 18–50 years, with ASA physical scores between I–III, who underwent unilateral or bilateral primary MSV, were included in the study. To minimize selection bias and balance the baseline characteristics between the GA group and SA group, we employed a propensity score matching approach, matching all 38 SA patients with 380 GA patients selected from a larger pool. Patients with complete 24-month follow-up data were included in the final analysis. The primary outcome of our study was determined as evaluating sperm count changes. Secondary outcomes included other sperm parameters (motility, morphology and semen volume), natural pregnancy rates, perioperative complications and recovery parameters. Results: The final analysis included 418 patients who met all inclusion criteria and completed the follow-up period. The study population comprised 380 patients in the GA group and 38 in the SA group. No significant difference was found between the groups in terms of sperm count. Greater improvement in sperm motility was observed in the SA group starting from the third month onwards (p = 0.027). Natural pregnancy was achieved in 16/38 (42.1%) of SA patients versus 125/380 (32.9%) of GA patients (p = 0.031). In addition, better results were obtained in terms of recovery parameters in the SA group. Other results were comparable between the groups. Conclusions: Spinal anesthesia for MSV was associated with greater improvement in sperm motility and higher natural pregnancy rates compared to general anesthesia, despite comparable sperm count improvements. These associations warrant further investigation in prospective randomized trials.

The International Standards for a Safe Practice of Anesthesia were developed on behalf of the World Federation of Societies of Anaesthesiologists (WFSA), a non-profit organization representing anesthesiologists in 150 countries, and the World Health Organization (WHO). The recommendations have been approved by WHO and the membership of WFSA. These Standards are applicable to all anesthesia providers throughout the world. They are intended to provide guidance and assistance to anesthesia providers, their professional organizations, hospital and facility administrators, and governments for maintaining and improving the quality and safety of anesthesia care. The Standards cover professional aspects; facilities and equipment; medications and intravenous fluids; monitoring; and the conduct of anesthesia. HIGHLY RECOMMENDED standards, the functional equivalent of mandatory standards, include (amongst other things): the continuous presence of a trained and vigilant anesthesia provider; continuous monitoring of tissue oxygenation and perfusion by clinical observation and a pulse oximeter; intermittent monitoring of blood pressure; confirmation of correct placement of an endotracheal tube (if used) by auscultation and carbon dioxide detection; the use of the WHO Safe Surgery Checklist; and a system for transfer of care at the end of an anesthetic. The International Standards represent minimum standards and the goal should always be to practice to the highest possible standards, preferably exceeding the standards outlined in this document.

Background and Objectives: High-grade gliomas (HGGs) are aggressive primary brain tumors with a poor prognosis despite multimodal treatment. The anesthetic technique used during surgery may influence tumor progression and survival, but its role in HGGs remains unclear. This meta-analysis evaluated the effect of total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) versus inhalational anesthesia (INHA) on overall survival (OS) and progression-free survival (PFS) in HGG patients. Materials and Methods: A systematic search was conducted in PubMed, Scopus, and Cochrane databases for studies assessing the impact of TIVA versus INHA on OS and PFS in HGG patients. Statistical analysis was performed using R version 4.3.1. Heterogeneity across studies was quantified using the Cochrane Q test alongside the I2 statistic. A random-effects model was employed to derive the pooled hazard ratios (HRs). Results: A total of five studies involving 827 participants (mean age 58 years, mean females 38%) were included, of whom 406 (49%) received TIVA. No statistically significant differences were observed in OS (HR 0.77; 95% CI [0.58–1.02]; p = 0.07; I2 = 67%) or PFS (HR 0.88; 95% CI [0.70–1.10]; p = 0.27; I2 = 51%) between the groups. A subgroup analysis revealed that TIVA was associated with improved OS in patients with grade IV tumors (HR 0.70; 95% CI [0.51–0.96]; p = 0.03), while no significant effect was observed in the mixed grade III–IV subgroup. However, the test for subgroup differences was not statistically significant (p = 0.0669), and this finding should be interpreted with caution. No significant differences were observed in median OS or PFS, or in single-arm meta-analyses. Conclusions: This meta-analysis found no statistically significant differences in overall or progression-free survival between TIVA and INHA in patients undergoing surgery for HGGs. Although a subgroup analysis suggested a possible survival advantage of TIVA in grade IV tumors, the lack of a statistically significant subgroup difference test limits the strength of this finding. Further investigation is needed to determine whether anesthetic technique influences outcomes in this subgroup.

Study Objective: To investigate whether alerting providers to errors results in improved documentation of reimbursable anesthesia care. Design: Prospective randomized controlled trial. Setting: Operating room (OR) of a university hospital. Interventions: Anesthesia cases were evaluated to determine whether they met the definition for appropriate anesthesia start time over 4 separate, 45-day calendar cycles: the pre-study period, study period, immediate post-study period, and 3-year follow-up period. During the study period, providers were randomly assigned to either a control or an alert group. Providers in the alert cohort received an automated alphanumeric page if the anesthesia start time occurred concurrently with the patient entering the OR, or more than 30 minutes before entering the OR. Measurements: Three years after the intervention period, overall compliance was analyzed to assess learned behavior. Main Results: Baseline compliance was 33% ± 5%. During the intervention period, providers in the alert group showed 87% ± 6% compliance compared with 41% ± 7% compliance in the control group (P < 0.001). Long-term follow-up after cessation of the alerts showed 85% ± 4% compliance. Conclusions: Automated electronic reminders for time-based billing charges are effective and result in improved ongoing reimbursement.

•The scalp block reduces hemodynamic response to pin head holder application in infratentorial craniotomies.•The scalp block and local anesthetic infiltration both reduce hemodynamic response to skin incision.•The scalp block also reduces postcraniotomy pain intensity. The most painful stages of craniotomy are the placement of the pin head holder and the skin incision. The primary aim of the present study is to compare the effects of the scalp block and the local anesthetic infiltration with bupivacaine 0.5% on the hemodynamic response during the pin head holder application and the skin incision in infratentorial craniotomies. The secondary aims are the effects on pain scores and morphine consumption during the postoperative 24h. This prospective, randomized and placebo controlled study included forty seven patients (ASA I, II and III). The scalp block was performed in the Group S, the local anesthetic infiltration was performed in the Group I and the control group (Group C) only received remifentanil as an analgesic during the intraoperative period. The hemodynamic response to the pin head holder application and the skin incision, as well as postoperative pain intensity, cumulative morphine consumption and opioid related side effects were compared. The scalp block reduced the hemodynamic response to the pin head holder application and the skin incision in infratentorial craniotomies. The local anesthetic infiltration reduced the hemodynamic response to the skin incision. As well as both scalp block and local anesthetic infiltration reduced the cumulative morphine consumption in postoperative 24h. Moreover, the pain intensity was lower after scalp block in the early postoperative period. The scalp block may provide better analgesia in infratentorial craniotomies than local anesthetic infiltration.

There is no data concerning the use of the intraseptal anaesthesia (ISA) for single tooth extraction. The aims of this study were to compare the clinical efficacy and haemodynamic responses of the ISA with the periodontal ligament anaesthesia (PLA) for single tooth extraction. Thirty-five randomly selected healthy patients (ASA I) undergoing maxillary lateral incisors extraction entered the study. Onset of anaesthesia, the width of the anaesthetic field and duration of anaesthesia were recorded by pinprick testing. Intensity of anaesthesia was evaluated on a visual analogue scale. Haemodynamic parameters were recorded simultaneously at different time points after anaesthesia injection. The two techniques of local anaesthesia did not show statistically significant differences regarding the success rate and onset of anaesthesia, while the duration of the ISA on the buccal site was significantly longer in comparison with the PLA. The intensity of the achieved anaesthesia, estimated by the experienced pain during procedure, pointed out that pain was recorded in 24% of cases in the ISA group, and in 19% in the PLA group without significant differences. Postoperative pain was found to be smaller in the ISA group (70.9% of treated sites) than in the PLA group (81.3% of treated sites); however, this difference was not significant. Although the heart rate increased in both groups, there were no significant differences in the patients' haemodynamic response between the ISA and the PLA. The results of the present study indicate that both techniques are useful and suitable for the routine tooth extraction.

ObjectivesReducing variability is integral in quality management. As part of the ongoing Encephaloduroarteriosynangiosis Revascularisation for Symptomatic Intracranial Arterial Stenosis (ERSIAS) trial, we developed a strict anaesthesia protocol to minimise fluctuations in patient parameters affecting cerebral perfusion. We hypothesise that this protocol reduces the intraoperative variability of targeted monitored parameters compared to standard management.DesignProspective cohort study of patients undergoing encephaloduroarteriosynangiosis surgery versus standard neurovascular interventions. Patients with ERSIAS had strict perioperative management that included normocapnia and intentional hypertension. Control patients received regular anaesthetic standard of care. Minute-by-minute intraoperative vitals were electronically collected. Heterogeneity of variance tests were used to compare variance across groups. Mixed-model regression analysis was performed to establish the effects of treatment group on the monitored parameters.SettingTertiary care centre.Participants24 participants: 12 cases (53.8 years±16.7 years; 10 females) and 12 controls (51.3 years±15.2 years; 10 females). Adults aged 30–80 years, with transient ischaemic attack or non-disabling stroke (modified Rankin Scale <3) attributed to 70–99% intracranial stenosis of the carotid or middle cerebral artery, were considered for enrolment. Controls were matched according to age, gender and history of neurovascular intervention.Main outcome measuresVariability of heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure (MAP), systolic blood pressure and end tidal CO2 (ETCO2) throughout surgical duration.ResultsThere were significant reductions in the intraoperative MAP SD (4.26 vs 10.23 mm Hg; p=0.007) and ETCO2 SD (0.94 vs 1.26 mm Hg; p=0.05) between the ERSIAS and control groups. Median MAP and ETCO2 in the ERSIAS group were higher (98 mm Hg, IQR 23 vs 75 mm Hg, IQR 15; p<0.001, and 38 mm Hg, IQR 4 vs 32 mm Hg, IQR 3; p<0.001, respectively).ConclusionsThe ERSIAS anaesthesia protocol successfully reduced intraoperative fluctuations of MAP and ETCO2. The protocol also achieved normocarbia and the intended hypertension.Trial registration numberNCT01819597; Pre-results.