Retinal degeneration associated with RDH12 mutations results from decreased 11-cis retinal synthesis due to disruption of the visual cycle

Human Molecular Genetics     

Pre-treatment with ozonized oxygen (O3) aggravates inflammation in septic rats

Objective and design:Ozone is produced by neutrophils during bacterial killing. Its application was found to be beneficial in peritonitis patients. Therefore, we measured survival and cytokines after ozone pre-treatment in septic rats. Subjects and treatment:With approval, 40 male Wistar-rats were allocated to 1) ozone pre-treatment for five days before intra-abdominal sepsis, or 2) no pre-treatment. Methods:The primary endpoint was mortality at 120 h. Secondary endpoints were plasma cytokine levels. Results:In the control group mortality was 50% (10/20 rats). After ozone pre-treatment, survival was only 35% (7/20 rats, Log-Rank test: P = 0.10). Ozone increased TNF-α and MIP-2 after infection: 127±23 pg/ml and 94±19 pg/ml (control group: 398 pg/ml and 369 pg/ml; P < 0.002 and P < 0.01). IL-6 levels were similar in both groups. Conclusions:Ozone pre-treatment was pro-inflammatory in sepsis with a trend to reduced survival. Therefore, its effects in sepsis should be further evaluated in animal trials.     

Evaluation of three risk scores to predict postoperative nausea and vomiting

BACKGROUND: So far there are three different scores to predict postoperative vomiting (PV: Apfel et al., 1998) or postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV: Koivuranta et al., 1997; Palazzo and Evans, 1993). All three scores used logistic regression analysis to identify and create weights for the risk factors for PV or PONV. In short, these were sex, age, history of previous PONV, motion sickness, duration of anaesthesia, and use of postoperative opioids. However, an external evaluation and a comparison of these scores has not been performed so far. METHODS: Patients undergoing a variety of surgical procedures under general anaesthesia were studied prospectively. Preoperatively, they completed a questionnaire concerning potential risk factors for the occurrence of PV or PONV implemented in the three risk scores. Balanced anaesthesia (induction agent, nondepolarising neuromuscular blocker, opioid, and inhalation agent in nitrous oxide/oxygen) was performed. No intravenous anaesthesia or any antiemetic prophylaxis was applied. Postoperatively, the patients were observed in the recovery room for the occurrence of PV and PONV and were visited twice on the ward within the 24-h observation period. Both the patients and the nursing staff were asked whether PV or PONV was present. The severity of PONV was categorised using a standardised scoring algorithm. A total of 1,444 patients was finally included into the analysis. Using information of the predicted risk for the individual patients and the actual occurrence of PV or PONV, Receiver Operator Characteristics (ROC-curves) were drawn. The area under each ROC-curve was calculated as a means of the predictive properties of each score and was compared for statistical differences. RESULTS: For prediction of PONV (any severity) the AUC-values (AUC=area under the curve) and the corresponding 95%-confidence intervals were: Apfel: 0.70 (0.67-0.72); Koivuranta: 0.71 (0.69-0.73); Palazzo: 0.68 (0.65-0.70). For prediction of PV: Apfel: 0.73 (0.71-0.75); Koivuranta: 0.73 (0.70-0.75); Palazzo: 0.68 (0.65-0.70). Thus, all three scores appeared to have a moderate accuracy as measured by the AUC. The score of Koivuranta predicts PONV (P=0.007) and also PV (P=0.002) significantly better than Palazzo's score. Furthermore, for predicting of PV the score of Apfel was also superior to Palazzo's score (P=0.005). All three scores predict PV with the same accuracy as PONV. CONCLUSION: The occurrence of PV and PONV in patients undergoing surgery under balanced anaesthesia can be predicted with moderate but acceptable accuracy using one of the available risk scores, regardless of local surgical or anaesthesiological circumstances. For clinical practice, we recommend the score published by Koivuranta, since its calculation is very simple.     

Einfluß verschiedener niedriger Droperidol-Dosierungen auf postoperative Angst, innere Anspannung, allgemeine Befindlichkeit und PONV

Background: Droperidol even in low doses such as 0,5?mg to 1,25?mg can increase postoperative anxiety and state of tension. The aim of this study was to determine whether these side effects occur frequently following low-dose droperidol and to see whether these are dose related. Methods: 184 female in- and outpatients ASA grade 1 and 2 undergoing gynaecological laparoscopy were recruited to this prospective, double-blind study. General anaesthesia was standardized (induction with thiopentone, fentanyl 2?µg/kg and vecuronium 0,1?mg/kg, tracheal intubation, maintainance with enflurane in N₂O/O₂). Patients were randomly allocated to receive saline (n=45), 0,625?mg (n=46), 1,25?mg (n=47) or 2,5?mg (n=46) droperidol i.v. 10 minutes before the end of surgery. 1, 3, 6, and 24 hours postoperatively, the patients’ anxiety, state of tension and overall mood was evaluated using two psychological questionnaires which had been tested for the perioperative period (Erlanger anxiety and tension-scale / BSKE-EWL-test). Sedation was evaluated by the staff of the recovery room. In addition, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was assessed using a 100?mm visual analogue scale and by counting the episodes of retching or vomiting. PONV was then rated over the whole observation period as none, mild, moderate or severe using a fixed scoring algorithm. Statistical analysis was performed using the ANOVA and the chi²-test. Results: The patients did not differ with regard to biometric data, duration of surgery and anaesthesia. The postoperative scores for anxiety, state of tension and overall mood were not different between the groups at any observation time (Fig.?1: anxiety and tension: P=0,5687; figure 2: overall mood: P=0,0647). Quality of sleep in the first night after surgery was the same in all groups (Table?2 and 3). Sedation was not significantly different (Table?4; P=0,0704). Furthermore, duration of stay in the recovery room did not differ (P=0,4353). On the other hand, three patients from the 2,5?mg droperidol group had to stay unexpectedly on the ward overnight, because they had been too much sedated to be discharged at home. This was not the case with any patient from the other groups. Compared to placebo, PONV over the whole 24?h observation period was significantly reduced by droperidol (Fig.?3; P=0,0338): completely free from PONV: placebo: 41,3%, 0,625?mg droperidol: 67,4%, 1,25?mg droperidol: 53,2%, 2,5?mg droperidol: 71,7%. Also the severity of PONV was reduced. Conclusion: In gynaecological laparoscopy under general anaesthesia with tracheal intubation, we recommend droperidol 0,625?mg in the prevention of PONV, as it reduces PONV as well as 2,5?mg with no severe sedation in this dosage. Psychological side effects did not occur more frequently after droperidol compared to placebo in any of the investigated dosages.     

Does femoral nerve catheter placement with stimulating catheters improve effective placement? A randomized, controlled, and observer-blinded trial

Continuous peripheral nerve blocks offer the benefit of extended postoperative analgesia and accelerated functional recovery after major knee surgery. Conventional nerve localization is performed over a stimulating needle followed by blind insertion of the peripheral catheter. Correct catheter placement is confirmed by testing for satisfactory analgesia. Stimulating catheters offer the advantage of verifying correct placement close to the nerve during catheter placement. The aim of this randomized trial was to determine whether accurate catheter positioning under continuous stimulation accelerates the onset of sensory and motor block, improves the quality of postoperative analgesia, and enhances functional recovery. We compared femoral nerve catheters inserted under continuous stimulation with catheters that were placed using the conventional technique of blind advancement in 81 patients undergoing major knee surgery. Time of catheter placement was similar in both groups with 4 min (3/7.3; median, 25th/75th percentile) in the conventional group and 5 min (4/8.8) in the stimulating catheter group. In both groups, 42% of the catheters could be correctly placed (motor response of the patella with a current < or =0.5 mA) at first attempt. In 22 patients (58%) of the stimulating catheter group, the catheter had to be redirected 1-20 times, including 2 that could not be correctly placed within 20 min. The onset time of sensory and motor block was almost similar in both groups. There were no differences in the postoperative IV opioid consumption, and visual analog scale pain scores at rest and movement, or maximal bending and stretching of the knee joint during the 5 days after surgery. We conclude that with continuous femoral nerve blocks, blind catheter advancement is as effective as the stimulating catheter technique with respect to onset time of sensory and motor block as well as for postoperative pain reduction and functional outcome.     

Postoperative analgesia and functional recovery after total-knee replacement: comparison of a continuous posterior lumbar plexus (psoas compartment) block, a continuous femoral nerve block, and the combination of a continuous femoral and sciatic nerve block

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Continuous femoral nerve block is a well-accepted technique for regional analgesia after total-knee replacement. However, many patients still experience considerable pain at the popliteal space and at the medial aspect of the knee. The goal of this study is to evaluate whether a psoas compartment catheter provides better postoperative analgesia than a femoral nerve catheter does and whether it is as effective as the combination of a femoral and a sciatic nerve catheter and, thus, improves functional outcome. METHODS: Ninety patients who underwent total-knee replacement under standardized general anesthesia participated in this prospective randomized study. Group FEM received a continuous femoral nerve block, group FEM/SCI received a combination of a femoral and a sciatic continuous nerve block, and group PSOAS received a continuous psoas compartment block. Patient-controlled analgesia with piritramide was available for 48 hours. Maximal bending and extending of the knee and walking distance was assessed during the first 7 days. A standardized telephone survey was conducted after 9 to 12 months to evaluate residual pain and functional outcome. RESULTS: Postoperative opioid consumption during 48 hours was significantly less in the FEM/SCI group (median: 18 mg; 25th/75th percentile: 6/40) compared with the FEM group (49 mg; 25/66) and the PSOAS group (44 mg; 30/62) (P =.002). Postoperative pain scores were not different, and no differences occurred with respect to short-term or long-term functional outcome. CONCLUSION: The FEM/SCI catheter is superior to FEM and PSOAS catheter with respect to reduced analgesic requirements after total-knee replacement, but functional outcome does not differ with those 3 continuous regional analgesia techniques.