Hasil Pencarian  ::  Simpan CSV :: Kembali

"Latar belakang. Kombinasi spray lidokain dan anestetika intravena saat ini merupakan pilihan utama pada prosedur endoskopi saluran cerna, namun spray lidokain mempunyai kekurangan berupa iritasi lokal, mual, muntah dan rasa pahit. Gel lidokain merupakan alternatif pilihan anestetik lokal. Gel lidokain memiliki keuntungan karena dapat mengurangi gesekan mukosa dengan endoskop saat insersi serta memungkinkan pemberian lidokain yang tebal dan lengket sehingga menghasilkan anestesia lokal yang lebih baik pada rongga mulut dan orofaring dibandingkan spray lidokain. Pada penelitian ini kami ingin mengetahui perbandingan keefektifan gel lidokain dengan spray lidokain dalam mengurangi jumlah penggunaan propofol. Metode. Penelitian ini merupakan uji klinis acak tersamar ganda terhadap pasien endoskopi saluran cerna atas dengan sedasi di Rumah Sakit Cipto Mangunkusumo pada bulan Juli-September 2015. Sebanyak 52 subyek diambil dengan metode consecutive sampling dan dibagi ke dalam 2 kelompok (kelompok gel lidokain 2% dan spray lidokain 10%). Pasien secara acak diberikan gel lidokain 2% atau spray lidokain 10% sebagai anestetik lokal. Total dosis propofol, angka kejadian gag refleks, hipotensi, bradikardia, dan desaturasi dicatat pada masing-masing kelompok. Analisis data dilakukan dengan uji t-test tidak berpasangan. Hasil. Rerata dosis propofol berbeda bermakna diantara 2 kelompok, dimana rerata dosis propofol pada grup gel lidokain 2% adalah 186,92±43,52 mg, sedangkan rerata dosis propofol pada grup spray lidokain 10% adalah 218,85±61,01 mg (p=0.035, IK 95%=31,92). Simpulan. Gel lidokain 2% lebih efektif dibandingkan spray lidokain 10% dalam mengurangi dosis propofol pada pasien endoskopi saluran cerna atas.

---

Background. A combination of lidocaine spray and intravenous anesthetics is currently the common choice in gastrointestinal endoscopy procedures, but lidocaine spray has some side efects like local irritation, nausea, vomiting and bitter taste. Lidocaine jelly is an alternative choice of local anesthetic. Lidocain jelly reduce friction of endoscope and enables to apply thick and sticky lidocaine resulting in better local anesthesia in the oral cavity and oropharynx compared to lidocaine spray. In this study, we want to compare the effectiveness between lidocaine jelly and lidocaine spray to reduce the propofol dose.

Methods. This study was a randomized double-blind control trial on upper gastrointestinal endoscopy patiens with sedation in Cipto Mangunkusumo Hospital in July to September 2015. A total of 52 subjects were taken with consecutive sampling method and divided into 2 groups (2 % lidocaine jelly group and 10% lidocaine spray group). Patients were randomly given 2% lidocaine jelly or 10% lidocaine spray as a local anesthetic. Total propofol dose, the incidence of gag reflex, hypotension, bradycardia and desaturation recorded in each group. Data analysis was performed by unpaired t-test.

Results. Mean propofol dose significantly different between 2 groups. The Mean propofol dose 2% lidocaine jelly was 186.92 ±43.52 mg, while the mean propofol dose in10% lidocaine spray group was 218.85 ± 61.01 mg (p = 0.035, CI 95% = 31.92).

Conclusion. 2% Lidocaine gel was more effective than 10% lidocaine spray in reducing the propofol dose in patients with upper gastrointestinal endoscopy."

"Obstructive: jaundice represents the most common complication of biliary tract Malignancy. Obstructive jaundice causes releases of proinflammatory cytokine. There has been controversy about effect of biliary drainage on the change in proinflammatory cytokine level in pancreatobiliary cancer patients. The present study was designed to determine levels of tumor necrosis factor alpha (TNF-alfa) and interleukin 6 (IL-6) in preprocedure of either endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) or percutaneous transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) and postprocedure of them in obstructive jaundice patient caused by pancreatobiliary cancer.Method: The study method was before-and-after case study design with consecutive sampling. Blood was collected five days prior to either endoscopic retrograde cholangio pancreatography (ERCP) procedure or percutaneus transhepatic biliary drainage (PTBD) procedure and five days after either of them. Enzyme linked immunosorbed assay (ELISA) was used to determine TNF-alfa and IL-6.Results: Forty subjects were included in this study which consisted of 22 men and 18 women. The age was 55.3 (SD 13.7) years old. According to the results of imaging and endoscopy procedure, twenty-two people were diagnosed cholangicarcinoma, ten people were diagnosed ampulla vateri and eigth people were diagnosed pancreatic tumor. In preprocedure, the TNF-alfa concentration was 4.81 (SD 2.91) pg/mL, the IL-6 concentration was 7.79 (SD 1.57) pg/mL and the bilirubin concentration was 15.5 (SD 6,9) mg%. In postprocedure, the TNF-alfa concentration was 8.05 (SD 6.7) pg/mL, there was a significant increase in TNF-alfa concentration (p = 0.02). However, IL-6 concentration was 7.75 (SD 1.76) pg/mL, there was not any significant chance in IL-6 concentration (p = 0.52). The bilirubin concentration was 11.3 (SD 6,5) mg%.Conclusion: There was a significant increase in mean concentration value of TNF-alfa after biliary drainage procedure. On the other hand there was not any significant decrease in the mean concentration value of IL-6 after biliary drainage procedure"