A comparison of spinal anesthesia with low-dose hyperbaric levobupivacaine and hyperbaric bupivacaine for transurethral surgery: a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to compare spinal anesthesia effects of low-dose hyperbaric levobupivacaine and low-dose hyperbaric bupivacaine for transurethral procedures. METHODS: In this double-blind, randomized, controlled study, a total of 60 patients who were ASA I-III were randomized into two groups. Group B received 7.5 mg hyperbaric bupivacaine plus 25 µg fentanyl, and Group L received 7.5 mg hyperbaric levobupivacaine plus 25 µg fentanyl intrathecally. The onset time to T10 dermatome, times to maximum sensory and motor block levels, time to two-segment regression of sensory block, time to Bromage score zero, time to full recovery of sensory block, and hemodynamic values, as well as adverse effects, were recorded. The primary outcome was the time to complete regression of motor block. RESULTS: The onset time of block to T10, time to maximum sensory block, and time to two-segment regression were similar in both groups. The time to maximum motor block was shorter in Group B (7 ± 3 min) than in Group L (12±5 min), (P<0.001). The time to a Bromage score of zero (recovery of motor block) was shorter in Group L (105±19 min) than in Group B (113±7 min), (P=0.04). The time to full recovery of sensory block was shorter in Group B (127±14 min) than in Group L (157±34 min), (P<0.001). The requirement for analgesia was earlier in Group B (305±50 min) than in Group L (389±146 min), (P=0.004). CONCLUSION: Although both techniques provide adequate spinal block and have few similar side effects for transurethral surgery, the use of low-dose hyperbaric levobupivacaine plus fentanyl may be preferable to low-dose hyperbaric bupivacaine plus fentanyl because of the reduced motor block, shorter duration of motor block, longer duration of sensory block and longer time to the first requirement for analgesia

International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortiu (INICC) report, data summary of 43 countries for 2007-2012. Device-associated module

We report the results of an International Nosocomial Infection Control Consortium (INICC) surveillance study from January 2007-December 2012 in 503 intensive care units (ICUs) in Latin America, Asia, Africa, and Europe. During the 6-year study using the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention's (CDC) U.S. National Healthcare Safety Network (NHSN) definitions for device-associated health care–associated infection (DA-HAI), we collected prospective data from 605,310 patients hospitalized in the INICC's ICUs for an aggregate of 3,338,396 days. Although device utilization in the INICC's ICUs was similar to that reported from ICUs in the U.S. in the CDC's NHSN, rates of device-associated nosocomial infection were higher in the ICUs of the INICC hospitals: the pooled rate of central line–associated bloodstream infection in the INICC's ICUs, 4.9 per 1,000 central line days, is nearly 5-fold higher than the 0.9 per 1,000 central line days reported from comparable U.S. ICUs. The overall rate of ventilator-associated pneumonia was also higher (16.8 vs 1.1 per 1,000 ventilator days) as was the rate of catheter-associated urinary tract infection (5.5 vs 1.3 per 1,000 catheter days). Frequencies of resistance of Pseudomonas isolates to amikacin (42.8% vs 10%) and imipenem (42.4% vs 26.1%) and Klebsiella pneumoniae isolates to ceftazidime (71.2% vs 28.8%) and imipenem (19.6% vs 12.8%) were also higher in the INICC's ICUs compared with the ICUs of the CDC's NHSN