Objectives: Quadratus Lumborum Block in contrast to Transversus Abdominis Plane Block contains a unique component which not only stops somatic pain but also inhibits visceral pain by spreading the local anesthetic to the paravertebral space. This study was designed to determine whether performing the Quadratus Lumborum Block type I in patients un­dergoing cesarean section would be associated with both decreased morphine consumption and decreased pain levels in the postoperative 48-hour period. Material and methods: Sixty patients undergoing caesarean section under spinal anesthesia were randomly and equally assigned to one or other of two groups: QLB I (who received Bilateral Quadratus Lumborum Block type I with the use of 24 mL 0.375% ropivacaine per side) or a Control group. In both groups, on-demand morphine analgesia was administered postoperatively within the first 48 hours. The following were measured: the morphine consumption; the time elapsed from the C-section until the first dose of morphine; and the levels of pain intensity among patients in rest (numeral pain rating scale). Results: There were no statistically significant demographic data differences between the QLB I and Control groups. The following significant differences were observed in the 48-hour postoperative period: morphine consumption was higher in the Control group (p = 0.000); the time elapsed from the C-section until the first dose of morphine was longer in QLB I group (p < 0.05); and the median of the pain numeric rating scale was higher in the Control group (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Quadratus Lumborum Block type I significantly reduces morphine consumption and pain levels up to 48 hours postoperatively. Objectives: Quadratus Lumborum Block in contrast to Transversus Abdominis Plane Block contains a unique component which not only stops somatic pain but also inhibits visceral pain by spreading the local anesthetic to the paravertebral space. This study was designed to determine whether performing the Quadratus Lumborum Block type I in patients un­dergoing cesarean section would be associated with both decreased morphine consumption and decreased pain levels in the postoperative 48-hour period. Material and methods: Sixty patients undergoing caesarean section under spinal anesthesia were randomly and equally assigned to one or other of two groups: QLB I (who received Bilateral Quadratus Lumborum Block type I with the use of 24 mL 0.375% ropivacaine per side) or a Control group. In both groups, on-demand morphine analgesia was administered postoperatively within the first 48 hours. The following were measured: the morphine consumption; the time elapsed from the C-section until the first dose of morphine; and the levels of pain intensity among patients in rest (numeral pain rating scale). Results: There were no statistically significant demographic data differences between the QLB I and Control groups. The following significant differences were observed in the 48-hour postoperative period: morphine consumption was higher in the Control group (p = 0.000); the time elapsed from the C-section until the first dose of morphine was longer in QLB I group (p < 0.05); and the median of the pain numeric rating scale was higher in the Control group (p < 0.05). Conclusions: Quadratus Lumborum Block type I significantly reduces morphine consumption and pain levels up to 48 hours postoperatively.

The aim of this study was to assess the adsorption of selected antibiotics: vancomycin, gentamicin, ciprofloxacine and tigecycline in an experimental continuous veno-venous hemofiltration circuit with the use of both polyethyleneimine-treated polyacrylonitrile (PAN) and the polysulfone (PS) filter membranes. The crystalloid fluid dosed with one of antibiotic was pumped from a reservoir through a hemofiltration circuit (with PAN or PS membrane) and back to reservoir. All ultrafiltrate was also returned to the reservoir. During the procedures samples were collected from the post-hemofilter port at 5, 15, 30, 45, 60, 90, and 120 min. To determine spontaneous degradation of the antimicrobials, an additional bag with each study drug was prepared, which was not attached to the hemofiltration circuit. The samples from these bags were used as controls. In the case of vancomycin, gentamycin and tigecycline there was a statistically significant decrease in the drug concentration in the hemofiltration circuit in comparison to the control for PAN membrane (P < 0.05,P < 0.001,P < 0.001, respectively). In the case of ciprofloxacine adsorption was reversible and the drug concentrations increase to achieve the initial level for both membranes. Our studies indicated that a large portion of the administered dose of antibiotics may be adsorbed on a PAN membrane. In the case of gentamicin and tigecycline this amount is sufficiently big (over 90% of the administered dose) to be of clinical importance. In turn, adsorption on PS membranes is clearly lower (up to 10%) and may be clinically unimportant.

Tigecycline is a glycylcycline often used in critically ill patients as the antibiotic of last resort. The pharmacokinetics (PK) of tigecycline in intensive care unit (ICU) patients can be affected by severe pathophysiological changes so that standard dosing might not be adequate. The aim of this study was to describe population PK of high-dose tigecycline in patients with sepsis or septic shock and evaluate the relationship between individual PK parameters and patient covariates. The study population consisted of 37 adult ICU patients receiving a 200-mg loading dose of tigecycline followed by multiple doses of 100 mg every 12 h. Blood samples were collected at 0.5, 2, 4, 8, and 12 h after dose administration. A two-compartment model with interindividual (IIV) and interoccasion (IOV) variability in PK parameters was used to describe the concentration-time course of tigecycline. The estimated values of mean population PK parameters were 22.1 liters/h and 69.4 liters/h for elimination and intercompartmental clearance, respectively, and 162 liters and 87.9 liters for volume of the central and peripheral compartment, respectively. The IIV and IOV in clearance were less than 20%. The estimated values of distribution volumes were different from previously published values, which might be due to pathophysiological changes in ICU patients. No systematic relationship between individual PK parameters and patient covariates was found. The developed model does not show evidence that individual tigecycline dosing adjustment based on patient covariates is necessary to obtain the same target concentration in patients with sepsis or septic shock. Dosing adjustments should be based on the pathogens, their susceptibility, and PK targets.

Current pain assessment and treatment does not address every patient’s requirements. Although the Polish national guidelines for post-operative pain management have been published, many patients experience severe pain in the postoperative period. The main goal of our study was to assess pain severity among patients from different types of hospitals (primary, secondary, and tertiary centers) after similar types of surgeries. We also aimed to determine if there were any differences in pain severity associated with anesthesia technique, type of surgery, and the patient’s age and sex. This was a prospective, observational study. A questionnaire form was used to collect demographic data, type of hospital, surgery, anesthesia, and patient satisfaction of pain control in the postoperative period. The visual analogue scale (VAS) was used to measure pain severity at four time points after surgery (4, 8, 12, and 24 h). The study was conducted from November 2015 to June 2016 in seven hospitals in Eastern Poland, and 269 women and 293 men participated. At the 4-h measurement, 39.32% of patients assessed the pain as moderate and 19.75% as severe. A difference was found in pain intensity between patients treated in primary and secondary hospitals. Vascular surgery patients had the lowest pain intensity (19 (13–26)), especially in comparison to those undergoing thoracic surgery (30 (27–33)). A sudden elevation in pain severity among patients anesthetized with single-shot spinal technique was observed. Only 4.9% of participants received strong opioids during the first 24 h after surgery. Postoperative pain control seems to be unexpectedly poor after single-shot subarachnoid anesthesia. Despite concerns, the use of analgesics may be insufficient in some groups of patients. Our study indicates new variables that influence the severity of pain, such as operated region, anesthetic technique, and type of surgical department. The results obtained in our study are in discrepancy with recommendations presented by the national guidelines for post-operative pain management.

Aim of the study: To compare analgesia and adverse effects during oral morphine and oxycodone and transdermal fentanyl and buprenorphine administration in cancer patients with pain. Patients and methods: Cancer patients treated at home and in outpatient clinics with severe pain (numerical rating scale score 6–10) fail to respond to non-opioids and/or weak opioids. All patients were randomized to either morphine, oxycodone, fentanyl or buprenorphine and divided into subgroups with predominant neuropathic and nociceptive pain component. Doses of opioids were titrated to satisfactory analgesia and acceptable adverse effects intensity. Patients were assessed at baseline and followed for 28 days. In all patient groups, immediate-release oral morphine was the rescue analgesic and lactulose 10 mL twice daily was the prophylaxis of constipation; no antiemetics were used as prophylaxis. Results: A total of 62 patients participated and 53 patients completed the study. Good analgesia was obtained for all 4 opioids, for both nociceptive and neuropathic pain. The use of co-analgesics was greater in patients with neuropathic pain. Morphine treatment was associated with less negative impact of pain on ability to walk, work and activity (trend) according to Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form scores and less consumption of rescue morphine. The most common adverse effects included nausea and drowsiness, which increased at the beginning of the treatment and gradually decreased over the days to come. Appetite, well-being, anxiety, depression, and fatigue improved. There was no constipation (the Bowel Function Index scores were within normal range) during the treatment with all opioids. No changes were seen for constipation, vomiting and dyspnea. Conclusion: All opioids were effective and well-tolerated. Morphine was the most effective in the improvement in some of the Brief Pain Inventory-Short Form items regarding negative impact of pain on patients’ daily activities. Prophylaxis of constipation was effective; antiemetics may be considered for nausea prevention.

A Review of Muscle Relaxants in Anesthesia in Patients with Neuromuscular Disorders Including Guillain-Barré Syndrome, Myasthenia Gravis, Duchenne Muscular Dystrophy, Charcot-Marie-Tooth Disease, and Inflammatory Myopathies - Article abstract #945675