Anesthetic gases and global warming: Potentials, prevention and future of anesthesia

Global warming refers to an average increase in the earth′s temperature, which in turn causes changes in climate. A warmer earth may lead to changes in rainfall patterns, a rise in sea level, and a wide range of impacts on plants, wildlife, and humans. Greenhouse gases make the earth warmer by trapping energy inside the atmosphere. Greenhouse gases are any gas that absorbs infrared radiation in the atmosphere and include: water vapor, carbon dioxide (CO₂), methane (CH₄), nitrous oxide (N₂O), halogenated fluorocarbons (HCFCs), ozone (O₃), perfluorinated carbons (PFCs), and hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs). Hazardous chemicals enter the air we breathe as a result of dozens of activities carried out during a typical day at a healthcare facility like processing lab samples, burning fossil fuels etc. We sometimes forget that anesthetic agents are also greenhouse gases (GHGs). Anesthetic agents used today are volatile halogenated ethers and the common carrier gas nitrous oxide known to be aggressive GHGs. With less than 5% of the total delivered halogenated anesthetic being metabolized by the patient, the vast majority of the anesthetic is routinely vented to the atmosphere through the operating room scavenging system. The global warming potential (GWP) of a halogenated anesthetic is up to 2,000 times greater than CO₂. Global warming potentials are used to compare the strength of different GHGs to trap heat in the atmosphere relative to that of CO₂. Here we discuss about the GWP of anesthetic gases, preventive measures to decrease the global warming effects of anesthetic gases and Xenon, a newer anesthetic gas for the future of anesthesia.

A study of ventilator-associated pneumonia: Incidence, outcome, risk factors and measures to be taken for prevention

Ventilator-associated pneumonia (VAP) is a major cause of hospital morbidity and mortality despite recent advances in diagnosis and accuracy of management. However, as taught in medical science, prevention is better than cure is probably more appropriate as concerned to VAP because of the fact that it is a well preventable disease and a proper approach decreases the hospital stay, cost, morbidity and mortality. The aim of the study is to critically review the incidence and outcome, identify various risk factors and conclude specific measures that should be undertaken to prevent VAP. We studied 100 patients randomly, kept on ventilatory support for more than 48 h. After excluding those who developed pneumonia within 48 h, VAP was diagnosed when a score of ≥6 was obtained in the clinical pulmonary infection scoring system having six variables and a maximum score of 12. After evaluating, the data were subjected to univariate analysis using the chi-square test. The level of significance was set at P<0.05. It was found that 37 patients developed VAP. The risk factor significantly associated with VAP in our study was found to be duration of ventilator support, reintubation, supine position, advanced age and altered consciousness. Declining ratio of partial pressure to inspired fraction of oxygen (PaO₂/FiO₂ ratio) was found to be the earliest indicator of VAP. The most common organism isolated in our institution was Pseudomonas. The incidence of early-onset VAP (within 96 h) was found to be 27% while the late-onset type (>96 h) was 73%. Late-onset VAP had poor prognosis in terms of mortality (66%) as compared to the early-onset type (20%). The mortality of patients of the non-VAP group was found to be 41% while that of VAP patients was 54%. Targeted strategies aimed at preventing VAP should be implemented to improve patient outcome and reduce length of intensive care unit stay and costs. Above all, everyone of the critical care unit should understand the factors that place the patients at risk of VAP and utmost importance must be given to prevent VAP.

Is premedication with midazolam more effective by the sublingual than the oral route?

Background:

In this study, we compared the sedative effects of sublingual midazolam solution with the oral tablet as premedication. Sixty pediatric patients of ASA physical status I and II were randomly selected to receive either 0.5 mg/kg of tablet or 0.5 mg/kg of sublingual solution of midazolam as premedication, about 45 min before elective surgery.

Materials and Methods:

There were 30 patients in each group. In Group I, the patients received premedication in the form of oral midazolam tablet 0.5 mg/kg. In Group II, the patients received midazolam solution 0.5 mg/kg. The degree of sedation and ease of separation was assessed according to the Niall C. Wilton scale and the procedure of Davis Peter, respectively. The time for complete drug dissolution was noted in both the groups. Then, the patients were interviewed regarding their acceptance of taste.

Results:

The sedation scores in the sublingual group were higher than in the oral group at 30 and 45 min after drug administration (P=0.0134 and P=0.0157). 66.6% of the patients in the sublingual group found it satisfactory as compared to 53.3% in the case of group receiving tablet.

Conclusion:

Thus, from the present study, it is concluded that premedication with midazolam is more effective by the sublingual than the oral route in children.