Research Article - Onkologia i Radioterapia ( 2024) Volume 18, Issue 2
Enhancing oncology and radiotherapy practice: The advantages of propofol and fentanyl in curettage procedures
Ahmed Sabah Mohammed Jamil1*, Hayder Hamza Alabedi2,3,4 and Imad Khalid Ahmed12Surgery Department, College of Medicine, Baghdad University, Baghdad, Iraq
3College of Medicine, University of Warith Al-Anbiyaa, Karbala, Iraq
4Al-Warith Cancer Institute, Karbala, Iraq
Ahmed Sabah Mohammed Jamil, Oncology and Nuclear Medicine Specialized Hospital, Ninava Directorate Health, Mosul, Iraq, Email: ahmedsabahmj@gmail.com
Received: 12-Nov-2023, Manuscript No. OAR-24-129330; Accepted: 20-Jan-2024, Pre QC No. OAR-24-129330 (PQ); Editor assigned: 18-Dec-2023, Pre QC No. OAR-24-129330 (PQ); Reviewed: 03-Jan-2024, QC No. OAR-24-129330 (Q); Revised: 16-Jan-2024, Manuscript No. OAR-24-129330 (R); Published: 25-Jan-2024
Abstract
Propofol and fentanyl have broadly used alone or in combination to induce sedation or anesthesia. The current study aims to assess the additive impact and economic benefit of using combination of propofol and fentanyl in elective curettage cases in Iraq. A total of 75 women were recruited to perform clinical trial between 1st January and 10th March 2023 at the department of gynecology and obstetrics in the Baghdad teaching hospital, Iraq. The sample was subdivided equally into three groups and received different doses of propofol alone (GI), Fentanyl alone (GII), and combination of propofol and fentanyl (GIII) respectively. The dose required for propofol to induce general anesthesia declined to 1.4 mg/kg -1.5 mg/kg instead of 2.5mg/kg, and 2 µg/kg instead of 8 µg/kg for fentanyl in the combination. Out of 25 cases, 19 (76%) patients being unconscious in a time of two minutes as a result of additive effect. Moreover, the cost evaluation showed a cost saving of USD 0.09/minute for every operated curettage weighing 65kg and average surgical time of 21.57+11.06 minutes. The combination of propofol and fentanyl is effective for sedation and anesthesia and cost saving.
Keywords
prostate cancer, toxicity, GIT, Prostate Specific Antigen (PSA)
Introduction
Prostate Cancer (PC) is the second most prevalent malignancy in men aî?er lung cancer, accounting for 375,304 deaths (3.8% of all cancer-related deaths) and 1,414,259 new cases (7.3% of all new cancer cases) worldwide in 2020 [1]. A 79.7% increase in PC incidence has been predicted by 2040 [2]. î??e incidence of PC is lower in Asia compared with other regions, like North America. î??e age-standardised incidence rate in Asia is 19.7 per 100,000, compared with 98.27 per 100,000 in the USA [3]. î??e diagnosis of PC is conventionally based on an elevated Prostate-Specific Antigen (PSA) level or trans-rectal-ultrasonography needle biopsy of the prostate [4]. î??e Magnetic Resonance Imaging (MRI) is recommended [5, 6]. î??ere are established risk factors for PC, which include age, ethnicity, and family history. î??e risk of PC typically increases aî?er the age of 55 years and peaks at age 70 years– 74 years [7, 8]. African Americans are about 60% more prone to PC than Caucasians and first-degree relative is affected more [9-12]. Radiation therapy brachytherapy, radical prostatectomy, and Androgen Deprivation î??erapy (ADT) are some of the known therapeutic options for patients with Prostate Cancer (PC), which are categorised according to severity and risk [13-22]. Patients at low or intermediate risk are the most common recipients of externalbeam radiation therapy; high-risk patients undergoing prostatectomy also oî?en get this treatment as an adjuvant. For high-risk individuals, a combination of ADT and radiation treatment may reduce the likelihood of systemic adverse effects and sexual dysfunction [23].
