There are about 348 clinical studies being (or have been) conducted in Belarus. The country of the clinical trial is determined by the location of where the clinical research is being studied. Most studies are often held in multiple locations & countries.
There is little work comparing the effectiveness of a femoral nerve block performed only under US guidance or US plus electrical stimulation of the peripheral nerve (EPN). The authors have shown the same effectiveness of these techniques(1).But the effectiveness of the blockade of the femoral nerve (complete blockade) performed in different ways turned out to be low valve: 71.7% for ultrasound in combination with electrical stimulation versus 69% for only ultrasound guidance. Research hypothesis: the blockade of the femoral nerve performed only under ultrasound control has the same effectiveness as the blockade performed under the ultrasound control with EPN.
In modern anesthesiology, peripheral nerve blocks are performed using ultrasound control and electrical stimulation of peripheral nerves (PEN), or only ultrasound control or only EPN. The most effective methods are with the use of ultrasound control. Until now, the effectiveness of the sciatic nerve blockade by the subgluteal approach, performed only under ultrasound control without EPN, in comparison with the blockade of the sciatic nerve performed under ultrasound control with EPN, has not been established. There is no data on how the effectiveness of the blockade of the sciatic nerve with small doses of lidocaine is influenced by the method of performing the blockade: under ultrasound control versus ultrasound control with electrostimulation of the nerve. Research hypothesis: the blockade of the sciatic nerve by the subgluteal approach (12.5 ml 1%lidocaine -Minimum Effective Dose - previously established ) performed only under ultrasound control has the same effectiveness as the blockade performed under the ultrasound control with EPN.
About 15 million spinal anesthesia procedures are performed worldwide each year. In the daily practice of the anesthesiologist for intrathecal use there are various local anesthetics such as bupivacaine, hyperbaric solution of bupivacaine, ropivacaine and levobupivacaine. From 1946 to 2017, only 16 studies comparing the clinical efficacy of isobaric and hyperbaric bupivacaine in nonpregnant patients have been conducted according to various databases. The small sample size and high heterogeneity of these results suggest that all results should be treated with caution. And, there is no conclusive evidence in favor of isobaric or hyperbaric bupivacaine regarding efficacy or side effects in the general surgical population. The literature describes such advantages of levobupivacaine as less cardiotoxicity, longer period of analgesia, more pronounced activity against sensory fibers than against motor fibers. In some studies it has been shown that levobupivacaine is equal to isobaric bupivacaine in efficacy. The efficacy of hyperbaric levobupivacaine equivalent to hyperbaric bupivacaine when administered intrathecally has also been shown on volunteers. However, in the literature there are different data on clinical efficacy of levobupivakin in comparison with ropivacaine and levobupivacaine. So during operations on extremities out of 20 patients surgical anesthesia developed in 18 patients. Fattorini F. et al. D in their study stated the same effectiveness of bupivacaine and levobupivacaine, but when using levobupivacaine in one patient general anesthesia was used due to insufficient spinal anesthesia. Other studies also reported similar efficacy of the two drugs, but surgical satisfaction with intraoperative anesthesia was 92.9% for bupivacaine and 83.9% for levobupivacaine for knee arthoroscopy. In their study, P Gautier et al. noted significantly lower efficacy of levobupivacaine in caesarean section compared to bupivacaine and ropivacaine for intrathecal use: 80% vs. 90% and 87%, respectively. According to Heng Sia et al. there is no clear evidence of the advantage of hyperbaric bupivacaine over isobaric bupivacaine for spinal anesthesia for cesarean section. The authors also noted that adequate randomized clinical trials with clear definitions, criteria and methodology for evaluating the transition to general anesthesia, requirements for additional analgesia, nausea, vomiting and sensory testing are needed. There is no clear practical guide to help anesthesiologists make informed decisions about the use of some form of intrathecal bupivacaine in non-cesarean surgery. Carefully designed, adequately conducted studies can provide further results that will contribute to sound clinical decision making. Given the above, the aim of the study is to compare the effectiveness of spinal anesthesia (SA) performed with 0.5% isobaric bupivacaine solution, 0.5% levobupivacaine solution and 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine solution in equivalent volumes in lower limb surgeries.
In modern anesthesiology, peripheral nerve blocks are performed using ultrasound control and electrical stimulation of peripheral nerves (PEN), or only ultrasound control or only PEN. The most effective methods are with the use of ultrasound control. Until now, the effectiveness of the sciatic nerve blockade by the subgluteal approach, performed only under ultrasound control without ESP, in comparison with the blockade of the sciatic nerve performed under ultrasound control with ESP, has not been established. Research hypothesis: the blockade of the sciatic nerve by the subgluteal approach performed only under ultrasound control has the same effectiveness as the blockade performed under the ultrasound control with EPN.
Phase 0/1 local application of the monoclonal antibody (Mab) sB24M in patients with purulent pyoderma (chronic ulcerative pyoderma) by injection into the affected areas. Monoclonal antibody (Mab) sB24 negatively regulates immune-inflammatory processes through CD47 / TNF-α Axis promotes epithelialization of damaged tissue.
The goal of the project: to study the dynamics of the humoral and cellular immunity in patients after pneumonia caused by the SARS-CoV-2 virus at different time intervals, in order to predict the duration of immune protection
Background: Many people think that people with mental disorders might be dangerous or unpredictable. These patients face various sources of disadvantages and experience discrimination on job interviews, in education, and housing. Mental health-related stigma (MHS) occurs not only within the public community, it is a growing issue among professionals as well. Aim: The investigators designed a prospective, observational, multi-centre, international study of 35 European countries to investigate the MHS among medical specialists and trainees in the field of general adult and child and adolescent psychiatry. Methods: An internet-based, anonymous survey will measure the stigmatizing attitude by using the local version of the Opening Minds Stigma Scale for Health Care Providers. Presentation of the Results: The results of the research will be published in an international peer-reviewed journal. Furthermore, the research team will present the results at national and international conferences.
Assess the Efficacy and Safety of MYL-1402O Compared with Avastin®, in the First-line Treatment of Patients with Stage IV Non-Squamous Non-Small Cell Lung Cancer
To develop a method of medical prevention of cardiovascular diseases caused by cardiotoxicity against the background of complex treatment of patients with primary resectable breast cancer to reduce the risk of cardiovascular complications
The purpose of this study is to assess the long-term safety of selexipag while providing continued selexipag treatment for participants who were previously enrolled in an Actelion-sponsored study with selexipag and who derived benefit from selexipag in indications for which a positive benefit-risk has been established.