---

Background and Objective: Using of laryngeal mask air way (LMA) was recommended for air way management in short duration elective surgeries. One of its side effects is the increasing of secretion of air way and subsequently laryngospasm. Anticholinergic drugs (hyoscine NBB and atropine) have been administrated to reduce of these side effects. This study was carried out to compare the atropin and hyoscine n-butylbromide (NBB) on hemodynamic and nausea and vomiting in anesthesia with laryngeal mask air way. Materials and Methods: In this randomized double- blind control trials, 100 patients (20-50 years) with class 1 and class 2 of Anesthesia, have been operated less than one hour under general anesthesia with LMA during 2007-08 in Beheshti hospital. These patients were divided to 2 groups every other one randomly with equal persons. After controlling the base of heart rate (HR) and mean arterial pressure (MAP), both groups was administrated to premed according weight. Then 0.5mg/5ml atropine to the first group and 10mg/5ml hyoscine NBB (Buscopan) to the second group was injected and hemodynamic was controlled after two minutes. Anesthesia with thiopental sodium was induced and LMA was inserted. Then hemodynamic was controlled during the time. The amount of secretions of air way was investigated according to the numbers of suction at the end of surgery and after removing of LMA. The severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting was assessed with attention to need of patients to antiemetic until 6 hours. Data was analyzed statistically. Results: Antiemetic effect of atropin and hyoscine n-butylbromide (NBB) was similar. With mild secretions, moderate and sever antisialague effect of hyoscine NBB was 80%, 18% and 2% and in atropine group was 72%, 22% and 6% retrospectively. Heart rate increase (less of 20%) without rising MAP was obsered in two groups. Conclusion: This study showed that the effects of hyoscine and atropine in decreasing airway secretions, nausea and vomiting is similar.

---

Background and Objective: Since the onset of the COVID-19 (Corona Virus Disease 2019) pandemic, several challenges have been proposed to the disease and the causing viral agent. Accurate and rapid diagnosis of the virus is essential to control the spread and progression of the disease. Choosing a suitable sample in different phases of the disease will reduce the false-negative results. This study was performed to identify the SARS-CoV-2 (Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2) genome in the blood samples of COVID-19 patients.
Methods: This descriptive-analytical study was performed by census method on 100 whole blood samples of patients (50 recovery and 50 deceased) with a definitive diagnosis of COVID-19 (positive Real-Time RT-PCR test of nasopharyngeal swab samples) admitted to Shahid Sayyad Shirazi educational and medical center in Gorgan during 2020-21. Clinical and laboratory findings were compared in the two groups of patients. The viral nucleic acid was extracted from the whole blood samples of the patients, and the presence of the virus genome was investigated using primer and probes via the Real-Time RT-PCR method.
Results: The age of the recovered patients (49.06±15.1 years) was significantly was lower than deceased patients (58.3±12.4 years) (P<0.05). Clinical symptoms including cough, shortness of breath, sputum secretion, and vomiting in deceased patients were significantly more than recovery group (P<0.05). The lymphocytes count and platelet level in the deceased group were lower than in the recovered group. Level of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH) was higher in the deceased group in compare to recovered group (P<0.05). The virus genome identified in the blood samples of 7 patients (3 recovered and 4 deceased), which had no significant relationship with the outcome of the disease.
Conclusion: The use of blood samples for the diagnosis of COVID-19 is not appropriate.