AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Review Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-1919/386
Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and RI, Ammapettai, Kanchipuram Dt-603108. INDIA
*Corresponding Author: Krishna Prasad T, Professor, Dept of Anaesthesiology, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and RI, Ammapettai, Deemed University, Kanchipuram Dt- 603108. India.
Citation: Kavin Adhitya, Krishna Prasad. T, Preetha Tamilchelvan, Soundarya Priyadharsini. K, (2024), Subhypnotic doses of Propofol for Nausea and Vomiting, J Clinical Research and Reports, 16(2); DOI:10.31579/2690-1919/386
Copyright: © 2024, Krishna Prasad T. K. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.
Received: 12 June 2024 | Accepted: 19 June 2024 | Published: 28 June 2024
Keywords: propofol; sub hypnotic; nausea; vomiting
The second most frequent postoperative complication following wound infection is postoperative nausea and vomiting. Retching and vomiting can cause a wound to dehisce, extending hospital stays and increasing costs. Numerous clinical studies have revealed that propofol is equally efficient at lowering the incidence of nausea and vomiting after intrathecal morphine administration as it is at reducing pruritus.
Aim:
The aim of the study was to analyse the antiemetic effects of sub hypnotic dose of propofol in various surgical conditions.
Methods:
An extensive research of all materials related to the topic was carried out in the PubMed and Google scholar search engine .relevant research articles focusing on sub hypnotic doses of Propofol for nausea and vomiting published since 2019 were included in the review .several review articles were excluded, and studies related to anaesthesia were included from 241articles, narrowing it down to a total of 7 studies which implies the subhypnotic doses of the drug in various anaesthesia related clinical scenarios. A total of 7 studies similar to the current study objectives were included in the study and analyzed. keywords used in the searches included Propofol, sub hypnotic, nausea, vomiting.
Conclusion:
Sub hypnotic dose of Propofol (0.5mg-1.0mg/kg/hr) given pre operatively effectively reduce post-operative nausea and vomiting in various surgical operation. But the duration of its anti-emetic effect seems to be lower than other anti-emetic drugs in the market. Still it can be effectively used in reducing post op and intra op nausea and vomiting.
Because of its multiple aetiology, postoperative nausea and vomiting continues to be the most common surgical complication. Laparoscopic procedures contribute for a further increase in incidence, which now stands at around 40-75%. Various drugs have been tried to prevent delay in recovery room, aspiration increased intra cranial pressure .in addition to the above vomiting and retching can result in wound dehiscence, prolonging hospital stays and raising costs, postoperative nausea and vomiting can also result in problems such dyselectrolytemia, haemorrhage, and aspiration of gastrointestinal contents.
Among the variety of drugs tried, Low dosages of propofol have been shown to be an effective antiemetic in individuals undergoing cancer treatment and surgery. However, the exact mechanism of action is still unknown. A new intravenous anaesthetic inducing agent called propofol has direct antiemetic characteristics and is associated with significantly less postoperative nausea and vomiting than existing anaesthetic medications.1
Method:
An extensive research of all materials related to the topic was carried out in the PubMed and Google scholar search engine .relevant research articles focusing on sub hypnotic doses of Propofol for nausea and vomiting published since 2019 were included in the review .several review articles were excluded, and studies related to anaesthesia were included from 241articles, narrowing it down to a total of 7 studies which implies the subhypnotic doses of the drug in various anaesthesia related clinical scenarios. A total of 7 studies similar to the current study objectives were included in the study and analyzed. keywords used in the searches included Propofol, sub hypnotic, nausea, vomiting.
Review of literature:
1. Sintayhu A et al. Studied the performance of a low dose of propofol in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting following gynecologic surgery in comparison to metoclopromide. Gynaecological surgical procedures are linked to a 60–83% higher risk of post-operative nausea and vomiting. Propofol was initially approved as an anaesthetic for induction and maintenance, despite the above. This study concentrated on how propofol differs from metoclopromide in terms of its antiemetic properties. This study shows there was no statistically significant difference between the propofol and metoclopromide groups in the overall incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first 24 postoperative hours (p=0.36). However, within the first six postoperative hours, the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was lower in the propofol group (41% vs. 64.1% with a p value of 0.04) than in the metoclopromide group (64.1%), indicating that propofol significantly reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting during this period. There is no statistically significant difference between the propofol and metoclopromide groups in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting at the 12-hour mark (p=0.49). At 24 postoperative hours, there was no difference between the two groups in the incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting (p=0.63). Additionally, the incidence of nausea was significantly lower in the propofol group (41% vs. 64.1%) in the first 6 hours (P=0.04) but not significantly different at 12 or 24 postoperative hours. The findings of this study are consistent with research conducted in Turkey, which found that metoclopromide (0.2 mg/kg) and propofol (0.5 mg/kg) are equally effective in preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting. In this RCT study, the incidence of nausea was 6 (30%) in the propofol group, 9 (45%) in the metoclopromide group, and 16 (80%) in the placebo group, with a significant p value of 0.002; however, there was no statistically significant difference at 4-12 and 12 -24 hours. The antiemetics were administered at the conclusion of surgery in both studies, which is the most likely explanation for the similarities between the two studies. Our study's findings are also consistent with those of a study conducted in India that used metoclopramide (0.2 mg/kg) or ondansetron (0.1 mg/kg) in addition to propofol (0.5 mg/kg) to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting following ENT surgery. The percentage of patients who received ondansetron, metoclopromide, or propofol who experienced postoperative nausea and vomiting within the first 24 hours was 20%, 70%, and 50%, respectively (p 0.05). The various types of surgery investigated and population demographics may help to explain slight variations in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting reported. Due to direct or indirect vestibular system stimulation, middle ear surgery is specifically linked to a higher incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.. Based on findings, we advise using low-dose propofol rather than metoclopromide during the first six postoperative hours as it is a more effective antiemetic.2
2. Kampo.S et al studied that with using a sub-hypnotic dose of propofol in a caesarean delivery patient, postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pruritus caused by intrathecal morphine can be reduced. According to the data, there was incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting in 108 (93.9%) parturient from the control group, 10 (8.7%) from the propofol group, and 8 (7.0%) from the metoclopramide group. The incidence of post-operative nausea and vomiting did not differ significantly between the propofol and metoclopramide groups. (P = 0.99; 0.31; and 0.35 respectively). From the control, propofol, and metoclopramide groups, respectively, 105 (97.2%), 1 (10.0%), and 3 (37.5%) of the pregnant women got antiemetic medications. When a pregnant woman is having a caesarean section while under spinal anaesthesia with intrathecal morphine, a sub-hypnotic dose of propofol is just as helpful as metoclopramide in preventing post-operative nausea and vomiting. Following intrathecal morphine administration, a sub-hypnotic dosage of propofol dramatically lowers the incidence of postoperative pruritus.3
3. Tilahun Bantie A et al studied the outcomes of Propofol vs. Dexamethasone for Post-surgical Vomiting and Nausea in Ear, Nose, and Throat Surgical procedures. High rates of postoperative nausea and vomiting following ENT surgery have been reported, particularly in patients who did not receive prophylactic antiemetics. During surgery, serotonin is released from enterochromaffin cells in the gastrointestinal tract and binds to visceral receptors of the 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 subtype, stimulating vagal afferents to conduct impulses to the chemosensory trigger zone, which is on the dorsal surface of the medulla oblongata at the caudal end of the fourth ventricle. Chemoreceptor Trigger Zone stimulation due to the arrived stimulus will lead to Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting. The requirement for rescue anti-emetics was relatively lower in dexamethasone group. Glucocorticoids have been widely used to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting during chemotherapy use or general anesthesia. Research shows that dexamethasone decreases 5-hydroxytryptamine production and release and decreases permeability across the Blood-Brain Barrier, which lowers the amount of 5-hydroxytryptamine available to chemical sensors despite the fact that the antiemetic mechanism is not fully understood. Dexamethasone use, however, may be linked to an increased risk of infection, stalled healing of wounds, and interference with the function of the adrenal glands as a decrease in endogenous steroid synthesis brought on by negative feedback. While there were no participants experiencing nausea and vomiting in the latter period, the incidence of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting was low in the dexamethasone group between the hours of 0 and 6 and between the hours of 12 and 24. (i.e., 12–24 hrs Dexamethasone's quick onset and protracted duration of action may explain why there is little to no postoperative nausea and vomiting when used as directed (i.e., 72 hours). Similarly, this study's ENT surgery patients who received a bolus dose of propofol experienced preventative antiemetic effects.Propofol still had a protective effect, but it started to wane over time when compared to the dexamethasone group. In accord with this finding, dexamethasone recipients required less rescue antiemetic therapy than propofol recipients over the course of a 24-hour period (5% versus 12.5%, p = 0.23). Statistically significant results were obtained at the 12th to 24th hour time period (p < 0>4. Hassani E et al aimed to compare the propofol, dexamethasone, and ondansetron effects on nausea and vomiting in cesarean section. 120 women between the years of 15 and 35 who were candidates for caesarean sections under spinal anaesthesia were participated in this double-blind, randomised clinical trial investigation. Patients were placed into four groups at random (three-drug groups and control group). Patients in group O received 0.05 mg/kg ondansetron, group D received 0.1 mg/kg dexamethasone, group P received 0.2 mg/kg propofol, and group C received normal saline (group C). Comparison of nausea and vomiting during recovery and 6 hours following surgery. Both nausea and vomiting were highest in group C during recovery and 6 hours following surgery, whereas they were lowest in group O. the frequency of nausea was 36.7% in both recovery and 6 hours after surgery, and the frequency of vomiting was 40% and 33.3% in the recovery and 6 hours after surgery respectively. Among three drug groups, nausea and vomiting were higher in group D in both the recovery room and 6 hours after surgery. The frequency of vomiting was 33.3% and 16.7% in recovery and 6 hours after surgery in group D, respectively. These differences were statistically significant between the four groups (P<0>5. Acharya SA et al Compared antiemetic properties of ondansetron (4 mg i.v; n = 40) and ramosetron (0.3 mg i.v; n = 40) with propofol (0.5 mg/kg i.v; n = 40) on 120 ASA I/II patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Additionally compared were the side effects of study drug, anaesthesia recovery time, readiness for PACU release, and patient satisfaction. Ramosetron had the lowest incidence of vomiting and the greatest requirement for rescue antiemetics compared to the group receiving propofol. Time to recovery was more in Propofol group was statistically significant. Readiness for PACU discharge was comparable in all the three groups. Subhypnotic dose of propofol requires more rescue antiemetic than Ondansetron and Ramosetron because of its short duration of action. Between Ondansetron and Ramosetron the latter is more effective in postoperative nausea and vomiting prevention.6
6. Nisarga R. compared the efficacy of sub hypnotic dose of midazolam and propofol in decreasing nausea and vomiting in caesarean section under spinal anaesthesia. All of the trial participants received the prescribed intervention and were follow-up until the study's conclusion. There were no dropouts or exclusions. The demographic parameters of the patients were similar between the two groups. The proportion of patients in ASA classes I and II was evenly distributed among the groups .The mean surgery duration did not significantly differ between the groups. The mean value of SBP, DBP, RR, and SPO2 were consistent in both groups in all intervals and were not statistically significant. There was no statistically significant change in heart rate in either group at any of the intervals. There was no maternal respiratory depression in either group. When compared to Group M, Group P experienced a lower incidence of nausea and vomiting (IV). Group M members reported nausea (16.67% (5/30), retching (6/30), and vomiting (26.67%). In group P 16.67% (5/30) had nausea, 6.67% (2) had retching, and 10.00% (11/60) had vomiting. When combined symptoms, statistically significant decrease in nausea, retching and vomiting was found in group p compared to group M. During the first minute, the Apgar score had a mean value of 8.470±507 in group M and 8.400±498 in group P. With a p-value of 0.61, it was ruled that this was statistically insignificant. The mean value of Apgar score was 9.47 in group M and 9.40 in group P during the 5th minute with p-value of 0.651 which was not statistically significant. Sub hypnotic Dose of propofol significantly decreases intraoperative nausea and vomiting in caesarean section under spinal Anesthesia compared to sub hypnotic dose of midazolam.7
7. Ray H et al Studied Propofol and its used during a caesarian delivery under spinal anaesthesia to manage nausea and vomiting.The result of study indicates the incidence of intraoperative emetic episodes in caesarean delivery is very high. In the study 6% of patients in propofol group experienced intra-operative vomiting, while in placebo group it was 30%(p=0.004). 4% of patients in propofol group experienced intraoperative retching, while placebo group it was 26% (p=0.005). Also 4% of patient in propofol group experienced intraoperative nausea, while in placebo group it was 22% (p=0.01). emetic episodes are observed more intraoperatively than post operatively due to anxiety surgical manipulations, vagal activity, blood loss, uterotonic agents, antibiotics, vigorous movements etc. use of rescue antiemetics was 6% in propofol group while in placebo group it was 26% (p=0.01). Thus in the study we found that propofol at 1mg/kg/hr infusion, administered immediately after clamping the umbilical cord, significantly decreased the incidence and severity of nausea, retching and vomiting and the need for rescue antiemetic therapy compared with placebo. There were no clinically significant adverse effects among the group.8
Sub hypnotic dose of Propofol (0.5mg-1.0mg/kg/hr) given pre operatively effectively reduce post-operative nausea and vomiting when given as infusion.
Clearly Auctoresonline and particularly Psychology and Mental Health Care Journal is dedicated to improving health care services for individuals and populations. The editorial boards' ability to efficiently recognize and share the global importance of health literacy with a variety of stakeholders. Auctoresonline publishing platform can be used to facilitate of optimal client-based services and should be added to health care professionals' repertoire of evidence-based health care resources.
Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Intervention The submission and review process was adequate. However I think that the publication total value should have been enlightened in early fases. Thank you for all.
Journal of Women Health Care and Issues By the present mail, I want to say thank to you and tour colleagues for facilitating my published article. Specially thank you for the peer review process, support from the editorial office. I appreciate positively the quality of your journal.
Journal of Clinical Research and Reports I would be very delighted to submit my testimonial regarding the reviewer board and the editorial office. The reviewer board were accurate and helpful regarding any modifications for my manuscript. And the editorial office were very helpful and supportive in contacting and monitoring with any update and offering help. It was my pleasure to contribute with your promising Journal and I am looking forward for more collaboration.
We would like to thank the Journal of Thoracic Disease and Cardiothoracic Surgery because of the services they provided us for our articles. The peer-review process was done in a very excellent time manner, and the opinions of the reviewers helped us to improve our manuscript further. The editorial office had an outstanding correspondence with us and guided us in many ways. During a hard time of the pandemic that is affecting every one of us tremendously, the editorial office helped us make everything easier for publishing scientific work. Hope for a more scientific relationship with your Journal.
The peer-review process which consisted high quality queries on the paper. I did answer six reviewers’ questions and comments before the paper was accepted. The support from the editorial office is excellent.
Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. I had the experience of publishing a research article recently. The whole process was simple from submission to publication. The reviewers made specific and valuable recommendations and corrections that improved the quality of my publication. I strongly recommend this Journal.
Dr. Katarzyna Byczkowska My testimonial covering: "The peer review process is quick and effective. The support from the editorial office is very professional and friendly. Quality of the Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on cardiology that is useful for other professionals in the field.
Thank you most sincerely, with regard to the support you have given in relation to the reviewing process and the processing of my article entitled "Large Cell Neuroendocrine Carcinoma of The Prostate Gland: A Review and Update" for publication in your esteemed Journal, Journal of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics". The editorial team has been very supportive.
Testimony of Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology: work with your Reviews has been a educational and constructive experience. The editorial office were very helpful and supportive. It was a pleasure to contribute to your Journal.
Dr. Bernard Terkimbi Utoo, I am happy to publish my scientific work in Journal of Women Health Care and Issues (JWHCI). The manuscript submission was seamless and peer review process was top notch. I was amazed that 4 reviewers worked on the manuscript which made it a highly technical, standard and excellent quality paper. I appreciate the format and consideration for the APC as well as the speed of publication. It is my pleasure to continue with this scientific relationship with the esteem JWHCI.
This is an acknowledgment for peer reviewers, editorial board of Journal of Clinical Research and Reports. They show a lot of consideration for us as publishers for our research article “Evaluation of the different factors associated with side effects of COVID-19 vaccination on medical students, Mutah university, Al-Karak, Jordan”, in a very professional and easy way. This journal is one of outstanding medical journal.
Dear Hao Jiang, to Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing We greatly appreciate the efficient, professional and rapid processing of our paper by your team. If there is anything else we should do, please do not hesitate to let us know. On behalf of my co-authors, we would like to express our great appreciation to editor and reviewers.
As an author who has recently published in the journal "Brain and Neurological Disorders". I am delighted to provide a testimonial on the peer review process, editorial office support, and the overall quality of the journal. The peer review process at Brain and Neurological Disorders is rigorous and meticulous, ensuring that only high-quality, evidence-based research is published. The reviewers are experts in their fields, and their comments and suggestions were constructive and helped improve the quality of my manuscript. The review process was timely and efficient, with clear communication from the editorial office at each stage. The support from the editorial office was exceptional throughout the entire process. The editorial staff was responsive, professional, and always willing to help. They provided valuable guidance on formatting, structure, and ethical considerations, making the submission process seamless. Moreover, they kept me informed about the status of my manuscript and provided timely updates, which made the process less stressful. The journal Brain and Neurological Disorders is of the highest quality, with a strong focus on publishing cutting-edge research in the field of neurology. The articles published in this journal are well-researched, rigorously peer-reviewed, and written by experts in the field. The journal maintains high standards, ensuring that readers are provided with the most up-to-date and reliable information on brain and neurological disorders. In conclusion, I had a wonderful experience publishing in Brain and Neurological Disorders. The peer review process was thorough, the editorial office provided exceptional support, and the journal's quality is second to none. I would highly recommend this journal to any researcher working in the field of neurology and brain disorders.
Dear Agrippa Hilda, Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery, Editorial Coordinator, I trust this message finds you well. I want to extend my appreciation for considering my article for publication in your esteemed journal. I am pleased to provide a testimonial regarding the peer review process and the support received from your editorial office. The peer review process for my paper was carried out in a highly professional and thorough manner. The feedback and comments provided by the authors were constructive and very useful in improving the quality of the manuscript. This rigorous assessment process undoubtedly contributes to the high standards maintained by your journal.
International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews. I strongly recommend to consider submitting your work to this high-quality journal. The support and availability of the Editorial staff is outstanding and the review process was both efficient and rigorous.
Thank you very much for publishing my Research Article titled “Comparing Treatment Outcome Of Allergic Rhinitis Patients After Using Fluticasone Nasal Spray And Nasal Douching" in the Journal of Clinical Otorhinolaryngology. As Medical Professionals we are immensely benefited from study of various informative Articles and Papers published in this high quality Journal. I look forward to enriching my knowledge by regular study of the Journal and contribute my future work in the field of ENT through the Journal for use by the medical fraternity. The support from the Editorial office was excellent and very prompt. I also welcome the comments received from the readers of my Research Article.
Dear Erica Kelsey, Editorial Coordinator of Cancer Research and Cellular Therapeutics Our team is very satisfied with the processing of our paper by your journal. That was fast, efficient, rigorous, but without unnecessary complications. We appreciated the very short time between the submission of the paper and its publication on line on your site.
I am very glad to say that the peer review process is very successful and fast and support from the Editorial Office. Therefore, I would like to continue our scientific relationship for a long time. And I especially thank you for your kindly attention towards my article. Have a good day!
"We recently published an article entitled “Influence of beta-Cyclodextrins upon the Degradation of Carbofuran Derivatives under Alkaline Conditions" in the Journal of “Pesticides and Biofertilizers” to show that the cyclodextrins protect the carbamates increasing their half-life time in the presence of basic conditions This will be very helpful to understand carbofuran behaviour in the analytical, agro-environmental and food areas. We greatly appreciated the interaction with the editor and the editorial team; we were particularly well accompanied during the course of the revision process, since all various steps towards publication were short and without delay".
I would like to express my gratitude towards you process of article review and submission. I found this to be very fair and expedient. Your follow up has been excellent. I have many publications in national and international journal and your process has been one of the best so far. Keep up the great work.
We are grateful for this opportunity to provide a glowing recommendation to the Journal of Psychiatry and Psychotherapy. We found that the editorial team were very supportive, helpful, kept us abreast of timelines and over all very professional in nature. The peer review process was rigorous, efficient and constructive that really enhanced our article submission. The experience with this journal remains one of our best ever and we look forward to providing future submissions in the near future.
I am very pleased to serve as EBM of the journal, I hope many years of my experience in stem cells can help the journal from one way or another. As we know, stem cells hold great potential for regenerative medicine, which are mostly used to promote the repair response of diseased, dysfunctional or injured tissue using stem cells or their derivatives. I think Stem Cell Research and Therapeutics International is a great platform to publish and share the understanding towards the biology and translational or clinical application of stem cells.
I would like to give my testimony in the support I have got by the peer review process and to support the editorial office where they were of asset to support young author like me to be encouraged to publish their work in your respected journal and globalize and share knowledge across the globe. I really give my great gratitude to your journal and the peer review including the editorial office.
I am delighted to publish our manuscript entitled "A Perspective on Cocaine Induced Stroke - Its Mechanisms and Management" in the Journal of Neuroscience and Neurological Surgery. The peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal are excellent. The manuscripts published are of high quality and of excellent scientific value. I recommend this journal very much to colleagues.
Dr.Tania Muñoz, My experience as researcher and author of a review article in The Journal Clinical Cardiology and Interventions has been very enriching and stimulating. The editorial team is excellent, performs its work with absolute responsibility and delivery. They are proactive, dynamic and receptive to all proposals. Supporting at all times the vast universe of authors who choose them as an option for publication. The team of review specialists, members of the editorial board, are brilliant professionals, with remarkable performance in medical research and scientific methodology. Together they form a frontline team that consolidates the JCCI as a magnificent option for the publication and review of high-level medical articles and broad collective interest. I am honored to be able to share my review article and open to receive all your comments.
“The peer review process of JPMHC is quick and effective. Authors are benefited by good and professional reviewers with huge experience in the field of psychology and mental health. The support from the editorial office is very professional. People to contact to are friendly and happy to help and assist any query authors might have. Quality of the Journal is scientific and publishes ground-breaking research on mental health that is useful for other professionals in the field”.
Dear editorial department: On behalf of our team, I hereby certify the reliability and superiority of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews in the peer review process, editorial support, and journal quality. Firstly, the peer review process of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is rigorous, fair, transparent, fast, and of high quality. The editorial department invites experts from relevant fields as anonymous reviewers to review all submitted manuscripts. These experts have rich academic backgrounds and experience, and can accurately evaluate the academic quality, originality, and suitability of manuscripts. The editorial department is committed to ensuring the rigor of the peer review process, while also making every effort to ensure a fast review cycle to meet the needs of authors and the academic community. Secondly, the editorial team of the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is composed of a group of senior scholars and professionals with rich experience and professional knowledge in related fields. The editorial department is committed to assisting authors in improving their manuscripts, ensuring their academic accuracy, clarity, and completeness. Editors actively collaborate with authors, providing useful suggestions and feedback to promote the improvement and development of the manuscript. We believe that the support of the editorial department is one of the key factors in ensuring the quality of the journal. Finally, the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is renowned for its high- quality articles and strict academic standards. The editorial department is committed to publishing innovative and academically valuable research results to promote the development and progress of related fields. The International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews is reasonably priced and ensures excellent service and quality ratio, allowing authors to obtain high-level academic publishing opportunities in an affordable manner. I hereby solemnly declare that the International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews has a high level of credibility and superiority in terms of peer review process, editorial support, reasonable fees, and journal quality. Sincerely, Rui Tao.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions I testity the covering of the peer review process, support from the editorial office, and quality of the journal.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, we deeply appreciate the interest shown in our work and its publication. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you. The peer review process, as well as the support provided by the editorial office, have been exceptional, and the quality of the journal is very high, which was a determining factor in our decision to publish with you.
The peer reviewers process is quick and effective, the supports from editorial office is excellent, the quality of journal is high. I would like to collabroate with Internatioanl journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews journal clinically in the future time.
Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I would like to express my sincerest gratitude for the trust placed in our team for the publication in your journal. It has been a true pleasure to collaborate with you on this project. I am pleased to inform you that both the peer review process and the attention from the editorial coordination have been excellent. Your team has worked with dedication and professionalism to ensure that your publication meets the highest standards of quality. We are confident that this collaboration will result in mutual success, and we are eager to see the fruits of this shared effort.
