AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Research Article
*Corresponding Author: Kianoush Saberi, Affiliation: Imam Khomeini hospital complex, Tehran University of Medical Sciences, Tehran, Iran.
Citation: Kianoush Saberi, Mehrdad Salehi, Hasti Saberi, Shahnaz Sharifi, Hosein Saberi. (2023), Effect of Perioperative Administration of Dexmedetomidine in Cardiac Surgeries: A Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial, Psychology and Mental Health Care, 7(7): DOI:10.31579/2637-8892/235
Copyright: © 2023, Surya S. Singh. 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: 25 September 2023 | Accepted: 10 October 2023 | Published: 17 October 2023
Keywords: dexmedetomidine; cardiac-surgery; atrial-fibrillation
Introduction: Despite many developments in the health care of cardiac surgery patients, yet 5-30% of them may become challenged due to renal dysfunction, delirium, and arrhythmia. Eliminating or reducing these unwanted outcomes is likely to improve the prognosis of them. Several studies suggested that dexmedetomidine (DEX), a highly selective short-acting α-2 adrenergic agonist predominantly used for anti-delirium and sedative characteristics, may be useful for reducing the adverse effect of cardiac surgeries. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the outcome of the administration of dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing cardiac surgeries.
Method: We included the data from patents who underwent CABG without a valve, CABG with valve surgery, and valve-only surgery from August 2018 to November 2018. A total of 51 patients were eligible for our study after extraction. For the DEX group, the infusion of DEX was started 10 minutes before anesthesia induction in a 0.2-0.6 µg/Kg/h rate. And the same amount of normal saline 0.9% was infused for the control group. The infusion was continued postoperatively until extubation (maximum for 24 hours). The patients were compared primarily for Acute Kidney Injury (AKI), delirium, new-onset atrial fibrillation (AF) rhythm.
Results: We had a total of 51 patients which 33(64.70%) received DEX, and 18(35.29%) received a placebo. There was no significant difference between groups for demographic data. One patient (16.7%) from the DEX group and 5 patients (83.3%) from the control group revealed an AF rhythm after surgery (p=0.009). No patient faced delirium. 7 patients seemed to be AKI, of which 5(71.4%) were in the DEX group, and 2(28.6%) were in the control group (p>0.05).
Conclusion: there might be a meaningful reduction of new-onset AF rhythm in adult patients who use DEX after cardiac surgeries.
Before introduction of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG), a reliable method for healing coronary stenosis, most of the patients must undergo cardiac arrest using a cardiopulmonary pump (CPB); the traditional approach of using CPB gave its place to the newer off-pump coronary artery bypass grafting with respect to fixation technology
[1]. Despite these and many other developments, yet 5-30% of patients undergoing cardiac surgeries may become challenged due to renal dysfunction[2], delirium[3,4], pathological changes in electrocardiogram (EKG) rhythms[5]. Eliminating or reducing these unwanted outcomes is likely to improve the prognosis in patients who have undergone cardiac surgery. Therefore, various approaches, tools, and drugs have been clinically applied to reduce the incidence of postoperative issues. Several studies, consisting of laboratory and clinical researches, suggested that dexmedetomidine (DEX) may be useful for reducing the adverse effect of cardiac surgeries [6,7]. Studies indicated that dexmedetomidine is associated with fewer incidences of postoperative complications in patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Current guidelines suggest using either propofol or dexmedetomidine instead of benzodiazepines to improve clinical outcomes [3]. Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective, short-acting α-2 adrenergic agonist that initially has been used as an intravenous anti-delirium drug in ICU and then approved as a sedative [8]. Besides safe and effective sedation, it may significantly reduce the use of analgesics, β-blockers, antiemetics, epinephrine, and diuretics. Recent studies also found that DEX has a protective effect on the kidney [7]. Kidney injury can lead to renal insufficiency, hyperkalemia, water intoxication, fatal arrhythmia, and cerebral edema, which are often life-threatening. Dexmedetomidine decreases the norepinephrine level in the blood, and thus it induces renal artery vasodilatation and increases renal blood flow and urine output[9]. The purpose of the current study was to investigate the outcome of administration of dexmedetomidine in patients undergoing cardiac surgeries from different aspects such as hemodynamic stability, EKG rhythm pathologic changes, delirium occurrence, kidney function, sedation-agitation status, pain feeling in ICU, time of mechanical ventilation, etc.
Method:
After obtaining the confirmation of the Tehran University of medical sciences ethics committee, all patients who meet our criteria at Imam Khomeini hospital, a university-based 1100 bed center, from August 2018 to November 2018 entered our study. Our inclusion criteria were anyone who is a candidate for CABG without a valve, CABG with valve surgery, and valve-only surgery during this period. We did not enter the patients with any aorta complication or any surgery that needed deep hypothermic circulatory arrest. A total of 72 patients entered the study, in which 21 cases were excluded from the study concerning our exclusion criteria. Our exclusion criteria were any urologic or nephrological problem consist of: a base creatinine more than 2, history of permanent or temporary dialysis, hydronephrosis or kidney infection, history of contrast administration for MRI or CT-scan, urine retention and using diapers or foley catheter and any renal surgery such as nephrectomy or transplant; Also, we excluded the patients with history of long-term sedative drugs (such as oxazepam, diazepam, clonazepam, alprazolam, gabapentin, etc.), history of antidepressant use ( such as sertraline, fluoxetine, fluvoxamine, etc.), any drug abuse, exciter drugs usage (like crystal, Ritalin, cocaine, etc.), any sleep disorder detected in tests and Non-Invasive ventilator extended usage. A total of 51 patients entered our study who 31(%) of them were in the dexmedetomidine (DEX) group, and 18(%) were in control group who double blindly received whether dexmedetomidine infusion of normal saline 0.9% and then data were extracted retrospectively according to patients’ file; neither the clinical staffs (consist of anesthesia crew, surgical crew and nursing group), nor data analyzer was aware of the groups until the end of analyze. We infused dexmedetomidine, 10 min. Before anesthesia induction in a 0.2-0.6 µg/Kg/h. An arterial-line was then fixed in the radial or brachial site. After standard monitoring (consist of a 5-lead EKG, pulse oximetry, and non-invasive blood pressure) The induction of anesthesia was performed using propofol, fentanyl, midazolam, atracurium. Anesthesia was then maintained using an infusion of midazolam and propofol. A routine ABG was sent before induction, 5 min. after induction, before cross-clamp, during the pump as needed and after disconnecting from the pump and before transferring to ICU. ABG was assessed, and improvement of ventilator tidal volume and respiratory rate was adjusted as needed along with drug administration if needed. An end-tidal CO2 of 35-45 was considered as normal. DEX infusion was continued postoperatively until weaning from the ventilator. If the patient was not extubated after 24 hours, it was discontinued due to FDA recommendations on safe administration of DEX. If any drug needed infusion during and after the surgery, the data was documented. The data for hemodynamic (HR, systolic, and diastolic pressure) was documented during and after the surgery, according to the standard sheet. Mean arterial pressure (MAP) was then calculated using the formula and compared before induction and average of postoperative data. Richmond agitation-sedation scale (RASS)
[Table1]
| Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale | ||
| Score | Term | Description |
| +4 | Combative | Overtly combative, violent, danger to staff |
| +3 | Very agitated | Pulls or removes tubes or catheters; aggressive |
| +2 | Agitated | Frequent no purposeful movement, fights ventilator |
| +1 | Restless | Anxious, but movements not aggressive or vigorous |
| 0 | Alert and calm | ... |
| −1 | Drowsy | Not fully alert, but has sustained awakening (eye opening/eye contact) to voice (> 10 s) |
| −2 | Light sedation | Briefly awakens with eye contact to voice (< 10> |
| −3 | Moderate sedation | Movement or eye opening to voice (but no eye contact) |
| −4 | Deep sedation | No response to voice, but movement or eye opening to physical stimulation |
| −5 | Unable to rouse | No response to voice or physical stimulus |
and critical-care pain observation tool (CPOT) [Table2]
| The Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool (CPOT) | ||
| Indicator | Score | Description |
| Facial expression | Relaxed, neutral 0 | No muscle tension observed |
| Tense 1 | Presence of frowning, brow lowering, orbit tightening and levator contraction or any other change (e.g. opening eyes or tearing during nociceptive procedures) | |
| Grimacing 2 | All previous facial movements plus eyelid tightly closed (the patient may present with mouth open or biting the endotracheal tube) | |
| Body movements | Absence of movements 0 or normal position | Does not move at all (doesn’t necessarily mean absence of pain) or normal position (movements not aimed toward the pain site or not made for the purpose of protection) |
| Protection 1 | Slow, cautious movements, touching or rubbing the pain site, seeking attention through movements | |
| Restlessness/Agitation 2 | Pulling tube, attempting to sit up, moving limbs/thrashing, not following commands, striking at staff, trying to climb out of bed | |
Compliance with the ventilator (intubated patients)
OR
Vocalization (extubated patients) | Tolerating ventilator or movement 0 | Alarms not activated, easy ventilation |
| Coughing but tolerating 1 | Coughing, alarms may be activated but stop spontaneously | |
| Fighting ventilator 2 | Asynchrony: blocking ventilation, alarms frequently activated | |
Talking in normal tone or no sound 0 | Talking in normal tone or no sound | |
| Sighing, moaning 1 | Sighing, moaning | |
| Crying out, sobbing 2 | Crying out, sobbing | |
Muscle tension Evaluation by passive flexion or extension of upper limbs when patient is at rest or evaluation when patient is being turned | Relaxed 0 | No resistance to passive movements |
| Tense, rigid | Resistance to passive movements | |
| Very tense or rigid 2 | Strong resistance to passive movements or incapacity to complete them | |
| Total CPOT Score | ……/8 | |
was assessed according to Table1. Daily routine experiments for all the patients were BUN, Creatinine, Hematocrit, Hemoglobin, Platelets count, and WBC. The initial goal of the study was to detect AF rhythm from EKG interpretation, AKI, according to the latest KDIGO guidelines, delirium assessed by the Confusion Assessment Method for Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) [Table3],
| The Confusion Assessment Method for the Intensive Care Unit (CAM-ICU) |
| Features and descriptions |
| a. Acute onset or fluctuating course |
A. Is there evidence of an acute change in mental status from the baseline? B. Or, did the (abnormal) behavior fluctuate during the past 24 hours, that is, tend to come and go or increase and decrease in severity as evidenced by fluctuations on the Richmond Agitation Sedation Scale (RASS) or the Glasgow Coma Scale? |
| b. Inattention |
| Did the patient have difficulty focusing attention as evidenced by a score of less than 8 correct answers on either the visual or auditory components of the Attention Screening Examination (ASE)? |
| c. Disorganized thinking |
Is there evidence of disorganized or incoherent thinking as evidenced by incorrect answers to three or more of the 4 questions and inability to follow the commands? Questions 1. Will a stone float on water? 2. Are there fish in the sea? 3. Does 1-pound weigh more than 2 pounds? 4. Can you use a hammer to pound a nail? Commands 1. Are you having unclear thinking? 2. Hold up this many finger. (Examiner holds 2 fingers in front of the patient.) 3. Now do the same thing with the other hand (without holding the 2 fingers in front of the patient). (If the patient is already extubated from the ventilator, determine whether the patient’s thinking is disorganized or incoherent, such as rambling or irrelevant conversation, unclear or illogical flow of ideas, or unpredictable switching from subject to subject.) |
| d. Altered level of consciousness |
Is the patient’s level of consciousness anything other than alert, such as being vigilant or lethargic or in a stupor or coma? alert: spontaneously fully aware of environment and interacts appropriately vigilant: hyperalert lethargic: drowsy but easily aroused, unaware of some elements in the environment or not spontaneously interacting with the interviewer; becomes fully aware and appropriately interactive when prodded minimally stupor: difficult to arouse, unaware of some or all elements in the environment or not spontaneously interacting with the interviewer; becomes incompletely aware when prodded strongly; can be aroused only by vigorous and repeated stimuli and as soon as the stimulus ceases, sporous subject lapses back into unresponsive state coma: unarousable, unaware of all elements in the environment with no spontaneous interaction or awareness of the interviewer so that the interview is impossible even with maximal prodding |
| Is delirium available? |
mechanical ventilation by minutes and days of ICU stay after surgery. The sample size was estimated using IBM SPSS sample power (release 3.0.1);17 patients were sufficient for each group to achieve a power of 80% considering type one error of less than 5%. Data were analyzed using IBM SPSS Statistics (version 25) and expressed as Mean (lower bond-upper bond confidence interval95%) for continuous variables and Number(percentage) for categorical variables. Data then were analyzed using one-way ANOVA for continuous data and Chi-square for categorical data. A p-value of less than 0.05 considered significant.
We had a total of 51 persons;33(64.70%) in the DEX group and 18(35.29%) in the control group. 30(58.8%). Patients characteristics before surgery are defined in [Table 4].
| Variables | DEX group (n = 33) | Control group (n =18) | P value |
| Age (years) | 51.18±16.18 | 53.72±19.89 | 0.623 |
| Weight (kilograms) | 71.36±17.46 | 76.11±15.52 | 0.339 |
| Height (Centimeters) | 168.30±20.25 | 170.50±7.57 | 0.660 |
| Female gender | 20(60.60%) | 10(55.55%) | 0.476 |
| HTN | 14(63.63%) | 8(36.36%) | 0.673 |
| Thyroid disease | 3(9.09%) | 0(0.00%) | 0.543 |
| Cigarette smoking | 7(21.21%) | 2(11.11%) | 0.464 |
| EF | 40.60±16.16 | 34.00±15.80 | 0.166 |
| MAP | 91.38±29.70 | 92.44±14.09 | 0.887 |
| HR | 73.27±27.98 | 69.77±29.08 | 0.676 |
| Systolic BP | 132.21±45.69 | 133.33±20.95 | 0.922 |
| Diastolic BP | 70.96±22.88 | 72.00±13.21 | 0.861 |
| Creatinine base | 1.05±0.42 | 1.41±0.79 | 0.038 |
| Hemoglobin base | 10.26±3.94 | 11.40±3.43 | 0.309 |
Abbreviations: HTN = Hypertension; EF = Ejection Fraction; MAP = Mean Arterial Pressure; HR = Heart Rates; BP = Blood Pressure.
Table 4: patients’ characteristics
From the interpretation of the 12 lead EKG of the patients before the surgery, 3(5.9%) had an AF rhythm which 2(66.7%) were in the DEX group, and 1(33.3%) were in the control group (p>0.05). No bradycardia was reported. Only one (3%) of the DEX patients had more than 140 beats per minute tachycardia, and no one in the control group had presented with tachycardia (p>0.05). Neither PAC nor PVC rhythm was detected in this research. Also, EKGs indicated no flutter, myocardial infarction, and ischemic heart disease. 28(63.6%) of the patients with normal cardiac rhythm were in the DEX group, and 16(36.4%) of them were in our control group (p>0.05).
A total of 27(52.9%) of the patients had only done CABG surgery, 18(54.5%) from the DEX group and 9(50.0%) from the control group (p>0.05). Data from perioperative time and surgery details are summarized in [Table 5].
| variables | DEX group (n = 33) | Control group (n = 18) | P value |
| Surgery type | |||
| CABG | 18(66.66%) | 9(33.33%) | 0.492 |
| Valve(s) | 10(76.92%) | 3(23.07%) | 0.235 |
| CABG + Valve(s) | 4(50.00%) | 4(50.00%) | 0.287 |
| Pump time (Min.) | 75.27±66.18 | 88.88±47.22 | 0.621 |
| Cross-clamp time (Min.) | 48.00±47.22 | 43.05±43.09 | 0.714 |
| Off-pump surgery | 4(12.12%) | 2(11.11%) | 0.646 |
| Total surgery time (Minutes) | 373.27±129.71 | 256.55±112.62 | 0.819 |
| Serum intake (cc) | 4606.06±1303.58 | 4066.66±1429.10 | 0.178 |
| Blood and blood products intake | 14(42.42%) | 6(33.33%) | 0.371 |
| Diuresis (cc) | 1043.93±681.19 | 758.33±645.85 | 0.151 |
Data are described as Mean ± Standard deviation or Number (percentage within group)
Table 5: Perioperative data
During the surgery, a total of 20(39.2%) patients required blood products (packed cell, fresh frozen plasma, platelets); 14(42.4%) of the DEX patients and 6(33.3%) of the control group (p>0.05). 8(24.2%) of the DEX group and 3(16.7%) of the control group needed electroshock due to surgeons’ demand (p>0.05). In the routine ABGs, we detected 2(6.1%) acidosis in the DEX group and 1(5.6%) in the control group (p>0.05) from which all three of them needed improvement with Sodium bicarbonate (p>0.05) and all of them solved (p>0.05).
A total of 25(49.0%) of the patients needed an infusion of epinephrine, which consists of 14(42.4%) of the DEX group and 11(61.1%) of the control group (p>0.05). Also, one patient from each group (3.0% of DEX and 5.6% of the control group) needed norepinephrine (p>0.05). 28(84.8%) of the DEX group and 17(94.4%) of the control group received midazolam infusion (p>0.05). Also, 28(84.8%) of the DEX patients and 16(88.9%) of the control group sedated with fentanyl drip (p>0.05). Only 2(6.1%) of the DEX patients needed dopamine, and none of the control group needed, such (p>0.05). No patient received milrinone. 16 (48.5%) of the DEX group and 11(40.7%) of the control group required TNG due to hypertension (p>0.05). One of the DEX (3.0%) and one of the control group (5.6%) received furosemide infusion (p>0.05). Mean MAP before surgery for the DEX group was 91.38(80.84-101.91 CI95%), and for the control group was 92.44(85.43-99.45 CI 95%) (p>0.05). After the surgery, during the stay in ICU, the mean MAP was 61.12(55.43-66.81 CI 95%) in the DEX group and 65.50(56.23-74.77 CI95%) in control group (p>0.05).
The mean total mechanical ventilation time was 589.36(527.66-651.06 CI 95%) minutes in the DEX group and 521.11(409.50-632.71 CI 95%) minutes in the control group(p>0.05). Total ICU stays in the day had a mean of 2.36 days in the DEX group and 2.77 days in the control group (p>0.05). From our endpoints, 6 patients came front with AF Rhythm, which only 1(16.7%) of them were from the DEX group and the other 5(83.3%) were from the control group(p=0.009). No patient required dialysis after the surgery. No patient underwent redo surgery, and no one faced delirium. 7 patients seemed to be AKI, which 5(71.4%) were in the DEX group, and 2(28.6%) were in the control group (p>0.05).
This research was designed to investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine on patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Our primary endpoint was to compare the AKI occurrence between the DEX group and the placebo group. The results did not show any significant difference between the group who received DEX and the control group for AKI; indeed, we had a total of 7 AKI patients, which according to KDIGO classification, 2 of them were stage 2 and no patient from current study became stage3 AKI. There is a different possibility for this result; first that in our study, we used different drugs, especially midazolam and fentanyl, along with DEX which may affect the renoprotective characteristic of DEX(7). In a study from Ammar et al., creatinine increased significantly higher in the DEX group on day1. Also, they reported DEX might provide cardiac and renal protection during cardiac surgery though it had no impact on postoperative outcomes(1, 8, 10). However, some studies suggested that it may have a favorable impact on outcomes in patients with preexisting cardiac and/or renal dysfunction(11). In our study, we had excluded patients with any renal complication, and more studies on those patients are recommended. The results contradicted that of Liu et al. whereas they concluded perioperative administration of DEX in adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery might reduce the incidence of postoperative AKI(12). Future trials are needed to reduce the contradiction in nephrological effects of DEX in cardiac surgery patients. Another reason that increases the rate of AKI is low blood pressure and/or unstable hemodynamics. The etiology of renal injury is due mainly to the elevation of renin levels as a result of sympathetic overactivity in addition to nephrotoxic, inflammatory, and hemodynamic components. The patients in our study had a mean MAP of 91.38 for the DEX group and 92.44 for the control group before surgery and 61.12 for the DEX group and 65.50 for the control group after surgery. The results were not statistically significant, which was in line with Chang et. Al. study(13); Despite this fact, we see a lower MAP in the DEX group, which may explain why we had more AKI in the DEX group than in the control group. Despite diminution in blood pressure, the pain-relieving characteristics of DEX are questionable. In a study about fast-track management in off-pump CABG from Zientara et al., the DEX group needed less use of pain medication in the initial phase at ICU(8). In the current research, 84.8% of the DEX group and 88.9% of the control group required fentanyl infusion. These results revealed that most of the patients with or without DEX might need another pain-reliever. In our study, we chose to use an infusion of fentanyl instead of any drug stat administration, because the strategy in controlling pain is to prevent it beforehand, instead of healing it. In contrary to DEX low-potency in relieving pain, it can significantly increase the time of weaning. Mean mechanical ventilation time for the DEX group was 68 minutes higher compare to the control group; this was contrary to some other studies(8, 14) whereas they used propofol infusion for their control group. Although we used a placebo instead of propofol or any other drugs, for reaching a RASS about -1 to -2, we need to perfused more of midazolam and fentanyl in the control group. This might explain why, in some cases, DEX group wanted more time for weaning from ventilator. Although dexmedetomidine has effects on the brain locus coeruleus and the a2-adrenergic receptors of the spinal cord to result in sedation, sympatholytic, analgesia, and antinociception, both groups had the same CPOT and RASS in our study. This was in line with some other studies(15). Besides, DEX did not show any benefit in deep sedation(16) , and because of that, we should only consider it as an adjuvant to other drugs. The current research did not show any difference between groups for pain. This was contrary to some studies; among them a meta-analysis from Wang et al. reported that DEX could effectively relieve the pain intensity, extend the pain-free period, and decrease the consumption of opioids during postoperative recovery of adults in general anesthesia(17); however, their study extracted the data only from one cardiac surgery article. Further, another study in non-cardiac ICU suggests the advantage of DEX in analgesia(18). Indeed, we recommend a study explicitly designed for assessment of DEX capability to relieve pain in cardiac surgery patients; because the power of sample of our study was according to AKI-occurrence, the results cannot be trusted alone. All the patients experienced a mean ICU stay of about 2 days, and there was no difference between groups from that aspect of view. The results indicated a meaningful difference between groups for a new-onset AF rhythm after the surgery. This was in line with some other studies(5, 8) and explain the antiarrhythmic characteristic of DEX(19). However, a meta-analysis by zhu et al.(20) revealed that DEX could not reduce the incidence of AF compared to control medicines following cardiac surgery. DEX might have an increased influence on AF occurrence if patients had a history of AF. We had 3 patients in our study, which had AF rhythm before surgery, but none of them had AF rhythm after surgery. Most studies suggest that the postoperative administration of dexmedetomidine may reduce delirium in patients, particularly following cardiac surgery(2-4, 6, 21). We used the CAM-ICU tool to screen for delirium based on four features: (a) a fluctuating mental status, (b) inattention, (c) disorganized thinking, and; (d) altered level of consciousness. For the determination of delirium, a patient must display features (a) and (b), with either (c) or (d). In the current study, patients had not delirium. This may be a result of having a mean RASS of -2, which indicated a good and deep sleep. Although DEX known to improve the quality of sleep in critically ill patients(3, 22),reduces agitation(23) and reduce pain after cardiothoracic surgery(24, 25), we did not see any difference of RASS and CPOT between groups. This is probably due to the fact that patients from both groups received midazolam and fentanyl as needed.
The results from current research indicated that there might be a meaningful reduction of new-onset AF rhythm in adult patients who use DEX after cardiac surgeries. Further studies for achieving a more reliable result on DEX antiarrhythmic effects is suggested.
None.
Because current study was a retrograde research, the need for clinical trial registration was waved by the ethics committee of Tehran University of Medical sciences due to lack of clinical intervention.
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.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, I hope this message finds you well. I want to express my utmost gratitude for your excellent work and for the dedication and speed in the publication process of my article titled "Navigating Innovation: Qualitative Insights on Using Technology for Health Education in Acute Coronary Syndrome Patients." I am very satisfied with the peer review process, the support from the editorial office, and the quality of the journal. I hope we can maintain our scientific relationship in the long term.
Dear Monica Gissare, - Editorial Coordinator of Nutrition and Food Processing. ¨My testimony with you is truly professional, with a positive response regarding the follow-up of the article and its review, you took into account my qualities and the importance of the topic¨.
Dear Dr. Jessica Magne, Editorial Coordinator 0f Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions, The review process for the article “The Handling of Anti-aggregants and Anticoagulants in the Oncologic Heart Patient Submitted to Surgery” was extremely rigorous and detailed. From the initial submission to the final acceptance, the editorial team at the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” demonstrated a high level of professionalism and dedication. The reviewers provided constructive and detailed feedback, which was essential for improving the quality of our work. Communication was always clear and efficient, ensuring that all our questions were promptly addressed. The quality of the “Journal of Clinical Cardiology and Cardiovascular Interventions” is undeniable. It is a peer-reviewed, open-access publication dedicated exclusively to disseminating high-quality research in the field of clinical cardiology and cardiovascular interventions. The journal's impact factor is currently under evaluation, and it is indexed in reputable databases, which further reinforces its credibility and relevance in the scientific field. I highly recommend this journal to researchers looking for a reputable platform to publish their studies.
Dear Editorial Coordinator of the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing! "I would like to thank the Journal of Nutrition and Food Processing for including and publishing my article. The peer review process was very quick, movement and precise. The Editorial Board has done an extremely conscientious job with much help, valuable comments and advices. I find the journal very valuable from a professional point of view, thank you very much for allowing me to be part of it and I would like to participate in the future!”
Dealing with The Journal of Neurology and Neurological Surgery was very smooth and comprehensive. The office staff took time to address my needs and the response from editors and the office was prompt and fair. I certainly hope to publish with this journal again.Their professionalism is apparent and more than satisfactory. Susan Weiner
My Testimonial Covering as fellowing: Lin-Show Chin. 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.
My experience publishing in Psychology and Mental Health Care was exceptional. The peer review process was rigorous and constructive, with reviewers providing valuable insights that helped enhance the quality of our work. The editorial team was highly supportive and responsive, making the submission process smooth and efficient. The journal's commitment to high standards and academic rigor makes it a respected platform for quality research. I am grateful for the opportunity to publish in such a reputable journal.
My experience publishing in International Journal of Clinical Case Reports and Reviews was exceptional. I Come forth to Provide a Testimonial Covering the Peer Review Process and the editorial office for the Professional and Impartial Evaluation of the Manuscript.
