Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research, ISSN - 0973 - 709X

Users Online : 33174

AbstractMaterial and MethodsResultsDiscussionConclusionReferencesDOI and Others
Article in PDF How to Cite Citation Manager Readers' Comments (0) Audio Visual Article Statistics Link to PUBMED Print this Article Send to a Friend
Advertisers Access Statistics Resources

Dr Mohan Z Mani

"Thank you very much for having published my article in record time.I would like to compliment you and your entire staff for your promptness, courtesy, and willingness to be customer friendly, which is quite unusual.I was given your reference by a colleague in pathology,and was able to directly phone your editorial office for clarifications.I would particularly like to thank the publication managers and the Assistant Editor who were following up my article. I would also like to thank you for adjusting the money I paid initially into payment for my modified article,and refunding the balance.
I wish all success to your journal and look forward to sending you any suitable similar article in future"

Dr Mohan Z Mani,
Professor & Head,
Department of Dermatolgy,
Believers Church Medical College,
Thiruvalla, Kerala
On Sep 2018

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar

"Over the last few years, we have published our research regularly in Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research. Having published in more than 20 high impact journals over the last five years including several high impact ones and reviewing articles for even more journals across my fields of interest, we value our published work in JCDR for their high standards in publishing scientific articles. The ease of submission, the rapid reviews in under a month, the high quality of their reviewers and keen attention to the final process of proofs and publication, ensure that there are no mistakes in the final article. We have been asked clarifications on several occasions and have been happy to provide them and it exemplifies the commitment to quality of the team at JCDR."

Prof. Somashekhar Nimbalkar
Head, Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad
Chairman, Research Group, Charutar Arogya Mandal, Karamsad
National Joint Coordinator - Advanced IAP NNF NRP Program
Ex-Member, Governing Body, National Neonatology Forum, New Delhi
Ex-President - National Neonatology Forum Gujarat State Chapter
Department of Pediatrics, Pramukhswami Medical College, Karamsad, Anand, Gujarat.
On Sep 2018

Dr. Kalyani R

"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research is at present a well-known Indian originated scientific journal which started with a humble beginning. I have been associated with this journal since many years. I appreciate the Editor, Dr. Hemant Jain, for his constant effort in bringing up this journal to the present status right from the scratch. The journal is multidisciplinary. It encourages in publishing the scientific articles from postgraduates and also the beginners who start their career. At the same time the journal also caters for the high quality articles from specialty and super-specialty researchers. Hence it provides a platform for the scientist and researchers to publish. The other aspect of it is, the readers get the information regarding the most recent developments in science which can be used for teaching, research, treating patients and to some extent take preventive measures against certain diseases. The journal is contributing immensely to the society at national and international level."

Dr Kalyani R
Professor and Head
Department of Pathology
Sri Devaraj Urs Medical College
Sri Devaraj Urs Academy of Higher Education and Research , Kolar, Karnataka
On Sep 2018

Dr. Saumya Navit

"As a peer-reviewed journal, the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research provides an opportunity to researchers, scientists and budding professionals to explore the developments in the field of medicine and dentistry and their varied specialities, thus extending our view on biological diversities of living species in relation to medicine.
‘Knowledge is treasure of a wise man.’ The free access of this journal provides an immense scope of learning for the both the old and the young in field of medicine and dentistry as well. The multidisciplinary nature of the journal makes it a better platform to absorb all that is being researched and developed. The publication process is systematic and professional. Online submission, publication and peer reviewing makes it a user-friendly journal.
As an experienced dentist and an academician, I proudly recommend this journal to the dental fraternity as a good quality open access platform for rapid communication of their cutting-edge research progress and discovery.
I wish JCDR a great success and I hope that journal will soar higher with the passing time."

Dr Saumya Navit
Professor and Head
Department of Pediatric Dentistry
Saraswati Dental College
On Sep 2018

Dr. Arunava Biswas

"My sincere attachment with JCDR as an author as well as reviewer is a learning experience . Their systematic approach in publication of article in various categories is really praiseworthy.
Their prompt and timely response to review's query and the manner in which they have set the reviewing process helps in extracting the best possible scientific writings for publication.
It's a honour and pride to be a part of the JCDR team. My very best wishes to JCDR and hope it will sparkle up above the sky as a high indexed journal in near future."

Dr. Arunava Biswas
MD, DM (Clinical Pharmacology)
Assistant Professor
Department of Pharmacology
Calcutta National Medical College & Hospital , Kolkata

Dr. C.S. Ramesh Babu
" Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a multi-specialty medical and dental journal publishing high quality research articles in almost all branches of medicine. The quality of printing of figures and tables is excellent and comparable to any International journal. An added advantage is nominal publication charges and monthly issue of the journal and more chances of an article being accepted for publication. Moreover being a multi-specialty journal an article concerning a particular specialty has a wider reach of readers of other related specialties also. As an author and reviewer for several years I find this Journal most suitable and highly recommend this Journal."
Best regards,
C.S. Ramesh Babu,
Associate Professor of Anatomy,
Muzaffarnagar Medical College,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Arundhathi. S
"Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR) is a reputed peer reviewed journal and is constantly involved in publishing high quality research articles related to medicine. Its been a great pleasure to be associated with this esteemed journal as a reviewer and as an author for a couple of years. The editorial board consists of many dedicated and reputed experts as its members and they are doing an appreciable work in guiding budding researchers. JCDR is doing a commendable job in scientific research by promoting excellent quality research & review articles and case reports & series. The reviewers provide appropriate suggestions that improve the quality of articles. I strongly recommend my fraternity to encourage JCDR by contributing their valuable research work in this widely accepted, user friendly journal. I hope my collaboration with JCDR will continue for a long time".

Dr. Arundhathi. S
MBBS, MD (Pathology),
Sanjay Gandhi institute of trauma and orthopedics,
On Aug 2018

Dr. Mamta Gupta,
"It gives me great pleasure to be associated with JCDR, since last 2-3 years. Since then I have authored, co-authored and reviewed about 25 articles in JCDR. I thank JCDR for giving me an opportunity to improve my own skills as an author and a reviewer.
It 's a multispecialty journal, publishing high quality articles. It gives a platform to the authors to publish their research work which can be available for everyone across the globe to read. The best thing about JCDR is that the full articles of all medical specialties are available as pdf/html for reading free of cost or without institutional subscription, which is not there for other journals. For those who have problem in writing manuscript or do statistical work, JCDR comes for their rescue.
The journal has a monthly publication and the articles are published quite fast. In time compared to other journals. The on-line first publication is also a great advantage and facility to review one's own articles before going to print. The response to any query and permission if required, is quite fast; this is quite commendable. I have a very good experience about seeking quick permission for quoting a photograph (Fig.) from a JCDR article for my chapter authored in an E book. I never thought it would be so easy. No hassles.
Reviewing articles is no less a pain staking process and requires in depth perception, knowledge about the topic for review. It requires time and concentration, yet I enjoy doing it. The JCDR website especially for the reviewers is quite user friendly. My suggestions for improving the journal is, more strict review process, so that only high quality articles are published. I find a a good number of articles in Obst. Gynae, hence, a new journal for this specialty titled JCDR-OG can be started. May be a bimonthly or quarterly publication to begin with. Only selected articles should find a place in it.
An yearly reward for the best article authored can also incentivize the authors. Though the process of finding the best article will be not be very easy. I do not know how reviewing process can be improved. If an article is being reviewed by two reviewers, then opinion of one can be communicated to the other or the final opinion of the editor can be communicated to the reviewer if requested for. This will help one’s reviewing skills.
My best wishes to Dr. Hemant Jain and all the editorial staff of JCDR for their untiring efforts to bring out this journal. I strongly recommend medical fraternity to publish their valuable research work in this esteemed journal, JCDR".

Dr. Mamta Gupta
(Ex HOD Obs &Gynae, Hindu Rao Hospital and associated NDMC Medical College, Delhi)
Aug 2018

Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey

"I wish to thank Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), for asking me to write up few words.
Writing is the representation of language in a textual medium i e; into the words and sentences on paper. Quality medical manuscript writing in particular, demands not only a high-quality research, but also requires accurate and concise communication of findings and conclusions, with adherence to particular journal guidelines. In medical field whether working in teaching, private, or in corporate institution, everyone wants to excel in his / her own field and get recognised by making manuscripts publication.

Authors are the souls of any journal, and deserve much respect. To publish a journal manuscripts are needed from authors. Authors have a great responsibility for producing facts of their work in terms of number and results truthfully and an individual honesty is expected from authors in this regards. Both ways its true "No authors-No manuscripts-No journals" and "No journals–No manuscripts–No authors". Reviewing a manuscript is also a very responsible and important task of any peer-reviewed journal and to be taken seriously. It needs knowledge on the subject, sincerity, honesty and determination. Although the process of reviewing a manuscript is a time consuming task butit is expected to give one's best remarks within the time frame of the journal.
Salient features of the JCDR: It is a biomedical, multidisciplinary (including all medical and dental specialities), e-journal, with wide scope and extensive author support. At the same time, a free text of manuscript is available in HTML and PDF format. There is fast growing authorship and readership with JCDR as this can be judged by the number of articles published in it i e; in Feb 2007 of its first issue, it contained 5 articles only, and now in its recent volume published in April 2011, it contained 67 manuscripts. This e-journal is fulfilling the commitments and objectives sincerely, (as stated by Editor-in-chief in his preface to first edition) i e; to encourage physicians through the internet, especially from the developing countries who witness a spectrum of disease and acquire a wealth of knowledge to publish their experiences to benefit the medical community in patients care. I also feel that many of us have work of substance, newer ideas, adequate clinical materials but poor in medical writing and hesitation to submit the work and need help. JCDR provides authors help in this regards.
Timely publication of journal: Publication of manuscripts and bringing out the issue in time is one of the positive aspects of JCDR and is possible with strong support team in terms of peer reviewers, proof reading, language check, computer operators, etc. This is one of the great reasons for authors to submit their work with JCDR. Another best part of JCDR is "Online first Publications" facilities available for the authors. This facility not only provides the prompt publications of the manuscripts but at the same time also early availability of the manuscripts for the readers.
Indexation and online availability: Indexation transforms the journal in some sense from its local ownership to the worldwide professional community and to the public.JCDR is indexed with Embase & EMbiology, Google Scholar, Index Copernicus, Chemical Abstracts Service, Journal seek Database, Indian Science Abstracts, to name few of them. Manuscriptspublished in JCDR are available on major search engines ie; google, yahoo, msn.
In the era of fast growing newer technologies, and in computer and internet friendly environment the manuscripts preparation, submission, review, revision, etc and all can be done and checked with a click from all corer of the world, at any time. Of course there is always a scope for improvement in every field and none is perfect. To progress, one needs to identify the areas of one's weakness and to strengthen them.
It is well said that "happy beginning is half done" and it fits perfectly with JCDR. It has grown considerably and I feel it has already grown up from its infancy to adolescence, achieving the status of standard online e-journal form Indian continent since its inception in Feb 2007. This had been made possible due to the efforts and the hard work put in it. The way the JCDR is improving with every new volume, with good quality original manuscripts, makes it a quality journal for readers. I must thank and congratulate Dr Hemant Jain, Editor-in-Chief JCDR and his team for their sincere efforts, dedication, and determination for making JCDR a fast growing journal.
Every one of us: authors, reviewers, editors, and publisher are responsible for enhancing the stature of the journal. I wish for a great success for JCDR."

Thanking you
With sincere regards
Dr. Rajendra Kumar Ghritlaharey, M.S., M. Ch., FAIS
Associate Professor,
Department of Paediatric Surgery, Gandhi Medical College & Associated
Kamla Nehru & Hamidia Hospitals Bhopal, Madhya Pradesh 462 001 (India)
On May 11,2011

Dr. Shankar P.R.

"On looking back through my Gmail archives after being requested by the journal to write a short editorial about my experiences of publishing with the Journal of Clinical and Diagnostic Research (JCDR), I came across an e-mail from Dr. Hemant Jain, Editor, in March 2007, which introduced the new electronic journal. The main features of the journal which were outlined in the e-mail were extensive author support, cash rewards, the peer review process, and other salient features of the journal.
Over a span of over four years, we (I and my colleagues) have published around 25 articles in the journal. In this editorial, I plan to briefly discuss my experiences of publishing with JCDR and the strengths of the journal and to finally address the areas for improvement.
My experiences of publishing with JCDR: Overall, my experiences of publishing withJCDR have been positive. The best point about the journal is that it responds to queries from the author. This may seem to be simple and not too much to ask for, but unfortunately, many journals in the subcontinent and from many developing countries do not respond or they respond with a long delay to the queries from the authors 1. The reasons could be many, including lack of optimal secretarial and other support. Another problem with many journals is the slowness of the review process. Editorial processing and peer review can take anywhere between a year to two years with some journals. Also, some journals do not keep the contributors informed about the progress of the review process. Due to the long review process, the articles can lose their relevance and topicality. A major benefit with JCDR is the timeliness and promptness of its response. In Dr Jain's e-mail which was sent to me in 2007, before the introduction of the Pre-publishing system, he had stated that he had received my submission and that he would get back to me within seven days and he did!
Most of the manuscripts are published within 3 to 4 months of their submission if they are found to be suitable after the review process. JCDR is published bimonthly and the accepted articles were usually published in the next issue. Recently, due to the increased volume of the submissions, the review process has become slower and it ?? Section can take from 4 to 6 months for the articles to be reviewed. The journal has an extensive author support system and it has recently introduced a paid expedited review process. The journal also mentions the average time for processing the manuscript under different submission systems - regular submission and expedited review.
Strengths of the journal: The journal has an online first facility in which the accepted manuscripts may be published on the website before being included in a regular issue of the journal. This cuts down the time between their acceptance and the publication. The journal is indexed in many databases, though not in PubMed. The editorial board should now take steps to index the journal in PubMed. The journal has a system of notifying readers through e-mail when a new issue is released. Also, the articles are available in both the HTML and the PDF formats. I especially like the new and colorful page format of the journal. Also, the access statistics of the articles are available. The prepublication and the manuscript tracking system are also helpful for the authors.
Areas for improvement: In certain cases, I felt that the peer review process of the manuscripts was not up to international standards and that it should be strengthened. Also, the number of manuscripts in an issue is high and it may be difficult for readers to go through all of them. The journal can consider tightening of the peer review process and increasing the quality standards for the acceptance of the manuscripts. I faced occasional problems with the online manuscript submission (Pre-publishing) system, which have to be addressed.
Overall, the publishing process with JCDR has been smooth, quick and relatively hassle free and I can recommend other authors to consider the journal as an outlet for their work."

Dr. P. Ravi Shankar
KIST Medical College, P.O. Box 14142, Kathmandu, Nepal.
On April 2011

Dear team JCDR, I would like to thank you for the very professional and polite service provided by everyone at JCDR. While i have been in the field of writing and editing for sometime, this has been my first attempt in publishing a scientific paper.Thank you for hand-holding me through the process.

Dr. Anuradha
On Jan 2020

Important Notice

Original article / research
Year : 2022 | Month : June | Volume : 16 | Issue : 6 | Page : UC01 - UC04 Full Version

Haemodynamics and Arterial Blood Gases in Smokers versus Non Smokers During General Anaesthesia for Abdominal Surgeries: A Prospective Observational Study

Published: June 1, 2022 | DOI:
Rashmi Pal, Hemlata Patel, KK Arora, Neetu Gupta

1. Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. 2. Postgraduate, Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. 3. Professor and Head, Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India. 4. Assistant Professor, Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical College, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India.

Correspondence Address :
Dr. Neetu Gupta,
House No-1404, Ophira-2 Apoolo DB City, Nipania, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India.


Introduction: Tobacco smoking is a worldwide accepted health hazard and its effect on cardiopulmonary system is a well-known fact. In a long run, it results in to gross derangements in haemodynamics and arterial blood gases which can lead to further complications during general anaesthesia.

Aim: To evaluate the effect of smoking on cardiopulmonary system, and also to compare its effects on haemodynamics and arterial blood gases during general anaesthesia for abdominal surgeries in smokers and non smokers.

Materials and Methods: This analytical study was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical Colledge, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India, from May 2020 to April 2021. The study included 74 male patients of American Society of Anaesthesiologist (ASA) grade I and II, aged 20-70 years, undergoing elective abdominal surgeries. The patients were divided into two groups, smokers and non smokers, depending on their smoking status. Haemodynamic monitoring was done from preinduction time till 48 hours after extubation, and arterial blood gas analysis was also done before induction and 2 hours after extubation in both the groups. T-test and Mann-whitney test were applied according to the requirement. A p-value < 0.05 was taken as statistically significant. The statistical software Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 and Medcalc 19.5 were used for the analysis.

Results: Significant increase in Heart Rate (HR) and Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP) was observed in smokers as compared to non smokers at all time intervals (p-value<0.001). End-tidal carbon dioxide concentration (EtCO2) values were found to be significantly higher in smokers (37.77±2.63 mmHg) than non smokers (32.99±2.83 mmHg) (p-value<0.001). Regarding arterial blood gas analysis significant difference was observed in preoperative and postoperative arterial carbon dioxide concentration (PaCO2) (p-value<0.0001), and pH levels (p-value<0.0001) in both the groups. A significant difference was also seen in preoperative and postoperative PaCO2 levels of the smokers (p-value= 0.0004) with a corresponding change in their pH levels also (p-value=0.0012). Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR) was lower in smokers in comparison to non smokers (p-value<0.0001).

Conclusion: Smoking has significant effects on haemodynamic status and arterial blood gases of smokers which can be aggravated during general anaesthesia.


Cardiopulmonary, End tidal carbon dioxide, Mean arterial pressure, Peak expiratory flow rate

Tabaco smoking is the leading cause of high mortality and morbidity, and it is a serious challenge to the healthcare system worldwide. The association between smoking and perioperative complications is well documented in various studies (1). There is an increased risk of mortality, while complications like, cardiac, pulmonary, wound infections, delayed wound healing and reduced bone fusion may occur. Post-surgery, smokers require an extended time in intensive care, in the ward and during recovery (2),(3). The relative risk of complications after surgery in smokers compared to non-smoker has been reported to increase 4.3-fold (4). Nicotine, the chief ingredient in tobacco stimulates adrenal response leading to increase sympathetic tone which results in increase in peripheral vascular resistance and cardiac excitability. An increase in coronary vascular resistance leads to a decrease in the coronary blood flow, resulting in decrease in the supply of oxygen. Increase in excitability lead to more frequent contractions and increase in oxygen consumption. These lead to a decrease in the myocardial oxygen supply demand ratio (5). Smoking also causes various inflammatory changes in lung parenchyma. As the lung function is already in a compromised state in smokers, administration of general anesthesia can further aggravate it and cause an alteration in the acid- base status of the patients which can be predicted by ABG analysis. It has been also reported that cessation of smoking before abdominal surgeries help improve the results.

There have been few studies on the duration of smoking cessation required before surgery to effectively reduce postoperative complications. At least 4 weeks of abstinence is needed to reduce the risks of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications (PPCs). Abstinence from smoking for more than 4 and 8 weeks before surgery reduced the risk of PPCs by 23% and 47% , respectively (6). So, hypothesizing that smoking may serve as an independent risk factor for perioperative cardiopulmonary complications, the present study was conducted to evaluate and compare the effect of smoking on the haemodynamics and arterial blood gases in perioperative period of abdominal surgeries done under general anaesthesia in smokers and non smokers.

Material and Methods

This analytical study was conducted in the Department of Anaesthesiology, Mahatma Gandhi Memorial Medical Colledge, Indore, Madhya Pradesh, India, from May 2020 to April 2021. Approval from the Institutional Ethics and Scientific Committee was obtained [IEC/M.G.M/July-20/101].

Sample size was calculation:

Sample size was obtained using the formula:

σ2 (Zα/2+Zβ)/d2

Z= coefficient of difference, d= degree of differentiation α=level of significance, β= type two error, σ= standard deviation. Adequate sample size based on above given information was 37 cases in each group.

Inclusion criteria: Male patients scheduled for abdominal surgeries under general anaesthesia with American Society of Anaesthesiologist (ASA) grade I and II, with 20 to 70 year of age and minimum duration of smoking 10 years were included in the study.

Exclusion criteria: The patients with Chronic Obstructive Lung Disease (COPD), renal and hepatic insufficiency endocrine and metabolic disorder Severe cardiac disease or those with drug allergy were excluded from the study.

Two groups were formed depending on the in smoking history:

• Smokers: n=37
• Non smokers: n=37

sample size based on above given information was 37 cases in each group.


A careful preanaesthetic assessment of all the selected patients was done and required investigations were ordered. Patients were kept nil orally for 6 hours before elective procedure. Upon arrival of the patient in the operation theatre, intravenous access was established. Patients were premedicated with inj. glycopyrolate 0.2 mg and inj. midazolam 1 mg both intravenously. Baseline haemodynamic parameters like heart rate (beats per minutes), non invasive blood pressure (mmHg) and oxygen saturation (SpO2) were noted down. A 22 gauge cannula was placed in the radial artery of the non-dominant hand, after confirmed negative Allen test, under all aseptic precautions before intubation. Before induction 1 mL of arterial blood sample was collected in 2 mL heparinized syringe and sent for arterial blood gas analysis. analysis. After this it was kept flushed with heparinized normal saline to prevent blockage. Then 18 gauge epidural catheter was placed at desired level and epidural analgesia was achieved with inj. bupivacaine (0.25%) 10 mL after confirming the correct placement of the catheter with test dose of lidocaine 1-5%. General Anaesthesia (GA) was administered as per standard protocol. Preoxygenation was done for 3 minutes. Anaesthesia was induced with inj. fentanyl 2 mcg/kg and inj. propofol 2 mg/kg intravenously. Endotracheal intubation was facilitated with inj. succinylcholine 1.5 mg/kg intravenously and loading dose of non depolarizing muscle relaxant inj. atracurium 0.5 mg/kg was given intravenously. Maintenance of anaesthesia was achieved with inj. atracurium 0.1 mg/kg repeated at 25 to 30 minute interval and N2O:O2 50%: 50% along with isoflurane 0.6 to 1.2%. Analgesia was also supplemented via epidural route as mentioned earlier, if required. After the completion of surgery neuromuscular blockade was reversed with inj. neostigmine (0.05 mg/kg) and inj. glycopyrrolate (0.01 mg/kg) both intrvenously. When clinically adequate tidal volume was achieved, extubation was performed.

Values for Heart Rate (HR), Mean Arterial Pressure (MAP), Oxygen saturation (SpO2) were recorded at different time intervals. All patients were administered oxygen by face mask at a rate of 4 L/min during recovery period. Postoperative epidural analgesia was maintained with inj. buprenorphine 2 mcg/kg diluted in 10 mL of normal saline. A second arterial blood sample was also taken 2 hours after extubation and the same heamodynamic parameters were measured at different time intervals.

Peak Expiratory Flow Rate (PEFR): The PEFR values were recorded on day 1 and day 2 of surgery at the interval of 24 hours by using peak flow meter at bed side. To measure PEFR the patient was asked to sit up straight and take deep breath. Then he was asked to hold the flow meter parallel to the ground and to make a tight seal around it with his lips. He then exhaled as fast and as forcibly through the flow meter as he could. Before blowing, red mark of the flow meter was set to zero. The procedure was repeated two more times. The highest of the three readings were noted down.

Statistical Analysis

The collected data were compiled in a Microsoft Excel sheet and statistical analyses were carried out. Results on continuous measurements were presented as Mean±SD and results on categorical measurements were presented as number (%). Chi-square test of association was also used to find if there was any relationship between two categorical variables. T-test and Mann-whitney test were applied according to the requirement. A p-value<0.05 was taken as statistically significant. The statistical software Statistical Package for Social Sciences (SPSS) version 20.0 and Medcalc 19.5 were used for the analysis.


Both the groups were comparable demographically i.e. age, weight and ASA status (p-value> 0.05) (Table/Fig 1). Heart rate and MAP were found to be higher in smokers than non smokers (p-value< 0.001) (Table/Fig 2). The End tidal carbon dioxide concentration (EtCO2) levels were also seen to be higher in smoker group as compared to non-smoker group (p-value<0.0001) (Table/Fig 3). Preoperative and postoperative pH values were lower in smokers as compared to non smokers (p-value<0.0001) (Table/Fig 4). There was no significant difference in the preoperative and postoperative PaO2 and HCO3 levels of the two groups (Table/Fig 4). On intra group comparison, a statistically significant difference was noted in preoperative and postoperative levels of PaCO2 (p-value= 0.0004) and pH (p-value=0.0012) of the two groups (Table/Fig 4). Although PEFR improved progressively from day-1 to day 2, it remained lower in smoker group as compared to non-smoker at all times of measurements (p-value<0.0001) (Table/Fig 5). Mean EtCO2 in smoker and non smoker group was significant (p-value<0.0001) (37.77±2.63, 32.99±2.83) respectively.


Postoperative pulmonary complications are defined as pulmonary abnormalities occurring in postoperative period which produce clinically significant, identifiable disease or dysfunction that adversely affects the patient’s clinical course and manifests changes in blood gas coefficients. Abdominal surgical procedures are associated with a high risk of Postoperative Pulmonary Complications (PPCs) which manifest as changes in haemodynamics and arterial blood gases of the patients. Despite recent advances in preoperative management, postoperative respiratory morbidity is still a common problem, especially following abdominal surgery (7),(8). Furthermore, these conditions may be more complicated in case of smoking, old age, and co-existing pulmonary diseases.

So, this prospective observational study was conducted to compare the haemodynamics and arterial blood gases of smokers and nonsmokers who received general anesthesia for abdominal surgeries. The study also evaluated the changes in ABG within the groups, following GA. This can help in predicting the importance of abstinence from smoking before planned surgeries and anesthesia in chronic smokers. The results of the present study show that the smokers are more prone to changes in haemodynamics and ABG levels as compared to nonsmokers and these parameters can further deteriorate after GA in smokers.

A significant rise in HR and BP was observed in smokers in comparison to non smokers at all time intervals (p-value<0.0001). Salman IA and John MY, in their study also found higher BP in smokers undergoing GA for lower abdominal surgeries. However, they did not find any change in HR of the smoker and nonsmoker patients.

There was no significant difference in mean SpO2 of smokers and nonsmokers in the present study, whereas it was found to be significantly lower in smokers in the study done by Salman IA and John MY (9). There was no statistically significant difference observed in oxygen saturation in both the groups.

In the present study, the difference in pre operative EtCO2 values was found to be statistically significant in smoker and non-smoker patients (p-value<0.0001), which, is in concordance with those observed in smoker and non smoker patients by Barik A et al., (10).

There was statistically significant difference in preoperative and postoperative PaCO2 levels of the two groups in the present study (p-value=0.0001). The both pH levels in smoker patients were also lower than non-smoker patients (p-value<0.0001). These findings are supported by a study done by Barik A et al., on ABG parameters in smoker and nonsmoker patients, undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy (10). There was no significant difference in pre and postoperative HCO3 levels of the two groups in the present study, whereas they were found to be statistically significant in the study done by Barik A et al., (p-value<0.001) (10).

On intraoperative comparison, it was found that in smoker patients both the PaCO2 and pH levels changed significantly from preoperative to postoperative time. This exclusive finding of the patient study is in contrast to the findings of a study done by Hansen G et al., conducted on patients scheduled for upper abdominal surgeries, where no definite changes in arterial pH and PaCO2 were found (11).

There was a statistically significant difference in the postoperative PEFR of the smoker and non-smoker patients (p-value<0.0001). This finding is in accordance with a study by Medbala T et al., who also observed lower PEFR in smokers (p-value<0.0001) (12).

Thus, haemodynamic as well as arterial blood gas changes were more common in smokers than in non smokers.


Although this study has tried to meet its aims and objectives in all aspects, there were limitations also. It was a single-centre study and only male patients were included in the study, so further studies are needed on a larger number of patients for the findings to be more conclusive.


Smokers show exaggerated haemodynamic response perioperatively and alteration in arterial blood gases suggesting respiratory insufficiency when compared to non smokers and they are more prone to wide cardiovascular and respiratory insults that affect perioperative outcomes following general anaesthesia and hence they should be optimized prior to it with special attention to long duration surgeries.


Delgado-Rodríguez M, Medina-Cuadros M, Martínez-Gallego G, Gómez-Ortega A, Mariscal-Ortiz M, Palma-Pérez S, et al. A Prospective Study of Tobacco Smoking as a Predictor of Complications in General Surgery. Infect Control Hosp Epidemiol. 2003;24(1):37-43. [crossref] [PubMed]
Moores LK. Smoking and postoperative pulmonary complications: An evidencebased review of the recent literature. Clin Chest Med. 2000;21(1):139-46. [crossref]
Møller AM, Maaløe R, Pedersen T. Postoperative intensive care admittance: The role of tobacco smoking. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2001;45(3):345-48. [crossref] [PubMed]
Warner DO. Tobacco dependence in surgical patients. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2007;20(3):279-83. [crossref] [PubMed]
Erskine RJ, Hanning CD. Do I advise my patient to stop smoking pre-operatively? Curr Anaesth Crit Care. 1992;3(3):175-80. [crossref]
Wong J, Lam DP, Abrishami A, Chan MT, Chung. Short-term preoperative smoking cessation and postoperative complications: A systematic review and meta-analysis. Can J Anesth (2012) 59:268-279. [crossref] [PubMed]
Agarwal M, Singh S, Kumar S, Ahmad S, Sharma SK. Haemodynamic changes and oxygen saturation during general anaesthesia in smokers and non-smokers. Indian J Clin Anaesth. 2019;6(3):395-400. [crossref]
Inoue Y, Katoh T, Masuda S, Lu X, Koga T, Sadohara T, et al. Perioperative complications of abdominal surgery in smokers. J Anesth. 2020;34(5):712-18. [crossref] [PubMed]
Salman IA, Jahn MY. Comparison of the Hemodynamic & Respiratory Parameters between Smokers & Non Smokers in Lower Abdominal Surgery Under General Anesthesia. Iraqi Postgrad Med J. 2013;12(2):202-07.
Barik A, Kumar A, Dhar M, Ranjan P. A prospective comparative study of arterial blood gas parameters in smoker versus non-smoker patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Indian J Anaesth. 2020;64(5):397-402. [crossref] [PubMed]
Hansen G, Drablos PA, Steinert R. Pulmonary complications, ventilation and blood after upper abdominal surgery. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1977;21(3):211-15. [crossref] [PubMed]
Medabala T, Rao BN, Glad Mohesh MI, Praveen Kumar M. Effect of cigarette and cigar smoking on Peak expiratory flow rate. J Clin Diagnostic Res. 2013;7(9):1886-89.

DOI and Others

DOI: 10.7860/JCDR/2022/56259.16429

Date of Submission: Mar 10, 2022
Date of Peer Review: Mar 29, 2022
Date of Acceptance: Apr 14, 2022
Date of Publishing: Jun 01, 2022

• Financial or Other Competing Interests: None
• Was Ethics Committee Approval obtained for this study? Yes
• Was informed consent obtained from the subjects involved in the study? Yes
• For any images presented appropriate consent has been obtained from the subjects. NA

• Plagiarism X-checker: Mar 19, 2022
• Manual Googling: Mar 21, 2022
• iThenticate Software: Apr 13, 2022 (25%)

ETYMOLOGY: Author Origin

JCDR is now Monthly and more widely Indexed .
  • Emerging Sources Citation Index (Web of Science, thomsonreuters)
  • Index Copernicus ICV 2017: 134.54
  • Academic Search Complete Database
  • Directory of Open Access Journals (DOAJ)
  • Embase
  • EBSCOhost
  • Google Scholar
  • HINARI Access to Research in Health Programme
  • Indian Science Abstracts (ISA)
  • Journal seek Database
  • Google
  • Popline (reproductive health literature)