AUCTORES
Globalize your Research
Chat with us
Research Article | DOI: https://doi.org/10.31579/2690-1919/396
1Assistant Professor in Department of Anaesthesiology, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and Ri, Ammapettai, Kanchipuram Dt-603108. India
2Professor in department of pharmacology, shri sathya sai medical college and ri, ammapettai, kanchipuram dt-603108.
*Corresponding Author: Krishna Prasad T, Professor, Dept of Anaesthesiology, Shri Sathya Sai Medical College and RI, Ammapettai, Deemed University, Kanchipuram Dt- 603108. India.
Citation: Sheik Abdulla, Krishna prasad T, Manahoor Jaffar, Soundarya Priyadharsini K., (2024), Levobupivacaine -Safe and Effective Drug In Daycare Ophthalmic Surgery, J Clinical Research and Reports, 16(3); DOI:10.31579/2690-1919/396
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: 10 July 2024 | Accepted: 30 July 2024 | Published: 12 August 2024
Keywords: levobupivacaine; peribulbar block; akinesia
A new local anesthetic, levobupivacaine, is the levorotatory isomer of bupivacaine and therefore meets all safety requirements. Out of 120 articles, ten articles similar to the current study objectives were included in the study and analyzed. Keywords used in the search include medical education and geriatrics. : in view of the above studies reviewed, we conclude levobupivacaine given in ophthalmic blocks is effective and safe for daycare surgeries. Levobupivacaine's lower risk of adverse effects may be especially helpful for the elderly cataract extraction, useful in daycare with the benefits of good preservation of sensory and motor block postoperatively. Less pain compared to lignocaine in the intraoperative and postoperative periods. We suggest drugs and agents which are appropriately suitable for clinical use in peribulbar anesthesia for cataract surgery.
Levobupivacaine has lower arrhythmogenic potential, and the central nervous system has less depressing action. The current trend in anesthetic techniques for cataract surgery is towards less invasive methods that ensure the safety of surgical interventions and rapid recovery. It is known that the ideal anesthetic should have low systemic toxicity and be non-harmful or permanent with a rapid onset of action and sufficient duration of anesthetic effect to perform the procedure with a short recovery period. A recent local anesthetic, levobupivacaine, is the levorotatory isomer of bupivacaine and thus satisfies sufficient safety criteria.
An extensive search of all materials related to the topic was carried out in the PubMed and Google Scholar search engines. Relevant research articles focusing on levobupivacaine -safe and effective drug in daycare ophthalmic surgery published in the period of 2000-2020 were included in the review. Out of 120 articles, ten articles similar to the current study objectives were included in the study and analyzed. Keywords used in the search include medical education and geriatrics
Fifty patients were assigned randomly to receive either 0.75 percent levobupivacaine or 0.75 percent racemic bupivacaine for peribulbar anesthesia prior to intraocular surgery. When comparing levobupivacaine and racemic bupivacaine, there were no statistically significant differences in the mean (SD) volume of anesthetic used (11 (2.7) ml vs. 10 (2.6) ml), the time to satisfactory block (levobupivacaine-13 (5.6) min vs. racemic bupivacaine-11 (4.4) min), peri-operative pain scores, or the frequency of adverse events. Levobupivacaine's lower risk of adverse effects may be especially helpful for the elderly cataract extraction patient population, where multiple medical conditions are common.[1]
A study looked into 203 people who had phacoemulsification surgery for cataracts. Two groups received either lidocaine (4% concentration) or levobupivacaine (0.75% concentration), with allocation determined by chance. It was determined when the sensory block began and when it ended. Patients used a verbal pain score to report their experience of pain during the application process, during surgery, and afterward. Both the surgeon's and the patient's opinions on the procedure's success and any complications that arose were documented. The levobupivacaine group had significantly longer mean sensory onset and offset times (P 0.01). Levobupivacaine patients reported significantly less pain than lidocaine patients throughout the study (P 0.01). Levobupivacaine also showed statistically significant increases in both the patient and surgeon satisfaction mean scores (P 0.01). There were no statistically significant variations in the occurrence of complications or the need for additional anesthesia. Compared to lidocaine, which is typically used in phacoemulsification for cataract surgery, topical levobupivacaine 0.75 percent was found to be equally effective and safe. Satisfaction rates between surgeons and patients were high, suggesting a successful block. There is now a new, safe, and effective option for topical anesthesia during cataract surgery: levobupivacaine (0.75%). [2]
Over the course of the study, 105 patients undergoing peribulbar anesthesia for cataract surgery were randomly divided into three groups of 35 patients each and given 5 ml of either a 1: 1 mixture of bupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2% (group 1), levobupivacaine 0.75% (group 2), or ropivacaine 1% (group 3). (Group 3). At 2, 4-, 6-, 8-, and 10 minutes post-injection, ocular movement scores were analyzed. Verbal pain scores were used to assess the effectiveness of intraoperative and postoperative analgesia. The duration of the operation, the use of any supplementary anesthetics, the hemodynamic parameters, and the occurrence of any complications during the procedure were all noted. As a result, group 1 had significantly less ocular movement than group 2 did in minute 2. The second and third groups were not distinguishable from one another. Groups 1 and 2 had considerably lower ocular movement scores at minutes 4 and 6 compared to group 3. At 8 and 10 minutes, statistical difference was barely substantial in ocular movement scores between groups. Verbal discomfort scores in postoperative hour 4 were highest in group 3, but scores for the intraoperative period and postoperative hours 1 and 2 were alike among the groups. There was no difference in surgical time or hemodynamic values between the groups. We settle that all agents are appropriately suitable for clinical use in peribulbar anesthesia for cataract surgery. There was no clinical significance to the fact that the ropivacaine group had better ocular movement totals at minutes 4 and 6, despite the fact that they were significantly higher than the other groups.[3]
The study included 135 patients undergoing local anesthesia for vitreoretinal surgery. Patients were randomly allocated to one of three groups. For retrobulbar anesthesia, patients in Group LB were given 5 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine, patients in Group L were given 5 mL of 2% lidocaine, and patients in Group B were given 5 mL of 0.5% bupivacaine injected in the inferotemporal space. Recordings of sensory and motor block times were made. A verbal pain scale was used to evaluate both during and after surgery. Point scales were used to evaluate the success of the anesthetic, the level of satisfaction felt by both the patient and the surgeon, and the extent to which akinesia developed. Symptoms and hematological readings were tracked. There were no significant differences between the groups in terms of patient demographics, surgical duration, or hemodynamic data. Motor and sensory blockade lasted longer in the levobupivacaine and bupivacaine groups than in the lidocaine group. There was a statistically significant (p0.05) increase in the incidence of injection-related pain in Groups L and B compared to Group LB. The intra-operative pain was less in the levobupivacaine group compared to the lidocaine and bupivacaine groups, and surgeon and patient satisfaction was higher. When used for retrobulbar anesthesia in vitreoretinal surgery, levobupivacaine outperforms lidocaine and bupivacaine in terms of motor and sensory block duration as well as surgeon and patient satisfaction.[4]
The purpose of this study was to draw a comparison between the value and effectiveness of Peribulbar blockade for superficial extraconal anesthesia using levobupivacaine 0.5% versus bupivacaine 0.5% combined with lidocaine 2% in patients undergoing phacoemulsification. One hundred fifty patients were randomly assigned to receive either a Peribulbar block (PB) with a mixture of levobupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2% or a PB with a mixture of bupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2% in this prospective, double-blind study. A 15-millimeter needle was inserted into infra-temporal space, just above the inferior orbital notch, to create the block. Each solution was injected in increments of 6.9 ml until the upper eyelids drooped completely. We measured akinesia at 2-, 5-, and 10-minutes post-block. A verbal rating scale was used to assess pain levels instantly after the block, at the end of the surgery, and 4 hours later. Post-operatively, both patients and doctors were polled on their preferences for the block's effectiveness. Akinesia scores at 2, 5, and 10 minutes were not significantly different between groups (P = 0.2), nor were the numbers of supplemental injections needed (P = 0.84), or the volumes of local anesthetics needed initially or altogether (P = 0.80 and 0.81, respectively). Surgeon and patient satisfaction were equally high across both groups (P = 0.53 and P = 0.74, respectively). Similarly, there were no statistically significant differences between the groups on any of the three occasions when verbal rating scales were administered. Both groups required the same amount of intra-operative topical anesthetic. (P = 0.69). Similar block quality and efficacy can be achieved when administering a combination of levobupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2% for a superficial extra-conal block, as can be achieved when administering a combination of bupivacaine 0.5% and lidocaine 2%.[5]
The low cardiovascular and neurological toxicity of levobupivacaine has managed to be administered as a local anesthetic in an extensive variety of specialist applications including peribulbar block for cataract surgery. The aim of this research was to assess the efficacy of levobupivacaine 0.5% and to compare block quality vs. ropivacaine 0.75% in peribulbar anesthesia. Methods: We considered 208 patients who underwent phacoemulsification for cataracts and randomly assigned them to receive either levobupivacaine (0.5%) or ropivacaine (0.75%) for peribulbar block, both of which contained hyaluronidase. Injections of 6 mL of the anesthetic mixture were made into the inferotemporal and superonasa regions to produce a nerve block.
After 24 hours to assess the block's efficacy, the following were measured- Time of motor and sensory onset, Akinesia score, Time of motor and sensory offset, and Patient and surgeon satisfaction. Pre-block, post-block, and postoperative intraocular pressure as well as the duration of surgical intervention was also determined. The results showed that, compared to ropivacaine, levobupivacaine significantly delayed the onset of motor and sensory function on average (P 0.001). The akinesia score was significantly higher (P 0.01), as were the mean motor and sensory offset times (P 0.001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in terms of average intervention times or patient/surgeon satisfaction. Levobupivacaine (0.5%) has better anesthetic properties with respect to 0.75% ropivacaine and is well-suited for a peribulbar block in cataract surgery.[6]
As compared with racemic bupivacaine, ropivacaine also showed the clinically relevant advantage of a stronger differentiation between sensory and motor blocks, which is particularly useful when early mobilization is important to accelerate postoperative recovery. Ropivacaine is 40-50% less potent than bupivacaine and levobupivacaine because of its lower lipid solubility; reduced potency does not imply that this agent is less effective than the other two, and using an equipotency ratio of 1.5: 1 between ropivacaine and the two other drugs results in a substantially similar clinical profile with good preservation of motor function. In conclusion, the reduced toxic potential of both levobupivacaine and ropivacaine should be carefully considered when choosing the local anesthetic for regional anesthesia techniques requiring large volumes and infusion rates, such as for epidural anesthesia/analgesia, peripheral nerve blocks, and local infiltration. [7]
It is possible to provide labor analgesia with either combined spinal-epidural or purely epidural block. There is a minimum local dose of levobupivacaine and ropivacaine shown in various studies for intrathecal as 2.73-3.16 mg for levobupivacaine and 3.33-3.96 mg for ropivacaine. An improved sensory block and less motor block are provided by the addition of opioids. The use of ropivacaine and levobupivacaine has been encouraged because of relative safety. At least 0.1% is required for satisfactory analgesia for the analgesic efficacy to be dependent on its concentration.
The sub-Tenon’s block has become the most commonly used block in ophthalmic regional anesthesia practice in the UK. Given the lower incidence of serious sight-threatening complications with the sub-Tenon technique2, this study may be seen as less relevant to current practice. However, globe rupture, optic nerve injection, and optic muscle damage have all been reported following sub-Tenon’s block15. The sub-Tenon’s block is also not suitable for all patients; it should be avoided in patients with the thin sclera, scleral scarring, or chronic eye inflammation and in situations where chemosis, conjunctival hematoma, or disruption are undesirable. [9]
The peribulbar block is used to obtain anesthesia and akinesia of the eye by injecting a local anesthetic around the muscle cone. A patient scheduled for cataract surgery received a peribulbar block with 6 mL of 2% lidocaine hydrochloride. Following the injection, confusion, hypotension, and dilatation of the contralateral pupil rapidly progressed to loss of consciousness and respiratory arrest. The patient was intubated and mechanically ventilated for 30 min. The patient regained her consciousness, was extubated, and transferred to the intensive care unit for further follow-up. Although brainstem anesthesia because of the peribulbar block is very rare, this procedure should be performed with complete monitorisation and resuscitation equipment. In view of the above studies reviewed, we conclude levobupivacaine given in ophthalmic blocks is effective and safe for daycare surgeries. [10]
Based on the above reviews, we suggest the drug Levobupivacaine is a suitable anesthetic in terms of its limited neurotoxicity and low cardiotoxicity, which represents a valid reason for use of levobupivacaine with good preservation of motor blocks. We suggest this drug for day care surgeries
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!”
