Electric Cardioversion in Older Adults. Is Sedation Using Propofol Safe in the Absence of the Direct Anesthetist's Assistance?

IF 4.6 Q2 MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS
Jarosław Karwowski, Karol Wrzosek, Jerzy Rekosz, Katarzyna Tymoszuk, Anna Wiktorska, Katarzyna Szmarowska, Mateusz Solecki, Mirosław Dłużniewski
{"title":"Electric Cardioversion in Older Adults. Is Sedation Using Propofol Safe in the Absence of the Direct Anesthetist's Assistance?","authors":"Jarosław Karwowski, Karol Wrzosek, Jerzy Rekosz, Katarzyna Tymoszuk, Anna Wiktorska, Katarzyna Szmarowska, Mateusz Solecki, Mirosław Dłużniewski","doi":"10.1177/10742484231221929","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p><b>Aims:</b> This study aimed to assess the safety of electric cardioversion in the absence of anesthetists assistance. We also evaluated the efficacy and safety of this procedure in older adults (≥80 years) compared to younger populations. <b>Methods:</b> We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent electric cardioversion at our cardiology department. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age: ≥ 80 years and <80 years old. <b>Results:</b> The study included 218 participants, 73 were aged 80 years or more (mean age: 84.8 years), and 145 were younger than 80 years (mean age: 66.7 years). Electric cardioversion was effective in 97.3% of older patients and 96.5% of younger patients (<i>P</i> = 1.00). No thromboembolic complications were observed in either of the groups. Asystole >5 s occurred immediately after shock in 4.1% of older and 2.1% of younger patients (<i>P</i> = .405). Propofol was used as a sedative, with a mean dose of 0.83 mg/kg versus 0.93 mg/kg, in older and younger patients, respectively. Intubation, medical intervention, or other advanced resuscitation techniques were not required. During hospitalization, arrhythmia recurred in 9.6% and 12.4% of the older and younger patients, respectively (<i>P</i> = .537). <b>Conclusions:</b> Electrical cardioversion is an effective and safe procedure regardless of patient age. Sedation with propofol administered by cardiologists was safe. Adverse events were not considered serious or reversible.</p>","PeriodicalId":2,"journal":{"name":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","volume":"29 ","pages":"10742484231221929"},"PeriodicalIF":4.6000,"publicationDate":"2024-01-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"ACS Applied Bio Materials","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1177/10742484231221929","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, BIOMATERIALS","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Aims: This study aimed to assess the safety of electric cardioversion in the absence of anesthetists assistance. We also evaluated the efficacy and safety of this procedure in older adults (≥80 years) compared to younger populations. Methods: We retrospectively analyzed the data of patients who underwent electric cardioversion at our cardiology department. Patients were divided into 2 groups according to age: ≥ 80 years and <80 years old. Results: The study included 218 participants, 73 were aged 80 years or more (mean age: 84.8 years), and 145 were younger than 80 years (mean age: 66.7 years). Electric cardioversion was effective in 97.3% of older patients and 96.5% of younger patients (P = 1.00). No thromboembolic complications were observed in either of the groups. Asystole >5 s occurred immediately after shock in 4.1% of older and 2.1% of younger patients (P = .405). Propofol was used as a sedative, with a mean dose of 0.83 mg/kg versus 0.93 mg/kg, in older and younger patients, respectively. Intubation, medical intervention, or other advanced resuscitation techniques were not required. During hospitalization, arrhythmia recurred in 9.6% and 12.4% of the older and younger patients, respectively (P = .537). Conclusions: Electrical cardioversion is an effective and safe procedure regardless of patient age. Sedation with propofol administered by cardiologists was safe. Adverse events were not considered serious or reversible.

老年人的电动心脏转复术。在没有直接麻醉师协助的情况下使用异丙酚镇静是否安全?
目的:本研究旨在评估在没有麻醉师协助的情况下进行心脏电复律的安全性。与年轻人相比,我们还评估了老年人(≥80 岁)使用这种方法的有效性和安全性。方法我们回顾性分析了在本院心脏科接受电复律的患者数据。根据年龄将患者分为两组:≥ 80 岁和结果:研究共纳入 218 名参与者,其中 73 人年龄在 80 岁及以上(平均年龄 84.8 岁),145 人年龄小于 80 岁(平均年龄 66.7 岁)。97.3%的老年患者和96.5%的年轻患者电复律有效(P = 1.00)。两组患者均未出现血栓栓塞并发症。有 4.1% 的老年患者和 2.1% 的年轻患者在电击后立即出现了 >5 秒的晕厥(P = .405)。丙泊酚被用作镇静剂,老年患者和年轻患者的平均剂量分别为 0.83 毫克/千克和 0.93 毫克/千克。无需插管、医疗干预或其他高级复苏技术。住院期间,老年患者和年轻患者中分别有 9.6% 和 12.4% 再次出现心律失常(P = .537)。结论无论患者年龄多大,电复律都是一种有效而安全的治疗方法。心脏病专家使用异丙酚镇静是安全的。不良事件并不严重或可逆。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
ACS Applied Bio Materials
ACS Applied Bio Materials Chemistry-Chemistry (all)
CiteScore
9.40
自引率
2.10%
发文量
464
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信