The Effect of Anaesthesia Management with Different Fresh Gas Flows on Cognitive Functions of Geriatric Patients: A Randomized Double-blind Study.

IF 0.6 Q3 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Bilge Özge Kılıç, Meltem Savran Karadeniz, Emre Şentürk, Meltem Merve Güler, İbrahim Hakan Gürvit, Zerrin Sungur, Ebru Demirel, Kamil Mehmet Tuğrul
{"title":"The Effect of Anaesthesia Management with Different Fresh Gas Flows on Cognitive Functions of Geriatric Patients: A Randomized Double-blind Study.","authors":"Bilge Özge Kılıç,&nbsp;Meltem Savran Karadeniz,&nbsp;Emre Şentürk,&nbsp;Meltem Merve Güler,&nbsp;İbrahim Hakan Gürvit,&nbsp;Zerrin Sungur,&nbsp;Ebru Demirel,&nbsp;Kamil Mehmet Tuğrul","doi":"10.4274/TJAR.2022.21630","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Objective: </strong>The present study aimed to compare the effects of two different fresh gas flows (FGFs) (0.5 L min<sup>-1</sup> and 2 L min<sup>-1</sup>) applied during maintenance of anaesthesia on recovery from anaesthesia and early cognitive functions in geriatric patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>In this prospective, randomised, double-blind study, sixty patients were divided into two groups according to the amount of FGF. Minimal-flow anaesthesia (0.5 L min<sup>-1</sup> FGF) was applied to group I and medium-flow anaesthesia (2 L min<sup>-1</sup> FGF) was applied to group II during maintenance of anaesthesia. Following the termination of inhalation anaesthesia, recovery times were recorded. The evaluation of cognitive functions was performed using the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-R).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of demographic characteristics and recovery (<i>P</i> > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the preoperative day, the first postoperative day, and the third postoperative day; ACE-R scores (<i>P</i> > 0.05). In group II, on the third postoperative day ACE-R scores were found to be significantly lower than the preoperative ACE-R scores (<i>P</i>=0.04). In group II, third postoperative day ACE-R memory sub-scores (14.53 ± 3.34) were found to be significantly lower than preoperative ACE-R memory sub-scores (15.03 ± 3.57) (<i>P</i>=0.04).</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In geriatric patients, minimal-flow anaesthesia was not superior to medium-flow anaesthesia in terms of recovery properties and cognitive functions. Keeping in mind that hypoxaemia and changes in anaesthesia levels may occur with the reduction of FGF, both minimal- and medium-flow anaesthesia can be applied with appropriate monitoring without adverse effects on recovery and cognitive functions.</p>","PeriodicalId":23353,"journal":{"name":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.6000,"publicationDate":"2023-06-16","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10339751/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Turkish journal of anaesthesiology and reanimation","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.4274/TJAR.2022.21630","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q3","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Objective: The present study aimed to compare the effects of two different fresh gas flows (FGFs) (0.5 L min-1 and 2 L min-1) applied during maintenance of anaesthesia on recovery from anaesthesia and early cognitive functions in geriatric patients.

Methods: In this prospective, randomised, double-blind study, sixty patients were divided into two groups according to the amount of FGF. Minimal-flow anaesthesia (0.5 L min-1 FGF) was applied to group I and medium-flow anaesthesia (2 L min-1 FGF) was applied to group II during maintenance of anaesthesia. Following the termination of inhalation anaesthesia, recovery times were recorded. The evaluation of cognitive functions was performed using the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-R).

Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of demographic characteristics and recovery (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the preoperative day, the first postoperative day, and the third postoperative day; ACE-R scores (P > 0.05). In group II, on the third postoperative day ACE-R scores were found to be significantly lower than the preoperative ACE-R scores (P=0.04). In group II, third postoperative day ACE-R memory sub-scores (14.53 ± 3.34) were found to be significantly lower than preoperative ACE-R memory sub-scores (15.03 ± 3.57) (P=0.04).

Conclusion: In geriatric patients, minimal-flow anaesthesia was not superior to medium-flow anaesthesia in terms of recovery properties and cognitive functions. Keeping in mind that hypoxaemia and changes in anaesthesia levels may occur with the reduction of FGF, both minimal- and medium-flow anaesthesia can be applied with appropriate monitoring without adverse effects on recovery and cognitive functions.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

不同新鲜气体流量麻醉管理对老年患者认知功能的影响:一项随机双盲研究。
目的:本研究旨在比较两种不同的新鲜气体流量(0.5 L min-1和2 L min-1)在麻醉维持期间对老年患者麻醉恢复和早期认知功能的影响。方法:在这项前瞻性、随机、双盲研究中,60例患者根据FGF的量分为两组。在麻醉维持期间,I组采用小流量麻醉(0.5 L min-1 FGF), II组采用中流量麻醉(2 L min-1 FGF)。结束吸入麻醉后,记录恢复时间。认知功能评估采用阿登布鲁克认知测验(ACE-R)。结果:两组患者人口学特征及康复情况比较,差异均无统计学意义(P > 0.05)。术前1天、术后1天、术后3天两组间无显著差异;ACE-R评分差异有统计学意义(P > 0.05)。II组术后第3天ACE-R评分明显低于术前(P=0.04)。II组术后第3天ACE-R记忆分评分(14.53±3.34)明显低于术前ACE-R记忆分评分(15.03±3.57)(P=0.04)。结论:在老年患者中,在恢复特性和认知功能方面,小流量麻醉并不优于中流量麻醉。记住,低氧血症和麻醉水平的变化可能会随着FGF的减少而发生,在适当的监测下,可以应用小流量和中流量麻醉,而不会对恢复和认知功能产生不利影响。
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
CiteScore
1.10
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
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