A prospective randomized study examining the impact of intravenous versus inhalational anesthesia on postoperative cognitive decline and delirium.

IF 1.4 4区 心理学 Q4 CLINICAL NEUROLOGY
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult Pub Date : 2025-07-01 Epub Date: 2023-08-12 DOI:10.1080/23279095.2023.2246612
Thomas J Farrer, Terri G Monk, David L McDonagh, Gavin Martin, Carl F Pieper, Deborah Koltai
{"title":"A prospective randomized study examining the impact of intravenous versus inhalational anesthesia on postoperative cognitive decline and delirium.","authors":"Thomas J Farrer, Terri G Monk, David L McDonagh, Gavin Martin, Carl F Pieper, Deborah Koltai","doi":"10.1080/23279095.2023.2246612","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><p>The present prospective randomized study was designed to investigate whether the development of Post Operative Cognitive Decline (POCD) is related to anesthesia type in older adults. All patients were screened for delirium and mental status, received baseline neuropsychological assessment, and evaluation of activities of daily living (ADLs). Follow-up assessments were performed at 3-6 months and 12-18 months. Patients were randomized to receive either inhalation anesthesia (ISO) with isoflurane or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol for maintenance anesthesia. ISO (n = 99) and TIVA (n = 100) groups were similar in demographics, preoperative cognition, and incidence of post-operative delirium. Groups did not differ in terms of mean change in memory or executive function from baseline to follow-up. Pre-surgical cognitive function is the only variable predictive of the development of POCD. Anesthetic type was not predictive of POCD. However, ADLs were predictive of post-operative delirium development. Overall, this pilot study represents a prospective, randomized study demonstrating that when examining ISO versus TIVA for maintenance of general anesthesia, there is no significant difference in cognition between anesthetic types. There is also no difference in the occurrence of postoperative delirium. Postoperative cognitive decline was best predicted by lower baseline cognition and functional status.</p>","PeriodicalId":51308,"journal":{"name":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","volume":" ","pages":"1155-1161"},"PeriodicalIF":1.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC10859544/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Applied Neuropsychology-Adult","FirstCategoryId":"102","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1080/23279095.2023.2246612","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"心理学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2023/8/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q4","JCRName":"CLINICAL NEUROLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

The present prospective randomized study was designed to investigate whether the development of Post Operative Cognitive Decline (POCD) is related to anesthesia type in older adults. All patients were screened for delirium and mental status, received baseline neuropsychological assessment, and evaluation of activities of daily living (ADLs). Follow-up assessments were performed at 3-6 months and 12-18 months. Patients were randomized to receive either inhalation anesthesia (ISO) with isoflurane or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) with propofol for maintenance anesthesia. ISO (n = 99) and TIVA (n = 100) groups were similar in demographics, preoperative cognition, and incidence of post-operative delirium. Groups did not differ in terms of mean change in memory or executive function from baseline to follow-up. Pre-surgical cognitive function is the only variable predictive of the development of POCD. Anesthetic type was not predictive of POCD. However, ADLs were predictive of post-operative delirium development. Overall, this pilot study represents a prospective, randomized study demonstrating that when examining ISO versus TIVA for maintenance of general anesthesia, there is no significant difference in cognition between anesthetic types. There is also no difference in the occurrence of postoperative delirium. Postoperative cognitive decline was best predicted by lower baseline cognition and functional status.

一项前瞻性随机研究,研究静脉麻醉与吸入麻醉对术后认知能力下降和谵妄的影响。
本前瞻性随机研究旨在调查老年人术后认知能力下降(POCD)的发展是否与麻醉类型有关。所有患者都接受了谵妄和精神状态筛查,接受了基线神经心理评估和日常生活活动评估。3-6岁时进行随访评估 月和12-18 月。患者随机接受异氟烷吸入麻醉(ISO)或丙泊酚全静脉麻醉(TIVA)维持麻醉。ISO(n = 99)和TIVA(n = 100)组在人口统计学、术前认知和术后谵妄发生率方面相似。从基线到随访,各组在记忆或执行功能的平均变化方面没有差异。术前认知功能是预测POCD发展的唯一变量。麻醉类型不能预测POCD。然而,ADL可预测术后谵妄的发展。总的来说,这项试点研究是一项前瞻性随机研究,表明在检查ISO与TIVA维持全身麻醉时,麻醉类型之间的认知没有显著差异。术后谵妄的发生率也没有差异。术后认知能力下降最好通过较低的基线认知和功能状态来预测。
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
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult
Applied Neuropsychology-Adult CLINICAL NEUROLOGY-PSYCHOLOGY
CiteScore
4.50
自引率
11.80%
发文量
134
期刊介绍: pplied Neuropsychology-Adult publishes clinical neuropsychological articles concerning assessment, brain functioning and neuroimaging, neuropsychological treatment, and rehabilitation in adults. Full-length articles and brief communications are included. Case studies of adult patients carefully assessing the nature, course, or treatment of clinical neuropsychological dysfunctions in the context of scientific literature, are suitable. Review manuscripts addressing critical issues are encouraged. Preference is given to papers of clinical relevance to others in the field. All submitted manuscripts are subject to initial appraisal by the Editor-in-Chief, and, if found suitable for further considerations are peer reviewed by independent, anonymous expert referees. All peer review is single-blind and submission is online via ScholarOne Manuscripts.
×
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