全静脉麻醉与七氟醚麻醉对术中面神经监测的影响:随机对照试验。

IF 3.4 3区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
Yu Jeong Bang, Sang Hyun Lee, Yeon Woo Jeong, Ji Won Choi, Hyun Joo Ahn, Boram Park, Jin Kyoung Kim
{"title":"全静脉麻醉与七氟醚麻醉对术中面神经监测的影响:随机对照试验。","authors":"Yu Jeong Bang, Sang Hyun Lee, Yeon Woo Jeong, Ji Won Choi, Hyun Joo Ahn, Boram Park, Jin Kyoung Kim","doi":"10.1007/s12630-024-02864-5","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Intraoperative facial nerve monitoring (IFNM) facilitates effective nerve preservation during ear and head and neck surgeries. Quantitative differences in the timely feasibility of IFNM during total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) vs sevoflurane anesthesia have not been investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which 98 patients undergoing ear surgery were allocated to either the TIVA or sevoflurane group. We used quantitative neuromuscular monitoring of train-of-four (TOF) responses to assess achievements of IFNM-feasible conditions, and recorded the TOF count (TOFC) or TOF ratio of T4/T1 (TOFR). The primary outcome was the time interval between a TOFR of 0.25 and 0.75 (recovery index). The most important secondary outcome was the time to reach a TOFR of 0.25. We also recorded the quality of IFNM, intubation condition, patient-ventilator dyssynchrony, surgeon's satisfaction, and postoperative analgesic and antiemetic requirements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-two patients completed the study. The median [interquartile range] recovery index was significantly shorter in the TIVA group (9 [7-11] min) than in the sevoflurane group (34 [24-53] min), with a difference in medians of 25 min (95% confidence interval, 20 to 31; P < 0.001). Before IFNM requests, the time to TOFR of 0.25 was achieved earlier in the TIVA group (34 [29-41] min) than in the sevoflurane group (51 [43-77] min) (P < 0.001). Both groups achieved neuromuscular recovery in time for IFNM without a need for reversal agents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intraoperative facial nerve monitoring was feasible earlier and faster under TIVA than under sevoflurane anesthesia. We suggest that TIVA may be a preferable choice over sevoflurane to meet a surgeon's request for an earlier IFNM.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>CRIS.nih.go.kr ( KCT0006676 ); first submitted 7 October 2021.</p>","PeriodicalId":56145,"journal":{"name":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","volume":" ","pages":"262-272"},"PeriodicalIF":3.4000,"publicationDate":"2025-02-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Effect of total intravenous anesthesia versus sevoflurane anesthesia on intraoperative facial nerve monitoring: a randomized controlled trial.\",\"authors\":\"Yu Jeong Bang, Sang Hyun Lee, Yeon Woo Jeong, Ji Won Choi, Hyun Joo Ahn, Boram Park, Jin Kyoung Kim\",\"doi\":\"10.1007/s12630-024-02864-5\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Intraoperative facial nerve monitoring (IFNM) facilitates effective nerve preservation during ear and head and neck surgeries. Quantitative differences in the timely feasibility of IFNM during total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) vs sevoflurane anesthesia have not been investigated.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which 98 patients undergoing ear surgery were allocated to either the TIVA or sevoflurane group. We used quantitative neuromuscular monitoring of train-of-four (TOF) responses to assess achievements of IFNM-feasible conditions, and recorded the TOF count (TOFC) or TOF ratio of T4/T1 (TOFR). The primary outcome was the time interval between a TOFR of 0.25 and 0.75 (recovery index). The most important secondary outcome was the time to reach a TOFR of 0.25. We also recorded the quality of IFNM, intubation condition, patient-ventilator dyssynchrony, surgeon's satisfaction, and postoperative analgesic and antiemetic requirements.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Ninety-two patients completed the study. The median [interquartile range] recovery index was significantly shorter in the TIVA group (9 [7-11] min) than in the sevoflurane group (34 [24-53] min), with a difference in medians of 25 min (95% confidence interval, 20 to 31; P < 0.001). Before IFNM requests, the time to TOFR of 0.25 was achieved earlier in the TIVA group (34 [29-41] min) than in the sevoflurane group (51 [43-77] min) (P < 0.001). Both groups achieved neuromuscular recovery in time for IFNM without a need for reversal agents.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>Intraoperative facial nerve monitoring was feasible earlier and faster under TIVA than under sevoflurane anesthesia. We suggest that TIVA may be a preferable choice over sevoflurane to meet a surgeon's request for an earlier IFNM.</p><p><strong>Study registration: </strong>CRIS.nih.go.kr ( KCT0006676 ); first submitted 7 October 2021.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":56145,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"262-272\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":3.4000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-02-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-024-02864-5\",\"RegionNum\":3,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/11/27 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Canadian Journal of Anesthesia-Journal Canadien D Anesthesie","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s12630-024-02864-5","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/11/27 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

目的:术中面神经监测(IFNM)有助于在耳部和头颈部手术中有效保护神经。在全静脉麻醉(TIVA)与七氟烷麻醉期间,IFNM 的及时可行性在数量上的差异尚未得到研究:我们进行了一项随机对照试验,将 98 名接受耳科手术的患者分配到 TIVA 组或七氟烷组。我们使用定量神经肌肉监测四连击(TOF)反应来评估 IFNM 可行条件的成就,并记录 TOF 计数(TOFC)或 T4/T1 的 TOF 比值(TOFR)。主要结果是 TOFR 为 0.25 和 0.75 之间的时间间隔(恢复指数)。最重要的次要结果是TOFR达到0.25的时间。我们还记录了 IFNM 的质量、插管情况、患者与呼吸机不同步、外科医生的满意度以及术后镇痛和止吐要求:92名患者完成了研究。TIVA组的恢复指数中位数[四分位间范围](9[7-11]分钟)明显短于七氟醚组(34[24-53]分钟),两者的中位数相差25分钟(95%置信区间,20-31;P 结论:TIVA组的恢复指数中位数(9[7-11]分钟)明显短于七氟醚组(34[24-53]分钟):与七氟醚麻醉相比,TIVA 可更早更快地进行术中面神经监测。我们认为,与七氟烷相比,TIVA可能是满足外科医生提前进行面神经监测要求的更佳选择:研究注册:CRIS.nih.go.kr ( KCT0006676 );2021年10月7日首次提交。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Effect of total intravenous anesthesia versus sevoflurane anesthesia on intraoperative facial nerve monitoring: a randomized controlled trial.

Purpose: Intraoperative facial nerve monitoring (IFNM) facilitates effective nerve preservation during ear and head and neck surgeries. Quantitative differences in the timely feasibility of IFNM during total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) vs sevoflurane anesthesia have not been investigated.

Methods: We conducted a randomized controlled trial in which 98 patients undergoing ear surgery were allocated to either the TIVA or sevoflurane group. We used quantitative neuromuscular monitoring of train-of-four (TOF) responses to assess achievements of IFNM-feasible conditions, and recorded the TOF count (TOFC) or TOF ratio of T4/T1 (TOFR). The primary outcome was the time interval between a TOFR of 0.25 and 0.75 (recovery index). The most important secondary outcome was the time to reach a TOFR of 0.25. We also recorded the quality of IFNM, intubation condition, patient-ventilator dyssynchrony, surgeon's satisfaction, and postoperative analgesic and antiemetic requirements.

Results: Ninety-two patients completed the study. The median [interquartile range] recovery index was significantly shorter in the TIVA group (9 [7-11] min) than in the sevoflurane group (34 [24-53] min), with a difference in medians of 25 min (95% confidence interval, 20 to 31; P < 0.001). Before IFNM requests, the time to TOFR of 0.25 was achieved earlier in the TIVA group (34 [29-41] min) than in the sevoflurane group (51 [43-77] min) (P < 0.001). Both groups achieved neuromuscular recovery in time for IFNM without a need for reversal agents.

Conclusions: Intraoperative facial nerve monitoring was feasible earlier and faster under TIVA than under sevoflurane anesthesia. We suggest that TIVA may be a preferable choice over sevoflurane to meet a surgeon's request for an earlier IFNM.

Study registration: CRIS.nih.go.kr ( KCT0006676 ); first submitted 7 October 2021.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
8.50
自引率
7.10%
发文量
161
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The Canadian Journal of Anesthesia (the Journal) is owned by the Canadian Anesthesiologists’ Society and is published by Springer Science + Business Media, LLM (New York). From the first year of publication in 1954, the international exposure of the Journal has broadened considerably, with articles now received from over 50 countries. The Journal is published monthly, and has an impact Factor (mean journal citation frequency) of 2.127 (in 2012). Article types consist of invited editorials, reports of original investigations (clinical and basic sciences articles), case reports/case series, review articles, systematic reviews, accredited continuing professional development (CPD) modules, and Letters to the Editor. The editorial content, according to the mission statement, spans the fields of anesthesia, acute and chronic pain, perioperative medicine and critical care. In addition, the Journal publishes practice guidelines and standards articles relevant to clinicians. Articles are published either in English or in French, according to the language of submission.
×
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