Brugada综合征麻醉管理18年分析:bruganas研究。

IF 4.2 2区 医学 Q1 ANESTHESIOLOGY
European Journal of Anaesthesiology Pub Date : 2025-05-01 Epub Date: 2025-02-12 DOI:10.1097/EJA.0000000000002146
Jaume Borrell-Vega, José Daniel Fernández Font, Miguel Linares, Graciela Martínez-Pallí, Alba Isabel-Roquero, Lluis Mont, Josep Brugada, Elena Arbelo, Marc Giménez-Milà
{"title":"Brugada综合征麻醉管理18年分析:bruganas研究。","authors":"Jaume Borrell-Vega, José Daniel Fernández Font, Miguel Linares, Graciela Martínez-Pallí, Alba Isabel-Roquero, Lluis Mont, Josep Brugada, Elena Arbelo, Marc Giménez-Milà","doi":"10.1097/EJA.0000000000002146","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Brugada syndrome (BrS) is a genetic disorder that increases the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD). Certain drugs (propofol, local anaesthetics), fever, bradycardia, increased vagal tone and electrolyte imbalances can trigger or worsen BrS arrhythmias.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the incidence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias during the perioperative period in patients with BrS, hypothesising that common anaesthetic drugs may be safe to use during daily clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>The BRUGANAES study was an observational, retrospective project including BrS patients who underwent various types of anaesthesia.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>BrS patients undergoing any type of anaesthesia intervention from 1 January 2006, to 31 December 2023, from a tertiary hospital in Barcelona.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the occurrence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and/or SCD during and up to 30 days postanaesthesia. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during hospitalisation, 30-day readmission rates and 30-day mortality rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 652 BrS patients registered in the hospital, 111 patients and 189 procedures were analysed. General anaesthesia was administered in 51.3% of cases, sedation in 36% and regional/neuraxial anaesthesia exclusively in 12.7%. Overall, nonrecommended drugs (propofol, ketamine and local anaesthetics) were used in 129 (68.3%) procedures, either bolus and/or continuous infusion. Epidural blocks were performed in 34% of regional anaesthesia cases, mostly in obstetrics, and subarachnoid blocks in 31.8%. The primary outcome occurred in two patients intraoperatively (1% of procedures): one with bradycardia-induced ventricular fibrillation after a nonrecommended drug and one with transient ventricular tachycardia after a drug not listed as potentially harmful.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To date, this is one of the largest cohorts describing the perioperative approach for BrS patients, including a wide range of anaesthesia procedures and drugs. Most of the patients undergoing anaesthesia for an interventional procedure received an anaesthetic drug classified as not recommended.</p>","PeriodicalId":11920,"journal":{"name":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","volume":" ","pages":"458-467"},"PeriodicalIF":4.2000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Eighteen-year analysis of anaesthetic management in Brugada syndrome: The BRUGANAES study.\",\"authors\":\"Jaume Borrell-Vega, José Daniel Fernández Font, Miguel Linares, Graciela Martínez-Pallí, Alba Isabel-Roquero, Lluis Mont, Josep Brugada, Elena Arbelo, Marc Giménez-Milà\",\"doi\":\"10.1097/EJA.0000000000002146\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Brugada syndrome (BrS) is a genetic disorder that increases the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD). Certain drugs (propofol, local anaesthetics), fever, bradycardia, increased vagal tone and electrolyte imbalances can trigger or worsen BrS arrhythmias.</p><p><strong>Objective: </strong>To evaluate the incidence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias during the perioperative period in patients with BrS, hypothesising that common anaesthetic drugs may be safe to use during daily clinical practice.</p><p><strong>Design: </strong>The BRUGANAES study was an observational, retrospective project including BrS patients who underwent various types of anaesthesia.</p><p><strong>Setting: </strong>BrS patients undergoing any type of anaesthesia intervention from 1 January 2006, to 31 December 2023, from a tertiary hospital in Barcelona.</p><p><strong>Main outcome measures: </strong>The primary outcome was the occurrence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and/or SCD during and up to 30 days postanaesthesia. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during hospitalisation, 30-day readmission rates and 30-day mortality rates.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Among 652 BrS patients registered in the hospital, 111 patients and 189 procedures were analysed. General anaesthesia was administered in 51.3% of cases, sedation in 36% and regional/neuraxial anaesthesia exclusively in 12.7%. Overall, nonrecommended drugs (propofol, ketamine and local anaesthetics) were used in 129 (68.3%) procedures, either bolus and/or continuous infusion. Epidural blocks were performed in 34% of regional anaesthesia cases, mostly in obstetrics, and subarachnoid blocks in 31.8%. The primary outcome occurred in two patients intraoperatively (1% of procedures): one with bradycardia-induced ventricular fibrillation after a nonrecommended drug and one with transient ventricular tachycardia after a drug not listed as potentially harmful.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>To date, this is one of the largest cohorts describing the perioperative approach for BrS patients, including a wide range of anaesthesia procedures and drugs. Most of the patients undergoing anaesthesia for an interventional procedure received an anaesthetic drug classified as not recommended.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":11920,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"European Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"volume\":\" \",\"pages\":\"458-467\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":4.2000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-05-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"European Journal of Anaesthesiology\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"3\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000002146\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"医学\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2025/2/12 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"Epub\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ANESTHESIOLOGY\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"European Journal of Anaesthesiology","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1097/EJA.0000000000002146","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2025/2/12 0:00:00","PubModel":"Epub","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:Brugada综合征(BrS)是一种遗传性疾病,可增加室性心动过速和心源性猝死(SCD)的风险。某些药物(异丙酚,局部麻醉剂),发烧,心动过缓,迷走神经张力增加和电解质失衡可触发或加重BrS心律失常。目的:探讨BrS患者围手术期恶性室性心律失常的发生率,并假设日常临床使用常用麻醉药物是安全的。设计:BRUGANAES研究是一项观察性、回顾性项目,包括接受各种麻醉的BrS患者。环境:2006年1月1日至2023年12月31日在巴塞罗那一家三级医院接受任何类型麻醉干预的BrS患者。主要结局指标:主要结局指标为麻醉期间及麻醉后30天内恶性室性心律失常和/或SCD的发生情况。次要结局包括住院期间的不良事件、30天再入院率和30天死亡率。结果:在本院登记的652例BrS患者中,分析了111例患者和189例手术过程。全身麻醉占51.3%,镇静占36%,局部/神经轴麻醉占12.7%。总的来说,129例(68.3%)手术中使用了非推荐药物(异丙酚、氯胺酮和局部麻醉剂),要么是大剂量注射,要么是持续输注。34%的区域麻醉病例采用硬膜外阻滞,主要用于产科,31.8%采用蛛网膜下阻滞。主要结果发生在两名患者术中(占手术的1%):一名患者在使用非推荐药物后出现心动过缓性心室颤动,另一名患者在使用未列入潜在有害药物后出现短暂性室性心动过速。结论:迄今为止,这是描述BrS患者围手术期入路的最大队列之一,包括广泛的麻醉程序和药物。大多数在介入手术中接受麻醉的患者都使用了不推荐使用的麻醉药物。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Eighteen-year analysis of anaesthetic management in Brugada syndrome: The BRUGANAES study.

Background: Brugada syndrome (BrS) is a genetic disorder that increases the risk of ventricular tachyarrhythmias and sudden cardiac death (SCD). Certain drugs (propofol, local anaesthetics), fever, bradycardia, increased vagal tone and electrolyte imbalances can trigger or worsen BrS arrhythmias.

Objective: To evaluate the incidence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias during the perioperative period in patients with BrS, hypothesising that common anaesthetic drugs may be safe to use during daily clinical practice.

Design: The BRUGANAES study was an observational, retrospective project including BrS patients who underwent various types of anaesthesia.

Setting: BrS patients undergoing any type of anaesthesia intervention from 1 January 2006, to 31 December 2023, from a tertiary hospital in Barcelona.

Main outcome measures: The primary outcome was the occurrence of malignant ventricular arrhythmias and/or SCD during and up to 30 days postanaesthesia. Secondary outcomes included adverse events during hospitalisation, 30-day readmission rates and 30-day mortality rates.

Results: Among 652 BrS patients registered in the hospital, 111 patients and 189 procedures were analysed. General anaesthesia was administered in 51.3% of cases, sedation in 36% and regional/neuraxial anaesthesia exclusively in 12.7%. Overall, nonrecommended drugs (propofol, ketamine and local anaesthetics) were used in 129 (68.3%) procedures, either bolus and/or continuous infusion. Epidural blocks were performed in 34% of regional anaesthesia cases, mostly in obstetrics, and subarachnoid blocks in 31.8%. The primary outcome occurred in two patients intraoperatively (1% of procedures): one with bradycardia-induced ventricular fibrillation after a nonrecommended drug and one with transient ventricular tachycardia after a drug not listed as potentially harmful.

Conclusion: To date, this is one of the largest cohorts describing the perioperative approach for BrS patients, including a wide range of anaesthesia procedures and drugs. Most of the patients undergoing anaesthesia for an interventional procedure received an anaesthetic drug classified as not recommended.

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
6.90
自引率
11.10%
发文量
351
审稿时长
6-12 weeks
期刊介绍: The European Journal of Anaesthesiology (EJA) publishes original work of high scientific quality in the field of anaesthesiology, pain, emergency medicine and intensive care. Preference is given to experimental work or clinical observation in man, and to laboratory work of clinical relevance. The journal also publishes commissioned reviews by an authority, editorials, invited commentaries, special articles, pro and con debates, and short reports (correspondences, case reports, short reports of clinical studies).
×
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