颈动脉内膜切除术:回顾葡萄牙一家三级医院10年全身麻醉和局部麻醉的实践

Mercês Lobo, Joana Mourão, Graça Afonso
{"title":"颈动脉内膜切除术:回顾葡萄牙一家三级医院10年全身麻醉和局部麻醉的实践","authors":"Mercês Lobo,&nbsp;Joana Mourão,&nbsp;Graça Afonso","doi":"10.1016/j.bjanes.2014.03.012","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Retrospective and prospective randomized studies have compared general and locoregional anesthesia for carotid endarterectomy, but without definitive results.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Evaluate the incidence of complications (medical, surgical, neurological, and hospital mortality) in a tertiary center in Portugal and review the literature.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing endarterectomy between 2000 and 2011, using a software for hospital consultation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 750 patients were identified, and locoregional anesthesia had to be converted to general anesthesia in 13 patients. Thus, a total of 737 patients were included in this analysis: 74% underwent locoregianal anesthesia and 26% underwent general anesthesia. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding perioperative variables. The use of shunt was more common in patients undergoing general anesthesia, a statistically significant difference. The difference between groups of strokes and mortality was not statistically significant. The average length of stay was shorter in patients undergoing locoregional anesthesia with a statistically significant difference.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>We found that our data are overlaid with the literature data. After reviewing the literature, we found that the number of studies comparing locoregional and general anesthesia and its impact on delirium, cognitive impairment, and decreased quality of life after surgery is still very small and can provide important data to compare the 2 techniques. Thus, some questions remain open, which indicates the need for randomized studies with larger number of patients and in new centers.</p></div>","PeriodicalId":100199,"journal":{"name":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)","volume":"65 4","pages":"Pages 249-254"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2015-07-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjanes.2014.03.012","citationCount":"1","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Endarterectomía carotídea: revisión de 10 años de práctica de la anestesia general y locorregional en un hospital terciario en Portugal\",\"authors\":\"Mercês Lobo,&nbsp;Joana Mourão,&nbsp;Graça Afonso\",\"doi\":\"10.1016/j.bjanes.2014.03.012\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<div><h3>Background</h3><p>Retrospective and prospective randomized studies have compared general and locoregional anesthesia for carotid endarterectomy, but without definitive results.</p></div><div><h3>Objectives</h3><p>Evaluate the incidence of complications (medical, surgical, neurological, and hospital mortality) in a tertiary center in Portugal and review the literature.</p></div><div><h3>Method</h3><p>Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing endarterectomy between 2000 and 2011, using a software for hospital consultation.</p></div><div><h3>Results</h3><p>A total of 750 patients were identified, and locoregional anesthesia had to be converted to general anesthesia in 13 patients. Thus, a total of 737 patients were included in this analysis: 74% underwent locoregianal anesthesia and 26% underwent general anesthesia. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding perioperative variables. The use of shunt was more common in patients undergoing general anesthesia, a statistically significant difference. The difference between groups of strokes and mortality was not statistically significant. The average length of stay was shorter in patients undergoing locoregional anesthesia with a statistically significant difference.</p></div><div><h3>Conclusions</h3><p>We found that our data are overlaid with the literature data. After reviewing the literature, we found that the number of studies comparing locoregional and general anesthesia and its impact on delirium, cognitive impairment, and decreased quality of life after surgery is still very small and can provide important data to compare the 2 techniques. Thus, some questions remain open, which indicates the need for randomized studies with larger number of patients and in new centers.</p></div>\",\"PeriodicalId\":100199,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)\",\"volume\":\"65 4\",\"pages\":\"Pages 249-254\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2015-07-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://sci-hub-pdf.com/10.1016/j.bjanes.2014.03.012\",\"citationCount\":\"1\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255496315000318\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Brazilian Journal of Anesthesiology (Edicion en Espanol)","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2255496315000318","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

摘要

背景:回顾性和前瞻性随机研究比较了全身麻醉和局部麻醉在颈动脉内膜切除术中的应用,但没有明确的结果。目的评估葡萄牙某三级医疗中心的并发症(内科、外科、神经内科和住院死亡率)发生率,并回顾相关文献。方法回顾性分析2000 ~ 2011年行动脉内膜切除术的患者,采用医院会诊软件。结果750例患者中有13例由局部麻醉转为全身麻醉。因此,共有737例患者被纳入本分析:74%接受局部区域麻醉,26%接受全身麻醉。两组围手术期各项指标差异无统计学意义。在接受全身麻醉的患者中,分流器的使用更为常见,差异有统计学意义。中风和死亡率组间差异无统计学意义。局区域麻醉患者的平均住院时间较短,差异有统计学意义。结论我们发现我们的数据与文献数据重叠。在回顾文献后,我们发现比较局部麻醉和全身麻醉及其对谵妄、认知障碍和术后生活质量下降影响的研究数量仍然很少,可以为比较两种技术提供重要的数据。因此,一些问题仍未解决,这表明需要在新的中心进行大量患者的随机研究。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Endarterectomía carotídea: revisión de 10 años de práctica de la anestesia general y locorregional en un hospital terciario en Portugal

Background

Retrospective and prospective randomized studies have compared general and locoregional anesthesia for carotid endarterectomy, but without definitive results.

Objectives

Evaluate the incidence of complications (medical, surgical, neurological, and hospital mortality) in a tertiary center in Portugal and review the literature.

Method

Retrospective analysis of patients undergoing endarterectomy between 2000 and 2011, using a software for hospital consultation.

Results

A total of 750 patients were identified, and locoregional anesthesia had to be converted to general anesthesia in 13 patients. Thus, a total of 737 patients were included in this analysis: 74% underwent locoregianal anesthesia and 26% underwent general anesthesia. There was no statistically significant difference between the 2 groups regarding perioperative variables. The use of shunt was more common in patients undergoing general anesthesia, a statistically significant difference. The difference between groups of strokes and mortality was not statistically significant. The average length of stay was shorter in patients undergoing locoregional anesthesia with a statistically significant difference.

Conclusions

We found that our data are overlaid with the literature data. After reviewing the literature, we found that the number of studies comparing locoregional and general anesthesia and its impact on delirium, cognitive impairment, and decreased quality of life after surgery is still very small and can provide important data to compare the 2 techniques. Thus, some questions remain open, which indicates the need for randomized studies with larger number of patients and in new centers.

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
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