High thoracic anesthesia offers no major benefit over general anesthesia in on-pump cardiac surgery patients: a retrospective study

Kód výsledku v IS VaVaI

<a href="https://www.isvavai.cz/riv?ss=detail&h=RIV%2F00064165%3A_____%2F16%3A10327343" target="_blank" >RIV/00064165:_____/16:10327343 - isvavai.cz</a>

Nalezeny alternativní kódy

RIV/00216208:11110/16:10327343

Výsledek na webu

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2541-6" target="_blank" >http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2541-6</a>

DOI - Digital Object Identifier

<a href="http://dx.doi.org/10.1186/s40064-016-2541-6" target="_blank" >10.1186/s40064-016-2541-6</a>

Jazyk výsledku

angličtina

Název v původním jazyce

High thoracic anesthesia offers no major benefit over general anesthesia in on-pump cardiac surgery patients: a retrospective study

Popis výsledku v původním jazyce

Background: Thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) has been proposed to improve and facilitate early postoperative outcome in cardiac surgery. The aim of our study was to analyze early postoperative outcome data of patients undergoing cardiac surgery under general anesthesia (GA) with comparison to patients receiving combined TEA and GA. Methods: Medical records data from 288 patients who underwent elective on-pump cardiac surgery were retrieved and analyzed. Patients were divided into two study groups according to the type of anesthesia used: GA group (n = 141) and TEA group (n = 147). Early postoperative outcome data including quality of analgesia and major organ outcome parameters were compared between the study groups. Results: There was no major difference in early postoperative outcome data between the study groups, except for shorter time to extubation (6.0 +/- 10.0 vs. 6.9 +/- 8.8 h, respectively, P < 0.05) and hospital stay (10.7 +/- 5.9 vs. 12.9 +/- 8.8 days, respectively, P < 0.05) in TEA group compared to GA group. Also TEA group as compared to GA group had lower pain numeric rating scale scores (1 +/- 1.1 vs. 1.4 +/- 1.5 at 24 h, respectively, P < 0.05) and morphine requirements during the first 24 h after surgery (148.2 vs. 193 +/- 85.4 mu g/kg, respectively, P < 0.05). Conclusion: Both anesthetic methods were equivalent in most postoperative outcome measures. Thoracic epidural analgesia provided superior pain relief, shorter time to extubation and earlier hospital discharge.

Název v anglickém jazyce

High thoracic anesthesia offers no major benefit over general anesthesia in on-pump cardiac surgery patients: a retrospective study

Popis výsledku anglicky

Background: Thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) has been proposed to improve and facilitate early postoperative outcome in cardiac surgery. The aim of our study was to analyze early postoperative outcome data of patients undergoing cardiac surgery under general anesthesia (GA) with comparison to patients receiving combined TEA and GA. Methods: Medical records data from 288 patients who underwent elective on-pump cardiac surgery were retrieved and analyzed. Patients were divided into two study groups according to the type of anesthesia used: GA group (n = 141) and TEA group (n = 147). Early postoperative outcome data including quality of analgesia and major organ outcome parameters were compared between the study groups. Results: There was no major difference in early postoperative outcome data between the study groups, except for shorter time to extubation (6.0 +/- 10.0 vs. 6.9 +/- 8.8 h, respectively, P < 0.05) and hospital stay (10.7 +/- 5.9 vs. 12.9 +/- 8.8 days, respectively, P < 0.05) in TEA group compared to GA group. Also TEA group as compared to GA group had lower pain numeric rating scale scores (1 +/- 1.1 vs. 1.4 +/- 1.5 at 24 h, respectively, P < 0.05) and morphine requirements during the first 24 h after surgery (148.2 vs. 193 +/- 85.4 mu g/kg, respectively, P < 0.05). Conclusion: Both anesthetic methods were equivalent in most postoperative outcome measures. Thoracic epidural analgesia provided superior pain relief, shorter time to extubation and earlier hospital discharge.

Druh

J_x - Nezařazeno - Článek v odborném periodiku (Jimp, Jsc a Jost)

CEP obor

FP - Ostatní lékařské obory

OECD FORD obor

—

Projekt

—

Návaznosti

V - Vyzkumna aktivita podporovana z jinych verejnych zdroju

Rok uplatnění

2016

Kód důvěrnosti údajů

S - Úplné a pravdivé údaje o projektu nepodléhají ochraně podle zvláštních právních předpisů

Název periodika

SpringerPlus

ISSN

2193-1801

e-ISSN

—

Svazek periodika

5

Číslo periodika v rámci svazku

June

Stát vydavatele periodika

DE - Spolková republika Německo

Počet stran výsledku

8

Strana od-do

—

Kód UT WoS článku

000378474400013

EID výsledku v databázi Scopus

2-s2.0-84976254426