Due to rapid evolution and technological advancements, medical personnel now require special training outside of their safe zones. Anesthesiologists face challenges in practicing in locations beyond the operating room. New locations, inadequate monitoring devices, poor assisting staff, unfamiliarity of procedures, insufficient knowledge of basic standards, and lack of experience compromise the quality of patient care. Therefore, anesthesiologists must recognize possible risk factors during anesthesia in nonoperating rooms and familiarize themselves with standards to improve safe practice. This review article emphasizes the need for standardizing hospitals and facilities requiring nonoperating room anesthesia, and encourages anesthesiologists to take the lead in applying these practice guidelines to improve patient outcomes and reduce adverse events.
BackgroundIntravenous anesthesia has been reported to have a favorable effect on the prognosis of cancer patients. This study was performed to analyze data regarding the relation between anesthetics and the prognosis of cancer patients in our hospital.MethodsThe medical records of patients who underwent surgical resection for gastric, lung, liver, colon, and breast cancer between January 2006 and December 2009 were reviewed. Depending on the type of anesthetic, it was divided into total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or volatile inhaled anesthesia (VIA) group. The 5-year overall survival outcomes were analyzed by log-rank test. Cox proportional hazards modeling was used for sensitivity.ResultsThe number of patients finally included in the comparison after propensity matching came to 729 in each group. The number of surviving patients at 5 years came to 660 (90.5%) in the TIVA and 673 (92.3%) in the VIA. The type of anesthetic did not affect the 5-year survival rate according to the log-rank test (P = 0.21). Variables associated with a significant increase in the hazard of death after multivariable analysis were male sex and metastasis at surgery.ConclusionsThere were no differences in 5-year overall survival between two groups in the cancer surgery.Trial registrationTrial registration: CRIS KCT0004101. Retrospectively registered 28 June 2019.
Regional anesthesia for non-obstetric surgery in parturients is a method to decrease patient and fetal risk during general anesthesia. Thoracic interfascial nerve block can be used as an analgesic technique for surgical procedures of the thorax. The Pecs II block is an interfascial block that targets not only the medial and lateral pectoral nerves, but also the lateral cutaneous branch of the intercostal nerve. Pecto-intercostal fascial block (PIFB) targets the anterior cutaneous branch of the intercostal nerve. The authors successfully performed a modified Pecs II block and PIFB without complications in a parturient who refused general anesthesia for breast surgery.
BackgroundIntraoperative hypothermia is common in patients undergoing general anesthesia during arthroscopic hip surgery. In the present study, we assessed the effect of heating and humidifying the airway with a heated wire humidification circuit (HHC) to attenuate the decrease of core temperature and prevent hypothermia in patients undergoing arthroscopic hip surgery under general anesthesia.MethodsFifty-six patients scheduled for arthroscopic hip surgery were randomly assigned to either a control group using a breathing circuit connected with a heat and moisture exchanger (HME) (n = 28) or an HHC group using a heated wire humidification circuit (n = 28). The decrease in core temperature was measured from anesthetic induction and every 15 minutes thereafter using an esophageal stethoscope.ResultsDecrease in core temperature from anesthetic induction to 120 minutes after induction was lower in the HHC group (–0.60 ± 0.27℃) compared to the control group (–0.86 ± 0.29℃) (P = 0.001). However, there was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of intraoperative hypothermia or the incidence of shivering in the postanesthetic care unit.ConclusionsThe use of HHC may be considered as a method to attenuate intraoperative decrease in core temperature during arthroscopic hip surgery performed under general anesthesia and exceeding 2 hours in duration.
BackgroundPropofol is a commonly used intravenous drug during anesthetic induction because of its rapid onset and short duration. However, the injection pain that patients experience is so severe that they recall the induction of anesthesia as the most painful part of the perioperative period. Therefore, the objective of this study was to determine the effect of heated carrier fluids (40℃) in decreasing propofol injection pain.MethodsA randomized, controlled clinical trial was conducted in 90 patients aged 18 to 65 who were scheduled for either elective or urgent surgery under general anesthesia classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I or II. Patients were allocated into the following 3 groups: 1) Group W (n = 30) who received 200 ml of heated carrier fluids for 20 minutes prior to propofol injection; 2) Group L (n = 30) who received 200 ml of heated carrier fluids for 20 minutes prior to 0.5 mg/kg 1%lidocaine 1 minute before propofol injection; 3) Group C (control group, n = 30) who received 200 ml of room temperature fluids prior to propofol injection. Pain was evaluated using verbal pain score (VPS).ResultsGroup W and Group L showed significant reduction (P = 0.001) in the incidence and severity of injection pain compared to Group C. VPS scores were significantly lower in Group W and Group L compared to those of Group C. Incidence of propofol injection pain was statistically different between Group W (P = 0.005) and Group L (P = 0.037) compared to Group C, but not statistically different between Group W and Group L (P = 0.432).ConclusionsBoth sole injection of heated carrier fluids and the combination of 0.5 mg/kg 1%lidocaine pretreatment effectively reduced propofol injection pain.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.