Thanks to the experience gained through the improvement of video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) technique, and the enhancement of surgical instruments and high-definition cameras, most pulmonary resections can now be performed by minimally invasive surgery. The future of the thoracic surgery should be associated with a combination of surgical and anaesthetic evolution and improvements to reduce the trauma to the patient. Traditionally, intubated general anaesthesia with one-lung ventilation was considered necessary for thoracoscopic major pulmonary resections. However, thanks to the advances in minimally invasive techniques, the non-intubated thoracoscopic approach has been adapted even for use with major lung resections. An adequate analgesia obtained from regional anaesthesia techniques allows VATS to be performed in sedated patients and the potential adverse effects related to general anaesthesia and selective ventilation can be avoided. The non-intubated procedures try to minimize the adverse effects of tracheal intubation and general anaesthesia, such as intubation-related airway trauma, ventilation-induced lung injury, residual neuromuscular blockade, and postoperative nausea and vomiting. Anaesthesiologists should be acquainted with the procedure to be performed. Furthermore, patients may also benefit from the efficient contraction of the dependent hemidiaphragm and preserved hypoxic pulmonary vasoconstriction during surgically induced pneumothorax in spontaneous ventilation. However, the surgical team must be aware of the potential problems and have the judgement to convert regional anaesthesia to intubated general anaesthesia in enforced circumstances. The non-intubated anaesthesia combined with the uniportal approach represents another step forward in the minimally invasive strategies of treatment, and can be reliably offered in the near future to an increasing number of patients. Therefore, educating and training programmes in VATS with non-intubated patients may be needed. Surgical techniques and various regional anaesthesia techniques as well as indications, contraindications, criteria to conversion of sedation to general anaesthesia in non-intubated patients are reviewed and discussed.

No abstract

Correspondence: Bernd Muellejans, dr.muellejans@drguth.de R1 HR = heart rate; ICU = intensive care unit; MAP = mean arterial pressure; PI = Pain Intensity (scale); SAPS = Simplified Acute Physiology Score; SAS = Sedation-Agitation Scale; SD = standard deviation. AbstractIntroduction This double-blind, randomized, multicentre study was conducted to compare the efficacy and safety of remifentanil and fentanyl for intensive care unit (ICU) sedation and analgesia. Methods Intubated cardiac, general postsurgical or medical patients (aged ≥18 years), who were mechanically ventilated for 12-72 hours, received remifentanil (9 µg/kg per hour; n = 77) or fentanyl (1.5 µg/kg per hour; n = 75). Initial opioid titration was supplemented with propofol (0.5 mg/kg per hour), if required, to achieve optimal sedation (i.e. a Sedation-Agitation Scale score of 4). Results The mean percentages of time in optimal sedation were 88.3% for remifentanil and 89.3% for fentanyl (not significant). Patients with a Sedation-Agitation Scale score of 4 exhibited significantly less between-patient variability in optimal sedation on remifentanil (variance ratio of fentanyl to remifentanil 1.84; P = 0.009). Of patients who received fentanyl 40% required propofol, as compared with 35% of those who received remifentanil (median total doses 683 mg and 378 mg, respectively; P = 0.065). Recovery was rapid (median time to extubation: 1.1 hours for remifentanil and 1.3 hours for fentanyl; not significant). Remifentanil patients who experienced pain did so for significantly longer during extubation (6.5% of the time versus 1.4%; P = 0.013), postextubation (10.2% versus 3.6%; P = 0.001) and post-treatment (13.5% versus 5.1%; P = 0.001), but they exhibited similar haemodynamic stability with no significant differences in adverse event incidence. Conclusion Analgesia based sedation with remifentanil titrated to response provided effective sedation and rapid extubation without the need for propofol in most patients. Fentanyl was similar, probably because the dosing algorithm demanded frequent monitoring and adjustment, thereby preventing over-sedation. Rapid offset of analgesia with remifentanil resulted in a greater incidence of pain, highlighting the need for proactive pain management when transitioning to longer acting analgesics, which is difficult within a double-blind study but would be quite possible under normal circumstances.

No abstract

The present study shows that the use of desflurane with desiccated carbon dioxide absorbents in pediatric anesthesia can produce a dangerous carbon dioxide intoxication, especially with low-flow anesthesia.