No difference in the rate of postoperative intra-abdominal abscesses exists between laparoscopic and open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis. Wound infections and ileus complicate the postoperative course of patients after laparoscopic appendectomy less frequently than after open appendectomy. The conversion of laparoscopic to open appendectomy for perforated appendicitis is associated with increased postoperative morbidity.
We evaluated in this prospective study the effectiveness of continuous thoracic epidural anesthesia (TEA) and postoperative analgesia with ropivacaine and compared it with general anesthesia (GA) and opioids for pain relief, side effects, postanesthesia recovery, and hospital discharge after modified radical mastectomy. Sixty ASA physical status II and III patients undergoing mastectomy were randomly assigned to two study groups of 30 patients each. In the TEA group, an epidural catheter was inserted at T6-7, and 5--10 mL of 0.2% ropivacaine was injected to maintain anesthesia and to continuously administer adequate analgesia for 48 h. GA was induced with IV 1--2 mg of midazolam or 50--100 microg/mL of fentanyl followed by 50--150 mg of propofol and was maintained with sevoflurane and 50% N(2)O in oxygen. The Aldrete score system was used to evaluate postanesthesia recovery, a verbal rating scale was used for assessment of pain intensity, and a postanesthesia discharge scoring system was used for discharge home. The demographic data and side effects (except for nausea and vomiting) (GA 43%, TEA 10%, P = 0.0074) and discharge home were similar in both groups. However, the number of patients ready for discharge from the recovery room during the first postanesthesia hour (Aldrete score of 10) was significantly larger after TEA (80%) than after GA (33%) (P = 0.0006). GA patients experienced significantly more (P < 0.001) substantial pain than TEA patients on Day 0 (70%), Day 1 (53%), and Day 2 (27%) after the surgery. Patient satisfaction was greater with TEA (70%) than with GA (30%) (P < 0.001). We conclude that TEA with ropivacaine provides better postoperative pain relief and less nausea and vomiting, facilitates postanesthesia recovery, and gives greater patient satisfaction than GA.
Popliteal artery aneurysms (PAAs) are the most frequent peripheral aneurysm with a significant morbidity if left untreated. Open surgical technique is still considered the gold standard; however the revolution in endovascular repair has proven to be a valid alternative option in selected patients. The role of endovascular treatment in PAA is still considered in its infancy. In addition, the indications for use of endovascular stents as compared to standard open surgery have not yet been fully defined and more studies are warranted to characterize the durability of this technique. This article describes the general principles of the natural history, clinical presentation, and long-term limb salvage and survival outcomes for patients with such aneurysms. It also details the features and results for the devices in current use and highlights the current consensus in the management of PAA.
Use of endovascular interventions for arterial occlusive lesions continues to increase. With the evolution of the technology supporting these therapeutic measures, the results of these interventions continue to improve. In general, a comparison of techniques for revascularization of iliac occlusive diseases shows similar initial technical success rates for open versus percutaneous transluminal angioplasty. Angioplasty is often associated with lower periprocedural morbidity and mortality rates. Conversely, surgery frequently provides greater long-term patency, although late failure of percutaneous therapies may occur but still can be treated successfully with reintervention. The perpetual buildup of experience with angioplasty and stenting will eventually characterize its role in the management of occlusive disease. This review outlines the current consensus and applicability of endovascular management of iliac occlusive diseases.
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.