The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients
Autor(a) principal: | |
---|---|
Data de Publicação: | 2010 |
Outros Autores: | , , , , , |
Tipo de documento: | Artigo |
Idioma: | eng |
Título da fonte: | Clinics |
Texto Completo: | https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/18511 |
Resumo: | OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare selective spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia with regard to postoperative recovery and fast-track eligibility in day surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Sixty geriatric outpatient cases, with ASA II-III physical status and requiring shortduration transurethral intervention, were enrolled in the study. The cases were split into 2 groups: as general anesthesia (Group GA) and selective spinal anesthesia (Group SSA). Group GA (n = 30) received propofol 2 mg kg-1 (until loss of eyelash reflex), remifentanil induction 0.5-1 µg kg-1, and laryngeal mask. Maintenance was achieved by 4-6% desflurane in 60% N2O and 40% O2 along with remifentanil infusion at 0.05 µg /kg-1 /min-1. Drugs were discontinued after the withdrawal of the ureteroscope, and extubation was carried out with 100% O2. Group SSA (n = 30) received 0.5% spinal anesthesia via L4-5 space by 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 5 mg. Anesthesia preparation time, time to surgical anesthesia level, postoperative fast-tracking, and time to White-Song recovery score of 12, were noted. In the operating room, we evaluated hemodynamics, nausea/vomiting, surgeon and patient satisfaction with anesthesia, perioperative midazolam-fentanyl administration, postoperative pain, and discharge time. RESULTS: Anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, anesthesia-related time in the operating room, time to sit, and time to walk were significantly low in Group GA (p < 0.05), whereas time to fast-track eligibility, length of stay in the PACU, discharge time, and other parameters were similar in both of the groups. CONCLUSION: While anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, start time of surgery, time to sit, and time to walk were shorter in the General Anesthesia group, time to fast-track eligibility, phase 1 recovery time, and discharge time were similar among patients subjected to selective spinal anesthesia. |
id |
USP-19_53120b6b26e557ba1f62452eded7d839 |
---|---|
oai_identifier_str |
oai:revistas.usp.br:article/18511 |
network_acronym_str |
USP-19 |
network_name_str |
Clinics |
repository_id_str |
|
spelling |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients Selective spinal anesthesiaGeneral anesthesiaPostoperative recoveryFast-trackGeriatri OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare selective spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia with regard to postoperative recovery and fast-track eligibility in day surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Sixty geriatric outpatient cases, with ASA II-III physical status and requiring shortduration transurethral intervention, were enrolled in the study. The cases were split into 2 groups: as general anesthesia (Group GA) and selective spinal anesthesia (Group SSA). Group GA (n = 30) received propofol 2 mg kg-1 (until loss of eyelash reflex), remifentanil induction 0.5-1 µg kg-1, and laryngeal mask. Maintenance was achieved by 4-6% desflurane in 60% N2O and 40% O2 along with remifentanil infusion at 0.05 µg /kg-1 /min-1. Drugs were discontinued after the withdrawal of the ureteroscope, and extubation was carried out with 100% O2. Group SSA (n = 30) received 0.5% spinal anesthesia via L4-5 space by 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 5 mg. Anesthesia preparation time, time to surgical anesthesia level, postoperative fast-tracking, and time to White-Song recovery score of 12, were noted. In the operating room, we evaluated hemodynamics, nausea/vomiting, surgeon and patient satisfaction with anesthesia, perioperative midazolam-fentanyl administration, postoperative pain, and discharge time. RESULTS: Anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, anesthesia-related time in the operating room, time to sit, and time to walk were significantly low in Group GA (p < 0.05), whereas time to fast-track eligibility, length of stay in the PACU, discharge time, and other parameters were similar in both of the groups. CONCLUSION: While anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, start time of surgery, time to sit, and time to walk were shorter in the General Anesthesia group, time to fast-track eligibility, phase 1 recovery time, and discharge time were similar among patients subjected to selective spinal anesthesia. Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo2010-01-01info:eu-repo/semantics/articleinfo:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersionapplication/pdfhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/1851110.1590/S1807-59322010001000003Clinics; Vol. 65 No. 10 (2010); 941-946 Clinics; v. 65 n. 10 (2010); 941-946 Clinics; Vol. 65 Núm. 10 (2010); 941-946 1980-53221807-5932reponame:Clinicsinstname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP)instacron:USPenghttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/18511/20574Ornek, DilsenMetin, SeyhanDeren, SerpilUn, CananMetin, MustafaDikmen, BayazitGogus, Nermininfo:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess2012-05-23T11:28:31Zoai:revistas.usp.br:article/18511Revistahttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinicsPUBhttps://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/oai||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br1980-53221807-5932opendoar:2012-05-23T11:28:31Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP)false |
dc.title.none.fl_str_mv |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients |
title |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients |
spellingShingle |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients Ornek, Dilsen Selective spinal anesthesia General anesthesia Postoperative recovery Fast-track Geriatri |
title_short |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients |
title_full |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients |
title_fullStr |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients |
title_full_unstemmed |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients |
title_sort |
The influence of various anesthesia techniques on postoperative recovery and discharge criteria among geriatric patients |
author |
Ornek, Dilsen |
author_facet |
Ornek, Dilsen Metin, Seyhan Deren, Serpil Un, Canan Metin, Mustafa Dikmen, Bayazit Gogus, Nermin |
author_role |
author |
author2 |
Metin, Seyhan Deren, Serpil Un, Canan Metin, Mustafa Dikmen, Bayazit Gogus, Nermin |
author2_role |
author author author author author author |
dc.contributor.author.fl_str_mv |
Ornek, Dilsen Metin, Seyhan Deren, Serpil Un, Canan Metin, Mustafa Dikmen, Bayazit Gogus, Nermin |
dc.subject.por.fl_str_mv |
Selective spinal anesthesia General anesthesia Postoperative recovery Fast-track Geriatri |
topic |
Selective spinal anesthesia General anesthesia Postoperative recovery Fast-track Geriatri |
description |
OBJECTIVE: We aim to compare selective spinal anesthesia and general anesthesia with regard to postoperative recovery and fast-track eligibility in day surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Sixty geriatric outpatient cases, with ASA II-III physical status and requiring shortduration transurethral intervention, were enrolled in the study. The cases were split into 2 groups: as general anesthesia (Group GA) and selective spinal anesthesia (Group SSA). Group GA (n = 30) received propofol 2 mg kg-1 (until loss of eyelash reflex), remifentanil induction 0.5-1 µg kg-1, and laryngeal mask. Maintenance was achieved by 4-6% desflurane in 60% N2O and 40% O2 along with remifentanil infusion at 0.05 µg /kg-1 /min-1. Drugs were discontinued after the withdrawal of the ureteroscope, and extubation was carried out with 100% O2. Group SSA (n = 30) received 0.5% spinal anesthesia via L4-5 space by 0.5% hyperbaric bupivacaine 5 mg. Anesthesia preparation time, time to surgical anesthesia level, postoperative fast-tracking, and time to White-Song recovery score of 12, were noted. In the operating room, we evaluated hemodynamics, nausea/vomiting, surgeon and patient satisfaction with anesthesia, perioperative midazolam-fentanyl administration, postoperative pain, and discharge time. RESULTS: Anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, anesthesia-related time in the operating room, time to sit, and time to walk were significantly low in Group GA (p < 0.05), whereas time to fast-track eligibility, length of stay in the PACU, discharge time, and other parameters were similar in both of the groups. CONCLUSION: While anesthesia preparation time, length of surgery, start time of surgery, time to sit, and time to walk were shorter in the General Anesthesia group, time to fast-track eligibility, phase 1 recovery time, and discharge time were similar among patients subjected to selective spinal anesthesia. |
publishDate |
2010 |
dc.date.none.fl_str_mv |
2010-01-01 |
dc.type.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/article info:eu-repo/semantics/publishedVersion |
format |
article |
status_str |
publishedVersion |
dc.identifier.uri.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/18511 10.1590/S1807-59322010001000003 |
url |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/18511 |
identifier_str_mv |
10.1590/S1807-59322010001000003 |
dc.language.iso.fl_str_mv |
eng |
language |
eng |
dc.relation.none.fl_str_mv |
https://www.revistas.usp.br/clinics/article/view/18511/20574 |
dc.rights.driver.fl_str_mv |
info:eu-repo/semantics/openAccess |
eu_rights_str_mv |
openAccess |
dc.format.none.fl_str_mv |
application/pdf |
dc.publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo |
publisher.none.fl_str_mv |
Hospital das Clínicas, Faculdade de Medicina, Universidade de São Paulo |
dc.source.none.fl_str_mv |
Clinics; Vol. 65 No. 10 (2010); 941-946 Clinics; v. 65 n. 10 (2010); 941-946 Clinics; Vol. 65 Núm. 10 (2010); 941-946 1980-5322 1807-5932 reponame:Clinics instname:Universidade de São Paulo (USP) instacron:USP |
instname_str |
Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
instacron_str |
USP |
institution |
USP |
reponame_str |
Clinics |
collection |
Clinics |
repository.name.fl_str_mv |
Clinics - Universidade de São Paulo (USP) |
repository.mail.fl_str_mv |
||clinics@hc.fm.usp.br |
_version_ |
1800222755699818496 |