Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 2 de 2
Filter
Add more filters










Database
Language
Publication year range
1.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 34(3): 791-796, 2020 Mar.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31399303

ABSTRACT

Non-invasive near-infrared spectroscopy is gaining popularity in the detection of spinal cord ischemia following aortic aneurysm repair. However, practical recommendations are lacking. This review focuses on the physiological and anatomical background, as well as on the clinical implementations of near-infrared spectroscopy as a tool for monitoring ischemia of the spinal cord. Clinical recommendations based on the currently available evidence are rendered.


Subject(s)
Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic , Spinal Cord Ischemia , Aortic Aneurysm, Thoracic/surgery , Humans , Ischemia , Monitoring, Intraoperative , Spectroscopy, Near-Infrared , Spinal Cord Ischemia/diagnostic imaging , Spinal Cord Ischemia/etiology
2.
Eur J Anaesthesiol ; 20(6): 461-6, 2003 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12803263

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We conducted an open, prospective, randomized study to compare the efficacy, safety and recovery characteristics of remifentanil or propofol during monitored anaesthesia care in patients undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: Forty patients were randomly assigned to receive either propofol (1 mg kg(-1) followed by 10 mg kg (-1) h(-1), n = 20) or remifentanil (0.5 microg kg(-1) followed by 0.2 microg kg(-1) min(-1), n = 20). The infusion rate was subsequently adapted to clinical needs. RESULTS: In the propofol group, arterial pressure and heart rate decreased significantly from the baseline. These variables remained unchanged in the remifentanil group, but hypoventilation occurred in 55% of patients. Early recovery was delayed in the propofol group (P < 0.002). Recovery of cognitive and psychomotor functions was faster in the remifentanil group. Fifteen minutes after anaesthesia, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test score was 28.6 +/- 12.8 versus 36.2 +/- 9.4 and the Trieger Dot Test score was 25.6 +/- 8.1 versus 18.7 +/- 4.1 in the propofol and remifentanil groups, respectively (both P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction, using a visual analogue scale, was higher in the propofol group (96 +/- 7 versus 77 +/- 21, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil proved efficient in reducing pain during colonoscopy. Emergence times were shorter and the recovery of cognitive function was faster with remifentanil compared with propofol. Remifentanil provided a smoother haemodynamic profile than propofol; however, the frequent occurrence of remifentanil-induced hypoventilation requires the cautious administration of this agent.


Subject(s)
Anesthesia , Anesthetics, Intravenous/therapeutic use , Colonoscopy , Monitoring, Intraoperative , Piperidines/therapeutic use , Propofol/therapeutic use , Adolescent , Adult , Aged , Analysis of Variance , Anesthesia/methods , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Prospective Studies , Psychomotor Performance/drug effects , Remifentanil , Respiration/drug effects
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL
...