ABSTRACT
Introduction: Iatrogenic retroperitoneal haematoma is an infrequent but serious complication of certain surgical procedures. Case presentation: We present the case of a female who developed retroperitoneal haemorrhage after an intradural lumbar puncture, resulting in multiple-organ failure. The diagnosis and treatment of this complication was more difficult than usual because of the presence of bilateral subclavian artery stenosis. Conclusion: Early diagnosis and prompt treatment with either conservative or interventional management is essential in order to decrease associated morbidity. Bilateral non-invasive arterial pressure measurements should be routinely performed in all cases, especially in patients with peripheral artery disease.
Introducción: El hematoma retroperitoneal iatrogénico es una complicación infrecuente pero, en ocasiones, de consecuencias fatales. Presentación del caso: En este artículo describimos el caso de una mujer que sufrió una hemorragia retroperitoneal secundaria a una punción lumbar intradural con evolución hacia el fallo multiorgánico, agravado en su manejo por la presencia de estenosis bilateral de arterias subclavias que dificultó el diagnóstico y el tratamiento. Conclusión: Un diagnóstico precoz y certero del hematoma retroperitoneal, unido a las medidas de soporte necesarias y a un abordaje quirúrgico eficiente cuando se requiera, se antojan fundamentales para evitar un desenlace mortal. Por otro lado, la medición de la presión arterial de forma bilateral debe ser una medida rutinaria en todos los pacientes, pero más aún en aquellos casos con enfermedad arterial periférica.
Subject(s)
HumansABSTRACT
AIM: To evaluate the effects of two different doses of sugammadex after maintenance anesthesia with sevofluorane and remifentanil and deep rocuronium-induced neuromuscular blockade (NMB). METHODS: Patients between 20 and 65 years of age, with American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classificationâ I-II, undergoing gynecological surgery were included in a prospective, comparative and randomized study. NMB was induced with an injection of 0.6 mg/kg of rocuronium followed by continuous infusion of 0.3-0.6 mg/kg per hour to maintain a deep block. Anesthesia was maintained with sevofluorane and remifentanil. Finally, when surgery was finished, a bolus of 2 mg/kg (group A) or 4 mg/kg (group B) of sugammadex was applied when the NMB first response in the train-of-four was reached. The primary clinical endpoint was time to recovery to a train-of-four ratio of 0.9. Other variables recorded were the time until recovery of train-of-four ratio of 0.7, 0.8, hemodynamic variables (arterial blood pressure and heart rate at baseline, starting sugammadex, and minutes 2, 5 and 10) and adverse events were presented after one hour in the post-anesthesia care unit. RESULTS: Thirty-two patients were included in the study: 16 patients in group A and 16 patients in group B. Only 14 patients each group were recorded because arterial pressure values were lost in two patients from each group in minute 10. The two groups were comparable. Median recovery time from starting of sugammadex administration to a train-of-four ratio of 0.9 in group A and B was 129 and 110 s, respectively. The estimated difference in recovery time between groups was 24 s (95%CI: 0 to 45 s, Hodges-Lehmann estimator), entirely within the predefined equivalence interval. Times to recovery to train-of-four ratios of 0.8 (group A: 101 s; group B: 82.5 s) and 0.7 (group A: 90 s; group B: 65 s) from start of sugammadex administration were not equivalent between groups. There was not a significant variation in the arterial pressure and heart rate values between the two groups and none of the patients showed any clinical evidence of residual or recurrent NMB. CONCLUSION: A dose of 2 mg/kg of sugammadex after continuous rocuronium infusion is enough to reverse the NMB when first response in the Train-Of-Four is reached.
