脊髓麻醉与常规麻醉下的清醒腰椎手术。

Surgical neurology international Pub Date : 2024-10-25 eCollection Date: 2024-01-01 DOI:10.25259/SNI_747_2024
Mohamed M Mohi Eldin, Ahmed Salah-Eldin Hassan Abdelaaty, Omar Youssef, Alaa A Abdulkawy, Mohamed Eltoukhy
{"title":"脊髓麻醉与常规麻醉下的清醒腰椎手术。","authors":"Mohamed M Mohi Eldin, Ahmed Salah-Eldin Hassan Abdelaaty, Omar Youssef, Alaa A Abdulkawy, Mohamed Eltoukhy","doi":"10.25259/SNI_747_2024","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lumbar spine surgery for discectomy or laminectomy is mostly performed under general anesthesia (GA). Here, we explored whether, in a series of 84 patients, better peri-operative outcomes and lower complication rates could be achieved for those undergoing diskectomy/laminectomy under spinal anesthesia (SA) versus GA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2022 to 2023, 84 patients were randomly assigned to undergo lumbar discectomy/laminectomy for stenosis under SA: 42 patients versus GAGA: 42 patients. For these two populations, we analyzed and compared multiple variables, including duration of anesthesia, estimated blood loss (EBL), and outcomes (i.e., including pre/post-operative Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry disability index, and short-form 36 questionnaires).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Major advantages of SA versus GA included a reduced mean EBL, shorter mean operative time, reduced mean hospital length of stay, and fewer post-operative side effects. Notably, baseline heart rate or mean arterial blood pressure showed no significant differences between SA and GA groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on this small preliminary sample of patients undergoing lumbar disc/stenosis surgery, it appeared that SA reduced the mean EBL, offered shorter mean operative times, mean hospital lengths of stay, and fewer post-operative side effects versus GA.</p>","PeriodicalId":94217,"journal":{"name":"Surgical neurology international","volume":"15 ","pages":"388"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-10-25","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11544509/pdf/","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Awake lumbar spine surgery performed under spinal versus conventional anesthesia.\",\"authors\":\"Mohamed M Mohi Eldin, Ahmed Salah-Eldin Hassan Abdelaaty, Omar Youssef, Alaa A Abdulkawy, Mohamed Eltoukhy\",\"doi\":\"10.25259/SNI_747_2024\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background: </strong>Lumbar spine surgery for discectomy or laminectomy is mostly performed under general anesthesia (GA). Here, we explored whether, in a series of 84 patients, better peri-operative outcomes and lower complication rates could be achieved for those undergoing diskectomy/laminectomy under spinal anesthesia (SA) versus GA.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>From 2022 to 2023, 84 patients were randomly assigned to undergo lumbar discectomy/laminectomy for stenosis under SA: 42 patients versus GAGA: 42 patients. For these two populations, we analyzed and compared multiple variables, including duration of anesthesia, estimated blood loss (EBL), and outcomes (i.e., including pre/post-operative Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry disability index, and short-form 36 questionnaires).</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Major advantages of SA versus GA included a reduced mean EBL, shorter mean operative time, reduced mean hospital length of stay, and fewer post-operative side effects. Notably, baseline heart rate or mean arterial blood pressure showed no significant differences between SA and GA groups.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>Based on this small preliminary sample of patients undergoing lumbar disc/stenosis surgery, it appeared that SA reduced the mean EBL, offered shorter mean operative times, mean hospital lengths of stay, and fewer post-operative side effects versus GA.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":94217,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Surgical neurology international\",\"volume\":\"15 \",\"pages\":\"388\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"2024-10-25\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC11544509/pdf/\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Surgical neurology international\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://doi.org/10.25259/SNI_747_2024\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"2024/1/1 0:00:00\",\"PubModel\":\"eCollection\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Surgical neurology international","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.25259/SNI_747_2024","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"2024/1/1 0:00:00","PubModel":"eCollection","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景:腰椎间盘切除术或椎板切除术大多在全身麻醉(GA)下进行。在此,我们对一系列 84 名患者进行了研究,探讨在脊髓麻醉(SA)下进行腰椎间盘切除术/椎板切除术与在全身麻醉下进行腰椎间盘切除术/椎板切除术相比,是否能获得更好的围手术期效果和更低的并发症发生率:从2022年到2023年,84名患者被随机分配到接受腰椎间盘切除术/椎板切除术治疗腰椎管狭窄症,其中42名患者在SA下接受治疗,42名患者在GAGA下接受治疗。我们对这两组患者的多个变量进行了分析和比较,包括麻醉持续时间、估计失血量(EBL)和结果(即包括术前/术后视觉模拟量表、Oswestry 残疾指数和短式 36 问卷):结果:与GA相比,SA的主要优势包括平均EBL降低、平均手术时间缩短、平均住院时间缩短以及术后副作用减少。值得注意的是,基线心率或平均动脉血压在 SA 组和 GA 组之间没有明显差异:根据对接受腰椎间盘/椎间孔狭窄手术的患者进行的小样本初步研究,与GA相比,SA似乎降低了平均EBL,缩短了平均手术时间和平均住院时间,并减少了术后副作用。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。

摘要图片

摘要图片

摘要图片

查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Awake lumbar spine surgery performed under spinal versus conventional anesthesia.

Background: Lumbar spine surgery for discectomy or laminectomy is mostly performed under general anesthesia (GA). Here, we explored whether, in a series of 84 patients, better peri-operative outcomes and lower complication rates could be achieved for those undergoing diskectomy/laminectomy under spinal anesthesia (SA) versus GA.

Methods: From 2022 to 2023, 84 patients were randomly assigned to undergo lumbar discectomy/laminectomy for stenosis under SA: 42 patients versus GAGA: 42 patients. For these two populations, we analyzed and compared multiple variables, including duration of anesthesia, estimated blood loss (EBL), and outcomes (i.e., including pre/post-operative Visual Analogue Scale, Oswestry disability index, and short-form 36 questionnaires).

Results: Major advantages of SA versus GA included a reduced mean EBL, shorter mean operative time, reduced mean hospital length of stay, and fewer post-operative side effects. Notably, baseline heart rate or mean arterial blood pressure showed no significant differences between SA and GA groups.

Conclusion: Based on this small preliminary sample of patients undergoing lumbar disc/stenosis surgery, it appeared that SA reduced the mean EBL, offered shorter mean operative times, mean hospital lengths of stay, and fewer post-operative side effects versus GA.

求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Effect of erythropoietin on serum brain-derived neurotrophic factor after experimental traumatic brain injury in Wistar rats: A randomized controlled laboratory study. Cranioplasty as a therapeutic intervention for refractory postdecompressive craniectomy seizures in combat-traumatic brain injury: A report of two cases. Optimizing resection of brain metastatic lesions with intraoperative sodium fluorescein guidance. Endovascular treatment for subarachnoid hemorrhage during pregnancy followed by minimum approaches for cerebral vasospasm. Orbital alveolar rhabdomyosarcoma with central nervous system invasion in adult: A case report.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1