止血改变药物和中枢神经阻滞。苏格兰和英国麻醉实践的调查。

Regional anesthesia Pub Date : 1996-11-01
F A Millar, A Mackenzie, G Hutchison, J Bannister
{"title":"止血改变药物和中枢神经阻滞。苏格兰和英国麻醉实践的调查。","authors":"F A Millar,&nbsp;A Mackenzie,&nbsp;G Hutchison,&nbsp;J Bannister","doi":"","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>There is debate regarding the use of central neural block in the presence of hemostasis-altering drugs. This study aims to examine current practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was made of the members of the Scottish Society of Anaesthetists and the U.K. branch of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia to determine the pattern of use of central neural block in patients who are receiving drugs known to alter hemostasis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Spinal anesthetics were considered safer than single epidural injections (P < .05) and single epidural injections safer than infusions via epidural catheters (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is general agreement regarding contraindication of central neural block in the presence of full anticoagulation with either heparin or warfarin, but there is less consensus about the use of central neural block in the presence of low-dose subcutaneous heparin. There is some confusion about the role of aspirin and its duration of action.</p>","PeriodicalId":77347,"journal":{"name":"Regional anesthesia","volume":"21 6","pages":"529-33"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"1996-11-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Hemostasis-altering drugs and central neural block. A survey of anesthetic practice in Scotland and the United Kingdom.\",\"authors\":\"F A Millar,&nbsp;A Mackenzie,&nbsp;G Hutchison,&nbsp;J Bannister\",\"doi\":\"\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"<p><strong>Background and objectives: </strong>There is debate regarding the use of central neural block in the presence of hemostasis-altering drugs. This study aims to examine current practice.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A survey was made of the members of the Scottish Society of Anaesthetists and the U.K. branch of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia to determine the pattern of use of central neural block in patients who are receiving drugs known to alter hemostasis.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>Spinal anesthetics were considered safer than single epidural injections (P < .05) and single epidural injections safer than infusions via epidural catheters (P < .05).</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>There is general agreement regarding contraindication of central neural block in the presence of full anticoagulation with either heparin or warfarin, but there is less consensus about the use of central neural block in the presence of low-dose subcutaneous heparin. There is some confusion about the role of aspirin and its duration of action.</p>\",\"PeriodicalId\":77347,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"Regional anesthesia\",\"volume\":\"21 6\",\"pages\":\"529-33\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":0.0000,\"publicationDate\":\"1996-11-01\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"Regional anesthesia\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"1085\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"\",\"RegionNum\":0,\"RegionCategory\":null,\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"\",\"JCRName\":\"\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Regional anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

摘要

背景和目的:关于在止血改变药物存在的情况下使用中枢神经阻滞存在争议。本研究旨在考察当前的实践。方法:对苏格兰麻醉师学会和欧洲区域麻醉学会英国分会的成员进行调查,以确定在接受已知改变止血药物的患者中使用中枢神经阻滞的模式。结果:腰麻比单次硬膜外注射安全(P < 0.05),单次硬膜外注射比经硬膜外导管输注安全(P < 0.05)。结论:在肝素或华法林充分抗凝的情况下,中枢神经阻滞的禁忌症是普遍同意的,但在低剂量皮下肝素存在的情况下,中枢神经阻滞的使用是不一致的。关于阿司匹林的作用和它的作用时间存在一些混淆。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
Hemostasis-altering drugs and central neural block. A survey of anesthetic practice in Scotland and the United Kingdom.

Background and objectives: There is debate regarding the use of central neural block in the presence of hemostasis-altering drugs. This study aims to examine current practice.

Methods: A survey was made of the members of the Scottish Society of Anaesthetists and the U.K. branch of the European Society of Regional Anaesthesia to determine the pattern of use of central neural block in patients who are receiving drugs known to alter hemostasis.

Results: Spinal anesthetics were considered safer than single epidural injections (P < .05) and single epidural injections safer than infusions via epidural catheters (P < .05).

Conclusions: There is general agreement regarding contraindication of central neural block in the presence of full anticoagulation with either heparin or warfarin, but there is less consensus about the use of central neural block in the presence of low-dose subcutaneous heparin. There is some confusion about the role of aspirin and its duration of action.

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
Not everything that can be done should be done Thoracic combined spinal epidural anesthesia for laparoscopic cholecystectomy in a geriatric patient with ischemic heart disease and renal insufficiency Comparative evaluation of continuous intercostal nerve block or epidural analgesia on the rate of respiratory complications, intensive care unit, and hospital stay following traumatic rib fractures: a retrospective review Does epidural analgesia during labor affect the incidence of cesarean delivery? Optimizing spinal anesthesia for ambulatory surgery.
×
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学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
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