Minerva surgery · 2026
Dexmedetomidine during carotid endarterectomy: a registry on safety and satisfaction of patients and operators (DexTEA).
СтатьяНаблюдательное исследованиеСравнительное исследованиеНазвание и аннотация: Перевод в очереди
Обработка статьи · этапы, ошибки и управление
Загрузка состояния…
Ошибки и ограничения
История · было → стало
Состояние обновляется каждые 5 секунд, пока блок открыт. Процент показывается только там, где известен объём работы. Пауза останавливает продолжение этапа; текущий запрос к источнику может завершиться.
Fiume Diego, DE Carolis Elisa, Arciuolo Michele, Liciani Giulia, Carlini Silvia, Polidoro Roberto, Picerno Paola, Avella Pasquale, Bartoli Stefano, Peverini Mario, Galletti Massimo
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: From an anesthesiologic perspective, carotid endarterectomy (CEA) is an operation that is increasingly being performed with locoregional techniques and sedation. The aim of this observational study was to compare dexmedetomidine with midazolam and fentanyl during CEA in terms of perioperative adverse events, patient, anesthetist, and surgeon satisfaction, as well as the possible reduction in clamping time and the number of times additional local anesthesia is needed.
METHODS: Sixty patients listed for CEA were enrolled and two types of sedation were used, both protocols widely used in our hospital, resulting in the formation of two groups of patients. Both the intermediate and superficial cervical plexus blocks were administered, and the patients in Group 1 were sedated with midazolam and fentanyl, and Group 2 was sedated with dexmedetomidine. We examined comorbidities, surgical time and clamping, and possible intraoperative use of local anesthetics and intraprocedural complications, and follow-up at 180 days to observe any residual deficits. The data were analyzed with SPSS Statistics 25 (IBM).
RESULTS: Patients, anesthetists and surgeons levelled off on a high level of satisfaction (scores 3 and 4). Clamping and operation times were similar between the two groups and within the ranges described in the literature.
CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding perioperative adverse events or decreased clamping or intervention times. Only surgeons and anesthetists were clearly aligned towards a satisfaction score of 4 with dexmedetomidine, although patients did not seem to experience any differences between the two sedations under study.
METHODS: Sixty patients listed for CEA were enrolled and two types of sedation were used, both protocols widely used in our hospital, resulting in the formation of two groups of patients. Both the intermediate and superficial cervical plexus blocks were administered, and the patients in Group 1 were sedated with midazolam and fentanyl, and Group 2 was sedated with dexmedetomidine. We examined comorbidities, surgical time and clamping, and possible intraoperative use of local anesthetics and intraprocedural complications, and follow-up at 180 days to observe any residual deficits. The data were analyzed with SPSS Statistics 25 (IBM).
RESULTS: Patients, anesthetists and surgeons levelled off on a high level of satisfaction (scores 3 and 4). Clamping and operation times were similar between the two groups and within the ranges described in the literature.
CONCLUSIONS: There were no significant differences between the two groups regarding perioperative adverse events or decreased clamping or intervention times. Only surgeons and anesthetists were clearly aligned towards a satisfaction score of 4 with dexmedetomidine, although patients did not seem to experience any differences between the two sedations under study.