Masui. The Japanese journal of anesthesiology · 2010
[Incidence and clinical features of anaphylaxis during general anesthesia].
Аннотация на английскомСтатьяНазвание 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.
Nabatame Maki, Mori Masanobu, Ikeda Yoshikazu, Matsushita Mitsuji, Tsujimura Shigehisa
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Anaphylaxis is an acute life-threatening systematic reaction, and it requires early diagnosis and correct management to save the patients. The true incidence of anaphylaxis during general anesthesia is unknown. Although anaphylaxis is a rare intraoperative complication, most drugs used in the perioperative period can lead to anaphylaxis.
METHODS: All patients who had received operations under general anesthesia in our hospital were covered in this study during the 5-year period. We searched for the incidence and clinical features of anaphylaxis retrospectively.
RESULTS: Seven cases in 9,844 patients were recognized. Various drugs were suspected as causal agents, but they were all nonanesthesia related drugs. The diagnosis of anaphylaxis relied on the history and clinical course of each patient. There was no reliable diagnostic testing such as serum tryptase and skin test. So we could not determine whether the reaction was IgE-mediated or not.
CONCLUSIONS: Immediate discontinuation of causal drugs and early administration of epinephrine are cornerstones of treatment. More specific diagnostic tests are required for correct identification of causal drugs. To reduce the risk of anaphylaxis during anesthesia, we hope practical data bases and guidelines for anaphylaxis related to anesthesia will be published in the future.
METHODS: All patients who had received operations under general anesthesia in our hospital were covered in this study during the 5-year period. We searched for the incidence and clinical features of anaphylaxis retrospectively.
RESULTS: Seven cases in 9,844 patients were recognized. Various drugs were suspected as causal agents, but they were all nonanesthesia related drugs. The diagnosis of anaphylaxis relied on the history and clinical course of each patient. There was no reliable diagnostic testing such as serum tryptase and skin test. So we could not determine whether the reaction was IgE-mediated or not.
CONCLUSIONS: Immediate discontinuation of causal drugs and early administration of epinephrine are cornerstones of treatment. More specific diagnostic tests are required for correct identification of causal drugs. To reduce the risk of anaphylaxis during anesthesia, we hope practical data bases and guidelines for anaphylaxis related to anesthesia will be published in the future.