Transplantation proceedings · 2016
Postoperative Continuous Infusion of Local Anesthesia in Hand-Assisted Retroperitoneoscopic Living Donor Nephrectomy.
СтатьяНаблюдательное 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.
Wahba R, Kleinert R, Hellmich M, Kurschat C, Heiermann N, Dieplinger G, Löser J, Stippel D L
Аннотация
INTRODUCTION: Postoperative pain management in living kidney donor nephrectomy plays a key role in donor comfort and is important for the further acceptance of living kidney donation in times of organ shortage. Standard pain treatment (SPT) based on opioids is limited due to related side effects. Continuous infusion of local anesthesia (CILA) into the operative field is a promising alternative. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether CILA could reduce the dose of opioids in living kidney donors operated with hand-assisted retroperitoneoscopic donor nephrectomy (HARP).
METHODS: An observational study on 30 living donors was performed. The primary outcome was the difference of morphine equivalents (MEQ) administered between CILA and SPT.
RESULTS: On day 0 and 1, living donors with CILA received significant less MEQ compared to the SPT group, although on day 1 this effect was not statistically significant (day 0: 6.3 mg, interquartile range [IR] 4.2-11.2 vs 16.8 mg, IR 10.5-22.1, P = .009; day 1: 5.25 mg, IR 2.1-13.3 vs 13.3 mg, IR 6.7-23.8, P = .150). On days 2 and 3 there was no difference (day 2: 13.3 mg, IR 0.0-20.0 vs 13.3 mg, IR 6.7-13.3, P = .708; day 3: 13.3 mg, IR 0.0-26.7 vs 13.3 mg, IR 6.7-20, P = .825). Overall (days 0 to3) MEQ was also less for CILA without reaching statistical significance (39.6 mg, IR 10.9-70.5 vs 59.6 mg, IR 42.4-72.9, P = .187).
CONCLUSIONS: CILA seems to be an effective instrument for donor pain management in the first 24 hours after HARP. Its effect abates by 48 hours after surgery, especially if highly potent nonopioids are given.
METHODS: An observational study on 30 living donors was performed. The primary outcome was the difference of morphine equivalents (MEQ) administered between CILA and SPT.
RESULTS: On day 0 and 1, living donors with CILA received significant less MEQ compared to the SPT group, although on day 1 this effect was not statistically significant (day 0: 6.3 mg, interquartile range [IR] 4.2-11.2 vs 16.8 mg, IR 10.5-22.1, P = .009; day 1: 5.25 mg, IR 2.1-13.3 vs 13.3 mg, IR 6.7-23.8, P = .150). On days 2 and 3 there was no difference (day 2: 13.3 mg, IR 0.0-20.0 vs 13.3 mg, IR 6.7-13.3, P = .708; day 3: 13.3 mg, IR 0.0-26.7 vs 13.3 mg, IR 6.7-20, P = .825). Overall (days 0 to3) MEQ was also less for CILA without reaching statistical significance (39.6 mg, IR 10.9-70.5 vs 59.6 mg, IR 42.4-72.9, P = .187).
CONCLUSIONS: CILA seems to be an effective instrument for donor pain management in the first 24 hours after HARP. Its effect abates by 48 hours after surgery, especially if highly potent nonopioids are given.