Journal of pediatric surgery · 2014
Feasibility of laparoscopic pyloromyotomy under spinal anesthesia.
Сравнительное исследованиеСтатьяНазвание и аннотация: Перевод пока не подготовлен
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.
Islam Saleem, Larson Shawn D, Kays David W, Irwin Maria D, Carvallho Norman
Аннотация
BACKGROUND: Most agents used for GA are considered to be neurotoxins and affect developing brains in experimental models, leading to a push for spinal anesthesia (SA). There are no reports of laparoscopic pyloromyotomy (LP) performed under SA. We present our experience with LP and SA and discuss feasibility.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on a consecutive series of patients who underwent an LP. An 'intent to treat' analysis was utilized, and GA was compared to SA. Data regarding patient characteristics, operative intervention, complications, and postoperative course were collected.
RESULTS: Twelve cases had attempted SA for the LP, 9 were successful. During the same time, 12 cases underwent LP under GA. We found no difference for length of procedure, time to the first feed, or the postoperative LOS. The time to leave the OR after conclusion of the procedure was significantly shorter for the SA group (14min vs. 28min, p<0.001). There were no complications from the SA, however three cases had to be converted to GA.
CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible and safe to perform laparoscopic pyloromyotomy under spinal anesthesia. Given the increasing concern over the use of GA in infants, consideration may be given to use of SA for LP.
METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed on a consecutive series of patients who underwent an LP. An 'intent to treat' analysis was utilized, and GA was compared to SA. Data regarding patient characteristics, operative intervention, complications, and postoperative course were collected.
RESULTS: Twelve cases had attempted SA for the LP, 9 were successful. During the same time, 12 cases underwent LP under GA. We found no difference for length of procedure, time to the first feed, or the postoperative LOS. The time to leave the OR after conclusion of the procedure was significantly shorter for the SA group (14min vs. 28min, p<0.001). There were no complications from the SA, however three cases had to be converted to GA.
CONCLUSIONS: It is feasible and safe to perform laparoscopic pyloromyotomy under spinal anesthesia. Given the increasing concern over the use of GA in infants, consideration may be given to use of SA for LP.