RESUMO
Objective: The present study aimed to compare the effects of two different fresh gas flows (FGFs) (0.5 L min-1 and 2 L min-1) applied during maintenance of anaesthesia on recovery from anaesthesia and early cognitive functions in geriatric patients. Methods: In this prospective, randomised, double-blind study, sixty patients were divided into two groups according to the amount of FGF. Minimal-flow anaesthesia (0.5 L min-1 FGF) was applied to group I and medium-flow anaesthesia (2 L min-1 FGF) was applied to group II during maintenance of anaesthesia. Following the termination of inhalation anaesthesia, recovery times were recorded. The evaluation of cognitive functions was performed using the Addenbrooke's Cognitive Examination (ACE-R). Results: There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of demographic characteristics and recovery (P > 0.05). There was no significant difference between the two groups in terms of the preoperative day, the first postoperative day, and the third postoperative day; ACE-R scores (P > 0.05). In group II, on the third postoperative day ACE-R scores were found to be significantly lower than the preoperative ACE-R scores (P=0.04). In group II, third postoperative day ACE-R memory sub-scores (14.53 ± 3.34) were found to be significantly lower than preoperative ACE-R memory sub-scores (15.03 ± 3.57) (P=0.04). Conclusion: In geriatric patients, minimal-flow anaesthesia was not superior to medium-flow anaesthesia in terms of recovery properties and cognitive functions. Keeping in mind that hypoxaemia and changes in anaesthesia levels may occur with the reduction of FGF, both minimal- and medium-flow anaesthesia can be applied with appropriate monitoring without adverse effects on recovery and cognitive functions.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: High scores in the Medically Necessary, Time-Sensitive (MeNTS) scoring system, used for elective surgical prioritization during the coronavirus disease 2019 pandemic, are assumed to be associated with worse outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the MeNTS scoring system in patients undergoing elective surgery during restricted capacity of our institution, with or without moderate or severe postoperative complications. STUDY DESIGN: In this prospective observational study, MeNTS scores of patients undergoing elective operations during May and June 2020 were calculated. Postoperative complication severity (classified as Group Clavien-Dindo < II or Group Clavien-Dindo ≥ II), as well as Duke Activity Index, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status, presence of smoking, leukocytosis, lymphopenia, elevated C-reactive protein (CRP), operation and anesthesia characteristics, intensive care requirement and duration, length of hospital stay, rehospitalization, and mortality were noted. RESULTS: There were 223 patients analyzed. MeNTS score was higher in the Clavien-Dindo ≥ II Group compared with the Clavien-Dindo < II Group (50.98 ± 8.98 vs 44.27 ± 8.90 respectively, p < 0.001). Duke activity status index (DASI) scores were lower, and American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status class, presence of smoking, leukocytosis, lymphopenia, elevated CRP, and intensive care requirement were higher in the Clavien-Dindo ≥ II Group (p < 0.01). Length of hospital stay was longer in the Clavien-Dindo ≥ II Group (15 [range 2-90] vs 4 [1-30] days; p < 0.001). Mortality was observed in 8 patients. Area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of MeNTS and DASI were 0.69 and 0.71, respectively, for predicting moderate/severe complications. CONCLUSIONS: Although significant, MeNTS score had low discriminating power in distinguishing patients with moderate/severe complications. Incorporation of a cardiovascular functional capacity measure could improve the scoring system.