ABSTRACT
INTRODUCTION: Despite preventive strategies, vomiting is an adverse event affecting patients with cancer. However, literature on the incidence and risk factors for vomiting in pediatric patients with cancer are scarce. AIM: To assess the incidence and risk factors for vomiting within 24 h and goodness of fit for the Eberhart score in pediatric patients with hematologic cancers after receiving intrathecal chemotherapy under deep sedation. METHODS: This prospective cohort study included patients under 20 years of age with hematologic cancers who were scheduled to undergo intrathecal chemotherapy under anesthesia. The primary outcome was the occurrence of vomiting within 24 h after the end of anesthesia. Sociodemographic and procedure data and underlying diseases were collected. Patients were monitored during the procedure, in the postanesthesia care unit, and the day after (by phone call). RESULTS: A total of 139 patients were included, and the incidence of vomiting was 30.9% within 24 h after intrathecal chemotherapy under anesthesia, with 90.7% of vomiting prior to 6 h. Prophylactic ondansetron was administered prior to the procedure to 45.3% of patients. Risk factors for vomiting were female gender (hazard ratio: 2.47, 95% confidence interval: 1.35-4.53, p: .003), consolidation phase of treatment (hazard ratio: 2.16, 95% confidence interval: 1.10-4.24, p: .025), and history of kinetosis (hazard ratio: 2.49, 95% confidence interval: 1.31-4.70, p: .005). Incidence of vomit was higher than estimated by the Eberhart score distribution (observed incidence in patients with a score of zero: 33.3%; with a score of one: 28.8%; with a score of two: 60%). CONCLUSION: A high incidence of vomiting was observed within 24 h after intrathecal chemotherapy under propofol deep sedation. Risk factors for this outcome were established (being female, consolidation phase of treatment, and previous kinetosis), and evidence suggested that the Eberhart score was not suitable for the studied population.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia , Antiemetics , Hematologic Neoplasms , Neoplasms , Humans , Child , Female , Male , Antiemetics/therapeutic use , Cohort Studies , Prospective Studies , Vomiting/chemically induced , Vomiting/epidemiology , Ondansetron/therapeutic use , Hematologic Neoplasms/drug therapy , Neoplasms/drug therapy , Double-Blind MethodABSTRACT
Difficult airway management in pediatrics during anesthesia represents a major challenge, requiring a careful approach, advanced technical expertise, and accurate protocols. The task force of the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) presents a report containing updated recommendations for the management of difficult airways in children and neonates. These recommendations have been developed based on the consensus of a panel of experts, with the objective of offering strategies to overcome challenges during airway management in pediatric patients. Grounded in evidence published in international guidelines and expert opinions, the report highlights crucial steps for the appropriate management of difficult airways in pediatrics, encompassing assessment, preparation, positioning, pre-oxygenation, minimizing trauma, and, paramountly, the maintenance of arterial oxygenation. The report also delves into additional strategies involving the use of advanced tools, such as video laryngoscopy, flexible intubating bronchoscopy, and supraglottic devices. Emphasis is placed on the simplicity of implementing the outlined recommendations, with a focus on the significance of continuous education, training through realistic simulations, and familiarity with the latest available technologies. These practices are deemed essential to ensure procedural safety and contribute to the enhancement of anesthesia outcomes in pediatrics.
Subject(s)
Anesthesia , Anesthesiology , Infant, Newborn , Humans , Child , Anesthesiology/methods , Intubation, Intratracheal/methods , Brazil , Airway Management/methods , Laryngoscopy/methodsSubject(s)
Ketamine , Midazolam , Humans , Preanesthetic Medication , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Anesthetics, Dissociative , Administration, OralABSTRACT
The novel coronavirus SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic dramatically changed the workflow of healthcare professionals around the world. Surgical procedures were withheld and postponed in a scenario of fear and uncertainty. Despite numerous medical institutions having swiftly and widely implemented pre-operative screening protocols, cost-effective studies remain scarce specially when comparing to other mitigation measures such as the donning of masks and social distancing measures. The objective of our study is to report the monthly positivity rates of SARS-COV-2 infection in our service and compare our data with monthly positivity rates reported by the State Health Department. Between April, 2020, to February, 2022, 7,199 patients had the RT-PCR for SARS-COV-2 collected, with 187 (2.59%) testing positive for COVID-19. Most of them (62.1%) were asymptomatic. The most common symptoms were coryza (10.7%), fever (10%), and diarrhea (8.7%). Nonetheless, there were two deaths due to COVID-19 reported in our center. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the impact of pre-operative screening for SARS-COV-2 in asymptomatic patients.
Subject(s)
COVID-19 , Child , Humans , COVID-19/diagnosis , SARS-CoV-2 , Retrospective Studies , Health PersonnelSubject(s)
Humans , Midazolam , Ketamine , Preanesthetic Medication , Administration, Oral , Hypnotics and Sedatives , Anesthetics, DissociativeABSTRACT
ABSTRACT The novel coronavirus SARS-COV-2 (COVID-19) pandemic dramatically changed the workflow of healthcare professionals around the world. Surgical procedures were withheld and postponed in a scenario of fear and uncertainty. Despite numerous medical institutions having swiftly and widely implemented pre-operative screening protocols, cost-effective studies remain scarce specially when comparing to other mitigation measures such as the donning of masks and social distancing measures. The objective of our study is to report the monthly positivity rates of SARS-COV-2 infection in our service and compare our data with monthly positivity rates reported by the State Health Department. Between April, 2020, to February, 2022, 7,199 patients had the RT-PCR for SARS-COV-2 collected, with 187 (2.59%) testing positive for COVID-19. Most of them (62.1%) were asymptomatic. The most common symptoms were coryza (10.7%), fever (10%), and diarrhea (8.7%). Nonetheless, there were two deaths due to COVID-19 reported in our center. Further studies are necessary to elucidate the impact of pre-operative screening for SARS-COV-2 in asymptomatic patients.
RESUMO A pandemia causada pelo novo coronavírus (SARS-COV-2) alterou a rotina de pacientes, profissionais e serviços de saúde em todo o mundo levando ao adiamento ou suspensão de muitos procedimentos cirúrgicos. Muitos serviços implementaram protocolos de triagem sistemática pré-operatória para SARS-COV-2. No entanto, segue incerta a eficácia da triagem sistemática de pacientes assintomáticos para SARS-COV-2 quando comparada com outras medidas de mitigação como o uso de máscaras e o distanciamento social apesar da aparente sensação de segurança conferida pela testagem pré-operatória de pacientes para SARS-COV-2. Sendo assim, descrevemos a experiência de dois anos de um hospital pediátrico (n=7.199) na triagem sistemática pré-operatória para SARS-COV-2 e comparamos a taxa de positividade mensal reportada pelo serviço em relação a taxa de positividade mensal regional do Estado de São Paulo. No período de Abril de 2020 a Fevereiro de 2022 houveram 187 (2,56%) RT-PCR positivos para COVID-19 dos quais 62.1% assintomáticos. Os sintomas mais comuns foram coriza (10,7%), febre (10%) e diarreia (8,7%). Dois pacientes faleceram em decorrência de sintomas relacionados a COVID-19. Mais estudos são necessários para determinar o impacto da testagem pré-operatória de RT-PCR para SARS-COV-2 em pacientes assintomáticos na mitigação da transmissão intra-hospitalar e na morbidade cirúrgica.
ABSTRACT
This second joint document, written by experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) concerned with perioperative anaphylaxis, aims to review the pathophysiological reaction mechanisms, triggering agents (in adults and children), and the approach for diagnosis during and after an episode of anaphylaxis. As anaphylaxis assessment is extensive, the identification of medications, antiseptics and other substances used at each setting, the comprehensive data documentation, and the use of standardized nomenclature are key points for obtaining more consistent epidemiological information on perioperative anaphylaxis.
Subject(s)
Anaphylaxis/diagnosis , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Perioperative Period , Adult , Allergy and Immunology , Anaphylaxis/physiopathology , Anesthesiology , Angioedema/chemically induced , Bradykinin/adverse effects , Brazil , Child , Drug Hypersensitivity/physiopathology , Humans , IgA Deficiency/complications , Immunoglobulin E/immunology , In Vitro Techniques , Mastocytosis/complications , Preoperative Care , Risk Factors , Skin Tests/methods , Societies, Medical , Symptom Assessment , Terminology as Topic , Vasodilator Agents/adverse effectsABSTRACT
Abstract This second joint document, written by experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) concerned with perioperative anaphylaxis, aims to review the pathophysiological reaction mechanisms, triggering agents (in adults and children), and the approach for diagnosis during and after an episode of anaphylaxis. As anaphylaxis assessment is extensive, the identification of medications, antiseptics and other substances used at each setting, the comprehensive data documentation, and the use of standardized nomenclature are key points for obtaining more consistent epidemiological information on perioperative anaphylaxis.
Resumo Este segundo documento, escrito por especialistas da Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunologia (ASBAI) e da Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) interessados no tema anafilaxia perioperatória, tem por objetivo revisar os mecanismos fisiopatológicos, agentes desencadeantes (em adultos e crianças), assim como a abordagem diagnóstica durante e após o episódio. Por se tratar de uma avaliação abrangente, a identificação das medicações, antissépticos e outras substâncias usadas em cada região, registros detalhados, e nomenclatura padronizada são pontos fundamentais para a obtenção de dados epidemiológicos mais fidedignos sobre a anafilaxia perioperatória.
Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Adult , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Perioperative Period , Anaphylaxis/diagnosis , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Societies, Medical , Vasodilator Agents/adverse effects , In Vitro Techniques , Mastocytosis/complications , Brazil , Preoperative Care , Immunoglobulin E/immunology , Bradykinin/adverse effects , Skin Tests/methods , Risk Factors , IgA Deficiency/complications , Drug Hypersensitivity/physiopathology , Allergy and Immunology , Symptom Assessment , Anaphylaxis/physiopathology , Anesthesiology , Angioedema/chemically induced , Terminology as TopicABSTRACT
Experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) interested in the issue of perioperative anaphylaxis, and aiming to strengthen the collaboration between the two societies, combined efforts to study the topic and to prepare a joint document to guide specialists in both areas. The purpose of the present series of two articles was to report the most recent evidence based on the collaborative assessment between both societies. This first article will consider the updated definitions, treatment and guidelines after a perioperative crisis. The following article will discuss the major etiologic agents, how to proceed with the investigation, and the appropriate tests.
Subject(s)
Anesthesiology , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Practice Guidelines as Topic , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Brazil , Humans , Perioperative PeriodABSTRACT
Abstract Experts from the Brazilian Association of Allergy and Immunology (ASBAI) and the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology (SBA) interested in the issue of perioperative anaphylaxis, and aiming to strengthen the collaboration between the two societies, combined efforts to study the topic and to prepare a joint document to guide specialists in both areas. The purpose of the present series of two articles was to report the most recent evidence based on the collaborative assessment between both societies. This first article will consider the updated definitions, treatment and guidelines after a perioperative crisis. The following article will discuss the major etiologic agents, how to proceed with the investigation, and the appropriate tests.
Resumo Especialistas da Associação Brasileira de Alergia e Imunologia (ASBAI) e da Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) interessados no tema anafilaxia perioperatória reuniram-se com o objetivo de intensificar a colaboração entre as duas sociedades no estudo desse tema e elaborar um documento conjunto que possa guiar os especialistas de ambas as áreas. O objetivo desta série de dois artigos foi mostrar as evidências mais recentes alicerçadas na visão colaborativa entre as sociedades. Este primeiro artigo versará sobre as definições mais atuais, formas de tratamento e as orientações após a crise no perioperatório. No próximo artigo serão discutidos os principais agentes causais e a condução da investigação com testes apropriados.
Subject(s)
Humans , Child , Adult , Drug Hypersensitivity/diagnosis , Drug Hypersensitivity/etiology , Perioperative Period , Anaphylaxis/diagnosis , Anaphylaxis/etiology , Societies, Medical , Vasodilator Agents/adverse effects , In Vitro Techniques , Mastocytosis/complications , Brazil , Preoperative Care , Immunoglobulin E/immunology , Bradykinin/adverse effects , Skin Tests/methods , Risk Factors , IgA Deficiency/complications , Drug Hypersensitivity/physiopathology , Allergy and Immunology , Symptom Assessment , Anaphylaxis/physiopathology , Anesthesiology , Angioedema/chemically induced , Terminology as TopicABSTRACT
JUSTIFICATIVA E OBJETIVOS: Ansiedade pré-operatória é um fator negativo na experiência anestésico-cirúrgica. Dentre as estratégias para redução da ansiedade em crianças, as não farmacológicas são tão importantes quanto as farmacológicas, porém sua validade ainda é controversa. Verificar se a informação oferecida aos responsáveis interfere na ansiedade da criança. MÉTODOS: 72 crianças de 4 a 8 anos, ASA I e II, submetidas a procedimentos cirúrgicos eletivos e seus responsáveis, divididos aleatoriamente em: Grupo Controle (GC) = responsável recebeu informação anestésica convencional; e Grupo Informativo (GI) = responsável recebeu folheto sobre a anestesia. Foi avaliada ansiedade das crianças pela escala de ansiedade pré-operatória de Yale modificada (EAPY-m), em dois momentos, na sala de espera do centro cirúrgico (SE) e na sala de operação (SO), e dos pais, pela Escala de ansiedade de Hamilton (HAM-A) em SE. RESULTADOS: Não houve diferença nos dados sociodemográficos entre os grupos. O nível de ansiedade nas crianças não apresentou diferença entre os grupos nos dois momentos. Houve diferença estatística significativa nos níveis de ansiedade entre SE e SO nos dois grupos, p = 0,0019 no GC e p < 0,0001 no GI, assim como na prevalência de ansiedade em GC (SE 38,9% e SO 69,4%, p = 0,0174) e em GI (SE 19,4% e SO 83,3%, p< 0,0001). O nível de ansiedade dos responsáveis não apresentou diferença entre os grupos. CONCLUSÃO: Independentemente da qualidade de informação oferecida aos responsáveis, o nível e a prevalência de ansiedade das crianças foram baixos no momento SE e aumentaram significativamente no momento SO.
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Preoperative Anxiety is a negative factor in anesthetic and surgical experience. Among the strategies for reducing children's anxiety, non-pharmacological strategies are as important as the pharmacological ones, but its validity is still controversial. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to verify if the information provided to guardians interferes with child anxiety. METHODS: 72 children, 4-8 years old, ASA I and II, undergoing elective surgical procedures and their guardians were randomly divided into two groups: control group (CG) = guardian received conventional information about anesthesia; informative group (IG) = guardian received an information leaflet about anesthesia. Children's anxiety was assessed using the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (m-YPAS) on two occasions: at the surgical theater waiting room (WR) and at the operating room (OR). Parents' anxiety was assessed using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) at the CT. RESULTS: There was no difference in demographic data between groups. The level of anxiety in children showed no difference between groups at two measured times. There was statistically significant difference in anxiety levels between WR and OR in both groups, p = 0.0019 for CG and p < 0.0001 for GI, as well as the prevalence of anxiety for CG (38.9% WR and 69.4 % OR, p = 0.0174) and GI (19.4% WR and 83.3% OR, p < 0.0001). The anxiety level of guardians did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the quality of information provided to the guardians, the level and prevalence of anxiety in children were low at WR time and significantly increased at OR time.
JUSTIFICATIVA Y OBJETIVOS: La ansiedad preoperatoria es un factor negativo en la experiencia anestésico-quirúrgica. Entre las estrategias para la reducción de la ansiedad en niños, las no farmacológicas son tan importantes como las farmacológicas, pero su caducidad todavía es algo controversial. Verificar si la información ofrecida a los responsables interfiere en la ansiedad del niño. MÉTODOS: Setenta y dos (72) niños de 4 a 8 años, con ASA I y II, sometidos a procedimientos quirúrgicos electivos y sus responsables, divididos aleatoriamente en: Grupo Control (GC) = responsable recibió una información anestésica convencional; y el Grupo Informativo (GI) = responsable recibió un folleto sobre la anestesia. Se evaluó la ansiedad de los niños por la escala de ansiedad preoperatoria de Yale modificada (EAPY-m), en dos momentos, en la sala de espera del centro quirúrgico (SE) y en el quirófano (Q), y de los padres, por la escala de Hamilton (HAM-A) en SE. RESULTADOS: No hubo diferencia en los datos sociodemográficos entre los grupos. El nivel de ansiedad en los niños no presentó ninguna diferencia entre los grupos en los dos momentos. Hubo una diferencia estadística significativa en los niveles de ansiedad entre SE y Q en los dos grupos, p = 0,0019 en el GC y p < 0,0001 en el GI, como también en la prevalencia de ansiedad en GC (SE 38,9% y Q 69,4%, p = 0,0174) y en GI (SE 19,4% y Q 83,3%, p< 0,0001). El nivel de ansiedad de los responsables no presentó diferencia entre los grupos. CONCLUSIONES: Independientemente de la calidad de la información ofrecida a los responsables, el nivel y la prevalencia de ansiedad de los niños fueron bajos en el momento SE aumentando significativamente en el momento Q.
Subject(s)
Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Male , Anxiety/epidemiology , Preoperative Care , Parents/psychology , Operating RoomsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: Preoperative Anxiety is a negative factor in anesthetic and surgical experience. Among the strategies for reducing children's anxiety, non-pharmacological strategies are as important as the pharmacological ones, but its validity is still controversial. OBJECTIVES: The aim of this study was to verify if the information provided to guardians interferes with child anxiety. METHODS: 72 children, 4-8 years old, ASA I and II, undergoing elective surgical procedures and their guardians were randomly divided into two groups: control group (CG) = guardian received conventional information about anesthesia; informative group (IG) = guardian received an information leaflet about anesthesia. Children's anxiety was assessed using the modified Yale Preoperative Anxiety Scale (m-YPAS) on two occasions: at the surgical theater waiting room (WR) and at the operating room (OR). Parents' anxiety was assessed using the Hamilton Anxiety Scale (HAM-A) at the CT. RESULTS: There was no difference in demographic data between groups. The level of anxiety in children showed no difference between groups at two measured times. There was statistically significant difference in anxiety levels between WR and OR in both groups, p = 0.0019 for CG and p < 0.0001 for GI, as well as the prevalence of anxiety for CG (38.9% WR and 69.4% OR, p = 0.0174) and GI (19.4% WR and 83.3% OR, p < 0.0001). The anxiety level of guardians did not differ between groups. CONCLUSION: Regardless of the quality of information provided to the guardians, the level and prevalence of anxiety in children were low at WR time and significantly increased at OR time.
Subject(s)
Anxiety/epidemiology , Parents/psychology , Preoperative Care , Child , Child, Preschool , Female , Humans , Male , Operating RoomsABSTRACT
O adenocarcinoma de próstata é o câncer mais comum no homem, na atualidade. Os autores propöem avaliar retrospectivamente o comprometimento desta neoplasia em 49 pacientes admitidos no Hospital Universitário Säo Francisco. Analisam e comparam diversos parâmetros pertinentes, tais como apresentaçäo clínica inicial, diagnóstico, estadiamento e tratamento. O período de seguimento variou de um a 48 meses. Concluem que o diagnóstico precoce é fator primordial no tratamento curativo da patologia, e este deve compreender o toque retal e o PSA (antígeno prost tico específico). Nos estádios mais avançados o bloqueio hormonal (androgênico) ainda permanece como tratamento padräo.
