Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 3 de 3
Filtrar
Más filtros










Intervalo de año de publicación
1.
Cureus ; 16(1): e51513, 2024 Jan.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-38318594

RESUMEN

Quadratus lumborum block (QLB) has been described as a regional analgesic technique in various abdominal surgeries. We present a case report of a high-risk patient who underwent ovarian cystectomy with QLB and deep sedation after failed neuraxial anesthesia. A 29-year-old female patient with comorbidities osteogenesis imperfecta, severe kyphoscoliosis with restrictive lung disease, and cervical syringomyelia with cranio-cervical junction stenosis (C2/C3). The patient had large ovarian cysts with associated dyspnea. She accepted surgery-an open bilateral ovarian cystectomy-despite being advised that general anesthesia would be high-risk. Regional anesthetic options were limited and challenging, given her anatomy and difficulty in positioning. Neuraxial anesthesia was attempted but was unsuccessful. The patient safely underwent surgery (lower midline laparotomy) using QLB. This clinically challenging case demonstrates the feasibility of QLB as the mainstay multimodal anesthetic approach (without general and neuraxial anesthesia) for abdominal surgery under exceptional circumstances.

2.
Braz. J. Anesth. (Impr.) ; 72(6): 780-789, Nov.-Dec. 2022. tab, graf
Artículo en Inglés | LILACS | ID: biblio-1420636

RESUMEN

Abstract Background The efficacy and safety profiles of prone ventilation among intubated Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients remain unclear. The primary objective was to examine the effect of prone ventilation on the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) in intubated COVID-19 patients. Methods Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from inception until March 2021. Case reports and case series were excluded. Results Eleven studies (n = 606 patients) were eligible. Prone ventilation significantly improved PaO2/FiO2 ratio (studies: 8, n = 579, mean difference 46.75, 95% CI 33.35‒60.15, p < 0.00001; evidence: very low) and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) (studies: 3, n = 432, mean difference 1.67, 95% CI 1.08‒2.26, p < 0.00001; evidence: ow), but not the arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) (studies: 5, n = 396, mean difference 2.45, 95% CI 2.39‒7.30, p= 0.32; evidence: very low), mortality rate (studies: 1, n = 215, Odds Ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.32‒1.33, p= 0.24; evidence: very low), or number of patients discharged alive (studies: 1, n = 43, Odds Ratio 1.49, 95% CI 0.72‒3.08, p= 0.28; evidence: very low). Conclusion Prone ventilation improved PaO2/FiO2 ratio and SpO2 in intubated COVID-19 patients. Given the substantial heterogeneity and low level of evidence, more randomized- controlled trials are warranted to improve the certainty of evidence, and to examine the adverse events of prone ventilation.


Asunto(s)
Humanos , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria del Recién Nacido , COVID-19/terapia , Oxígeno , Respiración Artificial , Posición Prona
3.
Braz J Anesthesiol ; 72(6): 780-789, 2022.
Artículo en Inglés | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-35809681

RESUMEN

BACKGROUND: The efficacy and safety profiles of prone ventilation among intubated Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) patients remain unclear. The primary objective was to examine the effect of prone ventilation on the ratio of arterial partial pressure of oxygen to fraction of inspired oxygen (PaO2/FiO2) in intubated COVID-19 patients. METHODS: Databases of MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL were systematically searched from inception until March 2021. Case reports and case series were excluded. RESULTS: Eleven studies (n = 606 patients) were eligible. Prone ventilation significantly improved PaO2/FiO2 ratio (studies: 8, n = 579, mean difference 46.75, 95% CI 33.35‒60.15, p < 0.00001; evidence: very low) and peripheral oxygen saturation (SpO2) (studies: 3, n = 432, mean difference 1.67, 95% CI 1.08‒2.26, p < 0.00001; evidence: ow), but not the arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide (PaCO2) (studies: 5, n = 396, mean difference 2.45, 95% CI 2.39‒7.30, p = 0.32; evidence: very low), mortality rate (studies: 1, n = 215, Odds Ratio 0.66, 95% CI 0.32‒1.33, p = 0.24; evidence: very low), or number of patients discharged alive (studies: 1, n = 43, Odds Ratio 1.49, 95% CI 0.72‒3.08, p = 0.28; evidence: very low). CONCLUSION: Prone ventilation improved PaO2/FiO2 ratio and SpO2 in intubated COVID-19 patients. Given the substantial heterogeneity and low level of evidence, more randomized- controlled trials are warranted to improve the certainty of evidence, and to examine the adverse events of prone ventilation.


Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Síndrome de Dificultad Respiratoria , Humanos , COVID-19/terapia , Posición Prona , Respiración Artificial , Oxígeno
SELECCIÓN DE REFERENCIAS
DETALLE DE LA BÚSQUEDA
...