Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Montrer: 20 | 50 | 100
Résultats 1 - 2 de 2
Filtrer
Plus de filtres










Base de données
Gamme d'année
1.
J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth ; 34(3): 791-796, 2020 Mar.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31399303

RÉSUMÉ

Non-invasive near-infrared spectroscopy is gaining popularity in the detection of spinal cord ischemia following aortic aneurysm repair. However, practical recommendations are lacking. This review focuses on the physiological and anatomical background, as well as on the clinical implementations of near-infrared spectroscopy as a tool for monitoring ischemia of the spinal cord. Clinical recommendations based on the currently available evidence are rendered.


Sujet(s)
Anévrysme de l'aorte thoracique , Ischémie de la moelle épinière , Anévrysme de l'aorte thoracique/chirurgie , Humains , Ischémie , Surveillance peropératoire , Spectroscopie proche infrarouge , Ischémie de la moelle épinière/imagerie diagnostique , Ischémie de la moelle épinière/étiologie
2.
Eur J Anaesthesiol ; 20(6): 461-6, 2003 Jun.
Article de Anglais | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12803263

RÉSUMÉ

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: We conducted an open, prospective, randomized study to compare the efficacy, safety and recovery characteristics of remifentanil or propofol during monitored anaesthesia care in patients undergoing colonoscopy. METHODS: Forty patients were randomly assigned to receive either propofol (1 mg kg(-1) followed by 10 mg kg (-1) h(-1), n = 20) or remifentanil (0.5 microg kg(-1) followed by 0.2 microg kg(-1) min(-1), n = 20). The infusion rate was subsequently adapted to clinical needs. RESULTS: In the propofol group, arterial pressure and heart rate decreased significantly from the baseline. These variables remained unchanged in the remifentanil group, but hypoventilation occurred in 55% of patients. Early recovery was delayed in the propofol group (P < 0.002). Recovery of cognitive and psychomotor functions was faster in the remifentanil group. Fifteen minutes after anaesthesia, the Digit Symbol Substitution Test score was 28.6 +/- 12.8 versus 36.2 +/- 9.4 and the Trieger Dot Test score was 25.6 +/- 8.1 versus 18.7 +/- 4.1 in the propofol and remifentanil groups, respectively (both P < 0.05). Patient satisfaction, using a visual analogue scale, was higher in the propofol group (96 +/- 7 versus 77 +/- 21, P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Remifentanil proved efficient in reducing pain during colonoscopy. Emergence times were shorter and the recovery of cognitive function was faster with remifentanil compared with propofol. Remifentanil provided a smoother haemodynamic profile than propofol; however, the frequent occurrence of remifentanil-induced hypoventilation requires the cautious administration of this agent.


Sujet(s)
Anesthésie , Anesthésiques intraveineux/usage thérapeutique , Coloscopie , Surveillance peropératoire , Pipéridines/usage thérapeutique , Propofol/usage thérapeutique , Adolescent , Adulte , Sujet âgé , Analyse de variance , Anesthésie/méthodes , Femelle , Humains , Mâle , Adulte d'âge moyen , Études prospectives , Performance psychomotrice/effets des médicaments et des substances chimiques , Rémifentanil , Respiration/effets des médicaments et des substances chimiques
SÉLECTION CITATIONS
DÉTAIL DE RECHERCHE
...