Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Mostrar: 20 | 50 | 100
Resultados 1 - 11 de 11
Filtrar
1.
Rev. esp. anestesiol. reanim ; 64(4): 223-232, abr. 2017. tab, ilus
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-160997

RESUMO

Reconocer la importancia de prevenir y tratar precozmente las náuseas y los vómitos postoperatorios (NVPO) es fundamental para evitar complicaciones postoperatorias, mejorar la satisfacción del paciente y permitir el desarrollo de la cirugía mayor ambulatoria y de la cirugía fast-track. El tema de las NVPO podría parecer estancado, pero seguimos avanzando. Aparecen nuevos conceptos y problemas como las náuseas y vómitos postalta, nuevos factores de riesgo y nuevos fármacos. Por otro lado, siguen existiendo ideas erróneas, como asociar las NVPO con la estancia en la unidad de recuperación postanestésica o asumir como factores de riesgo características del paciente, de la anestesia o de la cirugía que realmente no lo son. Debemos enfrentarnos a las NVPO de otro modo, implementando el uso de las guías clínicas en nuestros centros y apostando por una profilaxis más agresiva en determinados grupos de pacientes. Presentamos a continuación una amplia revisión del tema (AU)


Recognising the importance of the prevention and early treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is essential to avoid postoperative complications, improve patient satisfaction and enable the development of major outpatient surgery and fast-track surgery. The topic of PONV might seem to have become stagnant, but we are moving forward. New concepts and problems like post-discharge nausea and vomiting, new risk factors and new drugs are appearing. However, there continue to be mistaken notions about PONV, such as the association between PONV and post-anaesthesia care unit stays, or assuming that it is a risk factore characteristic of the patient, anaesthesia or surgery when it is not. Perhaps, now is the moment to tackle PONV in a different manner, implementing guidelines and going for more aggressive prophylaxis in some groups of patients. We present an extensive review of this topic (AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/complicações , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/fisiopatologia , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/terapia , Fatores de Risco , Antibioticoprofilaxia/métodos , Antieméticos/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas de Dopamina/uso terapêutico , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Anestesia por Condução/tendências , Corticosteroides/uso terapêutico , Receptores de Serotonina/uso terapêutico , Antagonistas Muscarínicos/uso terapêutico , Agonistas dos Receptores Histamínicos/uso terapêutico
2.
Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim ; 64(4): 223-232, 2017 Apr.
Artigo em Inglês, Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-28041609

RESUMO

Recognising the importance of the prevention and early treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is essential to avoid postoperative complications, improve patient satisfaction and enable the development of major outpatient surgery and fast-track surgery. The topic of PONV might seem to have become stagnant, but we are moving forward. New concepts and problems like post-discharge nausea and vomiting, new risk factors and new drugs are appearing. However, there continue to be mistaken notions about PONV, such as the association between PONV and post-anaesthesia care unit stays, or assuming that it is a risk factore characteristic of the patient, anaesthesia or surgery when it is not. Perhaps, now is the moment to tackle PONV in a different manner, implementing guidelines and going for more aggressive prophylaxis in some groups of patients. We present an extensive review of this topic.


Assuntos
Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios , Humanos , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/fisiopatologia , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/prevenção & controle , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/terapia , Prognóstico , Fatores de Risco
3.
Br J Anaesth ; 116(3): 370-6, 2016 Mar.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26705350

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: Ultrasound-guided internal jugular venous access increases the rate of successful cannulation and reduces the incidence of complications, compared with the landmark technique. Three transducer orientation approaches have been proposed for this procedure: short-axis (SAX), long-axis (LAX) and oblique-axis (OAX). Our goal was to assess and compare the performance of these approaches. METHODS: A prospective randomized clinical trial was conducted in one teaching hospital. Patients aged 18 yr or above, who were undergoing ultrasound-guided internal jugular cannulation, were randomly assigned to one of three intervention groups: SAX, LAX and OAX group. The main outcome measure was successful cannulation on first needle pass. Incidence of mechanical complications was also registered. Restricted randomization was computer-generated. RESULTS: In total, 220 patients were analysed (SAX n=73, LAX n=75, OAX n=72). Cannulation was successful on first needle pass in 51 (69.9%) SAX patients, 39 (52%) LAX patients and 53 (73.6%) OAX patients. First needle pass failure was higher in the LAX group than in the OAX group (adjusted OR 3.7, 95% CI 1.71-8.0, P=0.002). A higher mechanical complication rate was observed in the SAX group (15.1%) than in the OAX (6.9%) and LAX (4%) groups (P=0.047). CONCLUSIONS: As OAX showed a higher first needle pass success rate than LAX and a lower mechanical complications rate than SAX, we recommend it as the standard approach when performing ultrasound-guided internal jugular venous access. Further clinical studies are needed to confirm this conclusion. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT 01966354.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central , Veias Jugulares/diagnóstico por imagem , Transdutores , Ultrassonografia de Intervenção , Idoso , Feminino , Humanos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos
4.
Actual. anestesiol. reanim ; 20(4): 157-175, oct.-dic. 2010. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-88282

RESUMO

Las náuseas y los vómitos postoperatorios (NVPO) producen malestar e insatisfacción del paciente y aumentan la necesidad de cuidados. La infusión de opiáceos, frecuente como tratamiento analgésico postoperatorio, puede inducir náuseas y/o vómitos (NV). Este trabajo tiene como objetivo el desarrollo de recomendaciones de prevención y tratamiento de ambos problemas. Con este fin se constituyó un Grupo de Trabajo de acuerdo con los estatutos de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación. Dicho grupo realizó una evaluación crítica de artículos relevantes sobre el manejo de las NV perioperatorios precoces y tardíos tanto en adultos como en niños. Tras varias reuniones y discusión se acordaron las siguientes recomendaciones (resumen): 1. Todos los pacientes sometidos a cirugía deben ser evaluados respecto al riesgo de desarrollar NVPO. Se recomiendan las escalas de Apfel et al. para adultos y de Eberhart et al. para niños, ambas son útiles y fáciles de aplicar; 2. En los adultos con riesgo moderado o alto y en todos los niños se deben adoptar medidas de reducción del riesgo basal; 3. La profilaxis con un fármaco es útil en pacientes de riesgo bajo (Apfel 1 o Eberhart 1) sometidos a anestesia general. En los demás pacientes se debe realizar profilaxis con 2 o más fármacos y reducir el riesgo basal (abordaje multimodal); 4. Dexametasona, droperidol y ondansetrón (setrones en general) tienen similar eficacia. La elección de fármaco debe tener en consideración factores individuales en cada paciente; 5. El tratamiento de las NVPO establecidas debe hacerse preferentemente con un fármaco diferente al empleado en la profilaxis. El fármaco más efectivo es el ondansetrón; 6. Debe evaluarse la posibilidad de NVPO tras el alta del paciente en cirugía ambulatoria o en la sala de hospitalización en cirugía con ingreso. No existen evidencias suficientes para formular una estrategia de prevención de las NV tardíos; 7. El fármaco de elección en la prevención de las NV asociadas a infusión de opiáceos es droperidol (AU)


Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) causes patient discomfort, lowers patient satisfaction, and increases care requirements. Opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) may also occur if opioids are used to treat postoperative pain. These guidelines aim to provide recommendations for the prevention and treatment of both problems. A working group was established in accordance with the charter of the Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación. The group undertook the critical appraisal of articles relevant to the management of PONV and OINV in adults and children early and late in the perioperative period. Discussions led to recommendations, summarized as follows: 1) Risk for PONV should be assessed in all patients undergoing surgery; 2easy-to-use scales are useful for risk assessment: the Apfel scale for adults and the Eberhart scale for children.2) Measures to reduce baseline risk should be used for adults at moderate or high risk and all children. 3) Pharmacologic prophylaxis with 1 drug is useful for patients at low risk (Apfel or Eberhart 1) who are to receive general anesthesia; patients with higher levels of risk should receive prophylaxis with 2 or more drugs and baseline risk should be reduced (multimodal approach). 4) Dexamethasone, droperidol, and ondansetron (or other setrons) have similar levels of efficacy; drug choice should be made based on individual patient factors. 5) The drug prescribed for treating PONV should preferably be different from the one used for prophylaxis; ondansetron is the most effective drug for treating PONV. 6) Risk for PONV should be assessed before discharge after outpatient surgery or on the ward for hospitalized patients; there is no evidence that late preventive strategies are effective.7) The drug of choice for preventing OINV is droperidol (AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/prevenção & controle , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Droperidol/farmacocinética , Ondansetron/farmacocinética , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Analgesia/efeitos adversos , Comportamento de Redução do Risco
5.
Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim ; 57(8): 508-24, 2010 Oct.
Artigo em Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-21033457

RESUMO

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) causes patient discomfort, lowers patient satisfaction, and increases care requirements. Opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) may also occur if opioids are used to treat postoperative pain. These guidelines aim to provide recommendations for the prevention and treatment of both problems. A working group was established in accordance with the charter of the Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación. The group undertook the critical appraisal of articles relevant to the management of PONV and OINV in adults and children early and late in the perioperative period. Discussions led to recommendations, summarized as follows: 1) Risk for PONV should be assessed in all patients undergoing surgery; 2 easy-to-use scales are useful for risk assessment: the Apfel scale for adults and the Eberhart scale for children. 2) Measures to reduce baseline risk should be used for adults at moderate or high risk and all children. 3) Pharmacologic prophylaxis with 1 drug is useful for patients at low risk (Apfel or Eberhart 1) who are to receive general anesthesia; patients with higher levels of risk should receive prophylaxis with 2 or more drugs and baseline risk should be reduced (multimodal approach). 4) Dexamethasone, droperidol, and ondansetron (or other setrons) have similar levels of efficacy; drug choice should be made based on individual patient factors. 5) The drug prescribed for treating PONV should preferably be different from the one used for prophylaxis; ondansetron is the most effective drug for treating PONV. 6) Risk for PONV should be assessed before discharge after outpatient surgery or on the ward for hospitalized patients; there is no evidence that late preventive strategies are effective. 7) The drug of choice for preventing OINV is droperidol.


Assuntos
Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/tratamento farmacológico , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/prevenção & controle , Adulto , Analgésicos Opioides/efeitos adversos , Quimioprevenção/efeitos adversos , Quimioprevenção/economia , Criança , Análise Custo-Benefício , Interações Medicamentosas , Humanos , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/induzido quimicamente , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/fisiopatologia , Fatores de Risco
6.
Rev. esp. anestesiol. reanim ; 57(8): 508-524, oct. 2010. tab
Artigo em Espanhol | IBECS | ID: ibc-82068

RESUMO

Las náuseas y los vómitos postoperatorios (NVPO) producen malestar e insatisfacción del paciente y aumentan la necesidad de cuidados. La infusión de opiáceos, frecuente como tratamiento analgésico postoperatorio, puede inducir náuseas y/o vómitos (NV). Este trabajo tiene como objetivo el desarrollo de recomendaciones de prevención y tratamiento de ambos problemas. Con este fin se constituyó un Grupo de Trabajo de acuerdo con los estatutos de la Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación. Dicho grupo realizó una evaluación crítica de artículos relevantes sobre el manejo de las NV perioperatorios precoces y tardíos tanto en adultos como en niños. Tras varias reuniones y discusión se acordaron las siguientes recomendaciones (resumen): 1. Todos los pacientes sometidos a cirugía deben ser evaluados respecto al riesgo de desarrollar NVPO. Se recomiendan las escalas de Apfel et al. para adultos y de Eberhart et al. para niños, ambas son útiles y fáciles de aplicar; 2. En los adultos con riesgo moderado o alto y en todos los niños se deben adoptar medidas de reducción del riesgo basal; 3. La profilaxis con un fármaco es útil en pacientes de riesgo bajo (Apfel 1 ó Eberhart 1) sometidos a anestesia general. En los demás pacientes se debe realizar profilaxis con 2 o más fármacos y reducir el riesgo basal (abordaje multimodal); 4. Dexametasona, droperidol y ondansetrón (setrones en general) tienen similar eficacia. La elección de fármaco debe tener en consideración factores individuales en cada paciente; 5. El tratamiento de las NVPO establecidas debe hacerse preferentemente con un fármaco diferente al empleado en la profilaxis. El fármaco más efectivo es el ondansetrón; 6. Debe evaluarse la posibilidad de NVPO tras el alta del paciente en cirugía ambulatoria o en la sala de hospitalización en cirugía con ingreso. No existen evidencias suficientes para formular una estrategia de prevención de las NV tardíos; 7. El fármaco de elección en la prevención de las NV asociadas a infusión de opiáceos es droperidol(AU)


Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) causes patient discomfort, lowers patient satisfaction, and increases care requirements. Opioid-induced nausea and vomiting (OINV) may also occur if opioids are used to treat postoperative pain. These guidelines aim to provide recommendations for the prevention and treatment of both problems. A working group was established in accordance with the charter of the Sociedad Española de Anestesiología y Reanimación. The group undertook the critical appraisal of articles relevant to the management of PONV and OINV in adults and children early and late in the perioperative period. Discussions led to recommendations, summarized as follows: 1) Risk for PONV should be assessed in all patients undergoing surgery; 2 easy-to-use scales are useful for risk assessment: the Apfel scale for adults and the Eberhart scale for children. 2) Measures to reduce baseline risk should be used for adults at moderate or high risk and antineall children. 3) Pharmacologic prophylaxis with 1 drug is useful for patients at low risk (Apfel or Eberhart 1) who are to receive general anesthesia; patients with higher levels of risk should receive prophylaxis with 2 or more drugs and baseline risk should be reduced (multimodal approach). 4) Dexamethasone, droperidol, and ondansetron (or other setrons) have similar levels of efficacy; drug choice should be made based on individual patient factors. 5) The drug prescribed for treating PONV should preferably be different from the one used for prophylaxis; ondansetron is the most effective drug for treating PONV. 6) Risk for PONV should be assessed before discharge after outpatient surgery or on the ward for hospitalized patients; there is no evidence that late preventive strategies are effective. 7) The drug of choice for preventing OINV is droperidol(AU)


Assuntos
Humanos , Masculino , Feminino , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/prevenção & controle , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/terapia , Analgésicos Opioides/uso terapêutico , Fatores de Risco , Terapia Combinada , /uso terapêutico , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/induzido quimicamente , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/complicações , Transtornos Relacionados ao Uso de Opioides/diagnóstico , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/fisiopatologia , Análise Custo-Eficiência
7.
Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim ; 52(10): 634-6, 2005 Dec.
Artigo em Espanhol | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-16435620

RESUMO

A central venous catheter was inserted into the right internal jugular vein of a 67-year-old woman to provide parenteral nutrition on the 7th day after surgery. Five days later, mediastinitis with bilateral hydrothorax had developed and was causing respiratory failure and systemic inflammatory response syndrome secondary to documented vascular perforation by the catheter. Four factors have been associated with increased risk of perforation: catheter rigidity and diameter, the angle between the tip of the catheter and the vessel wall, and insertion from the left. Three catheter positions have been described as safe when radiologically confirmed: the superior vena cava, the point where the superior vena cava meets the atrium, and the midpoint of the innominate vein. However, it should not be forgotten that a radiograph is 2-dimensional and a single image of a catheter tip can correspond to a variety of locations (superior vena cava, vena innominata, extravascular location, and more). Even when there is clinical and radiologic evidence of catheter positioning, vascular perforation should be suspected in patients with a central venous catheter and bilateral pleural effusion who present respiratory insufficiency and hemodynamic instability.


Assuntos
Cateterismo Venoso Central/efeitos adversos , Hidrotórax/etiologia , Veias Jugulares/lesões , Nutrição Parenteral Total/instrumentação , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/etiologia , Idoso , Artroplastia de Quadril , Cateterismo Venoso Central/instrumentação , Enterite/terapia , Feminino , Necrose da Cabeça do Fêmur/cirurgia , Febre/etiologia , Humanos , Hidrotórax/diagnóstico por imagem , Hidrotórax/cirurgia , Derrame Pleural/etiologia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/diagnóstico por imagem , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/cirurgia , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/terapia , Síndrome do Desconforto Respiratório/etiologia , Síndrome Respiratória Aguda Grave/etiologia , Toracoscopia , Tomografia Computadorizada por Raios X
8.
Br J Anaesth ; 91(4): 589-92, 2003 Oct.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-14504165

RESUMO

BACKGROUND: This study compares the cost-effectiveness of three combinations of antiemetics in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). METHODS: We conducted a prospective, double-blind study. Ninety ASA I-II females, 18-65 yr, undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery, with standardized postoperative analgesia (intrathecal 0.2 mg plus i.v. PCA morphine), were randomly assigned to receive: ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after induction and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1); dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after induction and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2); ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after induction and placebo 12 h later (Group 3). A decision analysis tree was used to divide each group into nine mutually exclusive subgroups, depending on the incidence of PONV, need for rescue therapy, side effects and their treatment. Direct cost and probabilities were calculated for each subgroup, then a cost-effectiveness analysis was conducted from the hospital point of view. RESULTS: Groups 1 and 3 were more effective (80 and 70%) than Group 2 (40%, P=0.004) in preventing PONV but also more expensive. Compared with Group 2, the incremental cost per extra patient without PONV was euro;6.99 (95% CI, -1.26 to 36.57) for Group 1 and euro;13.55 (95% CI, 0.89-132.90) for Group 3. CONCLUSION: Ondansetron+droperidol is cheaper and at least as effective as ondansetron+ dexamethasone, and it is more effective than dexamethasone+droperidol with a reasonable extra cost.


Assuntos
Antieméticos/economia , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/economia , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Antieméticos/uso terapêutico , Análise Custo-Benefício , Dexametasona/economia , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Método Duplo-Cego , Droperidol/economia , Droperidol/uso terapêutico , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Ondansetron/economia , Ondansetron/uso terapêutico , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/prevenção & controle , Estudos Prospectivos , Reprodutibilidade dos Testes , Resultado do Tratamento
9.
Anesth Analg ; 95(6): 1590-5, table of contents, 2002 Dec.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-12456422

RESUMO

UNLABELLED: In this study we compared the efficacy and safety of three antiemetic combinations in the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Ninety ASA status I-II women, aged 18-65 yr, undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, were included in a prospective, randomized, double-blinded study. A standardized anesthetic technique and postoperative analgesia (intrathecal morphine plus IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine) were used in all patients. Patients were randomly assigned to receive ondansetron 4 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 1, n = 30), dexamethasone 8 mg plus droperidol 1.25 mg after the induction of anesthesia and droperidol 1.25 mg 12 h later (Group 2, n = 30), or ondansetron 4 mg plus dexamethasone 8 mg after the induction of anesthesia and placebo 12 h later (Group 3, n = 30). A complete response, defined as no PONV in 48 h, occurred in 80% of patients in Group 1, 70% in Group 3, and 40% in Group 2 (P = 0.004 versus Groups 1 and 3). The incidences of side effects and other variables that could modify the incidence of PONV were similar among groups. In conclusion, ondansetron, in combination with droperidol or dexamethasone, is more effective than dexamethasone in combination with droperidol in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery with intrathecal morphine plus IV PCA with morphine for postoperative analgesia. IMPLICATIONS: The combination of ondansetron plus dexamethasone or droperidol was significantly better than the combination of dexamethasone plus droperidol in the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting in women undergoing general anesthesia for major gynecological surgery, with intrathecal and IV morphine (patient-controlled analgesia) for management of postoperative pain.


Assuntos
Antieméticos/administração & dosagem , Náusea e Vômito Pós-Operatórios/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Analgesia Controlada pelo Paciente , Antieméticos/efeitos adversos , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Morfina/administração & dosagem , Dor Pós-Operatória/tratamento farmacológico , Estudos Prospectivos
11.
Br J Anaesth ; 76(6): 835-40, 1996 Jun.
Artigo em Inglês | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-8679359

RESUMO

We studied 100 ASA I-II females undergoing general anaesthesia for major gynaecological surgery, in a prospective, double-blind, placebo-controlled, randomized study. Patients received one of four regimens for the prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV): ondansetron 4 mg (n = 25), dexamethasone 8 mg (n = 25), ondansetron with dexamethasone (4 mg and 8 mg, respectively, n = 25) or placebo (saline, n = 25) There were no differences in background factors or factors related to operation and anaesthesia, morphine consumption, pain or side effects between groups. The incidence of nausea and emetic episodes in the ondansetron with dexamethasone group was lower than in the placebo (P < 0.01), ondansetron (P < 0.05) and dexamethasone (P = 0.057) groups. There were no differences between ondansetron and dexamethasone, and both were more effective than placebo (P < 0.05 and P < 0.01, respectively). Dexamethasone appeared to be preferable in preventing nausea than emetic episodes. Fewer patients in the ondansetron with dexamethasone group needed antimetic rescue (P < 0.01 vs placebo and P < 0.05 vs ondansetron). We conclude that prophylactic administration of combined ondansetron and dexamethasone is effective in preventing PONV.


Assuntos
Antieméticos/uso terapêutico , Dexametasona/uso terapêutico , Náusea/prevenção & controle , Ondansetron/uso terapêutico , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/prevenção & controle , Vômito/prevenção & controle , Adolescente , Adulto , Idoso , Método Duplo-Cego , Quimioterapia Combinada , Feminino , Doenças dos Genitais Femininos/cirurgia , Humanos , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Estudos Prospectivos
SELEÇÃO DE REFERÊNCIAS
DETALHE DA PESQUISA
...