General anesthesia and Obstetric Anesthesia is the gold standard for a cesarean section but there are some cases where general anesthesia is unavoidable. The use of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery has decreas...General anesthesia and Obstetric Anesthesia is the gold standard for a cesarean section but there are some cases where general anesthesia is unavoidable. The use of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery has decreased in recent years due to the widespread use of neuraxial techniques. The choice of anesthesia techniques for cesarean delivery depends on several factors, including the patient’s psychology and the attending physician’s experience. It is chosen because of its safety profile and its benefits to the mother and fetus. It may be indicated due to emergency, maternal refusal of regional techniques, or regional contraindications. Major complications include failed intubation, gastric content aspiration, and increased bleeding risk. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a newly launched team on obstetric anesthesia practice.展开更多
Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of additional coronary revascularization on the early results in patients submitted to valve surgery. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of the ca...Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of additional coronary revascularization on the early results in patients submitted to valve surgery. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of the cardiac surgical database between January 2000 and December 2018 was performed. A total of 1667 patients were included and divided into two groups: Group A isolated valve surgery (IVS n = 1608) and Group B with valve surgery combined to coronary artery bypass grafting (VS + CABG n = 59). Demographic, operative data and postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. Results: Patients with combined procedure were older than patients who underwent isolated valvular surgery (64.9 ± 9.2 years vs 44.4 ± 13.1 years;p = 0.0001) and there was a higher proportion of diabetics (40.7% vs 6.6%;p = 0.0001). The 30 days mortality rate in the combined procedure group was 18.6% versus 6.2% in isolated valve surgery (p = 0.001). Also post-operative complications were more frequent than for patients who underwent IVS. Additionally we noted a high prevalence of coronary artery risk factors in patients with combined procedures. Conclusion: Surgical mortality and morbidity of coexisting coronary and heart valve disease were substantially higher than IVS. More efforts in medical management may reduce the incidence of adverse outcomes.展开更多
文摘General anesthesia and Obstetric Anesthesia is the gold standard for a cesarean section but there are some cases where general anesthesia is unavoidable. The use of general anesthesia for cesarean delivery has decreased in recent years due to the widespread use of neuraxial techniques. The choice of anesthesia techniques for cesarean delivery depends on several factors, including the patient’s psychology and the attending physician’s experience. It is chosen because of its safety profile and its benefits to the mother and fetus. It may be indicated due to emergency, maternal refusal of regional techniques, or regional contraindications. Major complications include failed intubation, gastric content aspiration, and increased bleeding risk. This study aims to evaluate the impact of a newly launched team on obstetric anesthesia practice.
文摘Background: The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of additional coronary revascularization on the early results in patients submitted to valve surgery. Patients and Methods: A retrospective review of the cardiac surgical database between January 2000 and December 2018 was performed. A total of 1667 patients were included and divided into two groups: Group A isolated valve surgery (IVS n = 1608) and Group B with valve surgery combined to coronary artery bypass grafting (VS + CABG n = 59). Demographic, operative data and postoperative outcomes were compared between groups. Results: Patients with combined procedure were older than patients who underwent isolated valvular surgery (64.9 ± 9.2 years vs 44.4 ± 13.1 years;p = 0.0001) and there was a higher proportion of diabetics (40.7% vs 6.6%;p = 0.0001). The 30 days mortality rate in the combined procedure group was 18.6% versus 6.2% in isolated valve surgery (p = 0.001). Also post-operative complications were more frequent than for patients who underwent IVS. Additionally we noted a high prevalence of coronary artery risk factors in patients with combined procedures. Conclusion: Surgical mortality and morbidity of coexisting coronary and heart valve disease were substantially higher than IVS. More efforts in medical management may reduce the incidence of adverse outcomes.
