Lista OMS de verificación quirúrgica y su aplicación práctica en cirugía plástica
WHO Surgical Checklist and Its Practical Application in Plastic Surgery.
Abdel-Rehim S, Morritt A, Perks G.
Department of Plastic Surgery, Nottingham University Hospitals NHS Trust, City Hospital Campus, Hucknall Road, Nottingham NG5 1PB, UK.
Plast Surg Int. 2011;2011:579579. doi: 10.1155/2011/579579. Epub 2011 Apr 27.Abstract
The WHO surgical checklist was introduced to most UK surgical units following the WHO "Safe Surgery Saves Lives" initiative. The aim of this audit was to review patient's safety in the delivery of surgical care and to evaluate the practical application of the new WHO surgical checklist. We conducted a retrospective audit of patients who received operative treatment under general anaesthesia at our Plastic Surgery Department, involving a total number of 90 patients. The WHO form was compared to its former equivalents. Complications or incidents occurring during or after surgery were recorded. Using the department's previous surgical checklist, "Time out" was only performed in only 30% of cases. One patient arrived at theatre reception without a completed consent form, and two clinical incidents were reported without patients suffering harm. Following introduction of current WHO surgical checklist, "Time out" was recorded in 80% of cases. In all cases, the new WHO surgical checklist was used and no incidents were reported. The WHO surgical checklist provides a structured frame work that standardizes the delivery of care across hospitals and specialized units; however, it will take some time and practice for teams to learn to use the checklist effectively and reliably.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3335640/pdf/PSI2011-579579.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3335640/
La validación del modelo de evaluación de riesgo Caprini en pacientes de cirugía plástica y reconstructiva.
Validation of the Caprini risk assessment model in plastic and reconstructive surgery patients.
Pannucci CJ, Bailey SH, Dreszer G, Fisher Wachtman C, Zumsteg JW, Jaber RM, Hamill JB, Hume KM, Rubin JP, Neligan PC, Kalliainen LK, Hoxworth RE, Pusic AL, Wilkins EG.
Department of Surgery, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, 48105, USA.
J Am Coll Surg. 2011 Jan;212(1):105-12.
doi: 10.1016/j.jamcollsurg.2010.08.018. Epub 2010 Nov 18.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: The Venous Thromboembolism Prevention Study (VTEPS) Network is a consortium of 5 tertiary referral centers established to examine venous thromboembolism (VTE) in plastic surgery patients. We report our midterm analyses of the study's control group to evaluate the incidence of VTE in patients who receive no chemoprophylaxis, and validate the Caprini Risk Assessment Model (RAM) in plastic surgery patients. STUDY DESIGN: Medical record review was performed at VTEPS centers for all eligible plastic surgery patients between March 2006 and June 2009. Inclusion criteria were Caprini score ≥3, surgery under general anesthesia, and postoperative hospital admission. Patients who received chemoprophylaxis were excluded. Dependent variables included symptomatic deep vein thrombosis (DVT) or pulmonary embolism (PE) within the first 60 postoperative days and time to DVT or PE. RESULTS: We identified 1,126 historic control patients. The overall VTE incidence was 1.69%. Approximately 1 in 9 (11.3%) patients with Caprini score >8 had a VTE event. Patients with Caprini score >8 were significantly more likely to develop VTE when compared with patients with Caprini score of 3 to 4 (odds ratio [OR] 20.9, p < 0.001), 5 to 6 (OR 9.9, p < 0.001), or 7 to 8 (OR 4.6, p = 0.015). Among patients with Caprini score 7 to 8 or Caprini score >8, VTE risk was not limited to the immediate postoperative period (postoperative days 1-14). In these high-risk patients, more than 50% of VTE events were diagnosed in the late (days 15-60) postoperative period.
CONCLUSIONS: The Caprini RAM effectively risk-stratifies plastic and reconstructive surgery patients for VTE risk. Among patients with Caprini score >8, 11.3% have a postoperative VTE when chemoprophylaxis is not provided. In higher risk patients, there was no evidence that VTE risk is limited to the immediate postoperative period.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3052944/pdf/nihms237229.pdf
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3052944/
Consideraciones perioperatorias para la seguridad del paciente durante cirugía cosmética. Prevención de complicaciones
Perioperative considerations for patient safety during cosmetic surgery - preventing complications.
Ellsworth WA, Basu CB, Iverson RE.
Division of Plastic Surgery, Baylor College of Medicine, Houston, Texas;
Can J Plast Surg. 2009 Spring;17(1):9-16.
Abstract
Maintaining patient safety in the operating room is a major concern of surgeons, hospitals and surgical facilities. Circumventing preventable complications is essential, and pressure to avoid these complications in cosmetic surgery is increasing. Traditionally, nursing and anesthesia staff have managed patient positioning and safety issues in the operating room. As the number of office-based procedures in the plastic surgeon's practice increases, understanding and implementing patient safety guidelines by the plastic surgeon is of increasing importance.A review of the Joint Commission's Universal Protocol highlights requirements set forth to prevent perioperative complications. In the present paper, the importance of implementing these guidelines into the cosmetic surgery practice is reviewed. Key aspects of patient safety in the operating room are outlined, including patient positioning, ocular protection and other issues essential for minimization of postoperative morbidity. Additionally, as the demand for body contouring surgery in the cosmetic practice continues to increase, special attention to safety considerations specific to the obese and massive weight loss patients is mandatory.After review of the present paper, the reader should be able to introduce the Joint Commission's Universal Protocol into their daily practice. The reader will understand key aspects of patient positioning, airway management and ocular protection in cosmetic surgery. Finally, the reader will have a better understanding of the perioperative care of unique populations including the morbidly obese, massive weight loss patients and the elderly. Attention to detail in these aspects of patient safety can help avoid unnecessary complication and significantly improve the patient's experience and surgical outcome.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2705307/
Liposucción
Liposuction.
Dhami LD.
Laser, Aesthetic and Plastic Surgeon, Vasudhan Arjin Cosmetic and Laser Surgery, Mumbai, India.
Indian J Plast Surg. 2008 Oct;41(Suppl):S27-40.
Abstract
Advent of the tumescent technique in 1987 has allowed for safe contouring in ambulatory single session liposuction under regional or general anaesthesia. Safety and aesthetic issues define MegaLiposuction to be in Volume in litres of more than 10% of Body weight in Kgs. 870 cases of liposuction were performed between September 2000 and August 2008. In (65%) cases, the total volume of aspirate was greater then 5 liters. (Range: 5 to 25 liters). In 24% cases, the large volume liposuction was combined with a limited or a total block lipectomy. Regional anaesthesia with conscious sedation was preferred except where liposuction was for above the subcostal region (the Upper Trunk, Lateral Chest, Back, Gynaecomastia, Breast, Arms and Face) or when the patient so desired. Tumescent infiltration with Lactated ringer, adrenalin, triamcinalone and hyalase was made in all cases. This approach has clinically shown less tissue edema in the post operative period than when the conventional physiological saline was being used in place of Ringer Lactate. The amount injected varied from 1,000 ml to 12,500 ml depending on the size, site and area. Local anesthetic was included only to the terminal portion of the tumescent mixture while infiltrating the sub-costal regions, or when above costal region was combined with below costal region being anaesthetized with Spinal Anaesthesia. The aspirate was restricted to the unstained white / yellow fat and the amount of fat aspirated did not have any bearing to the amount of solution infiltrated. There was no major complication. Blood transfusion was given only on one occasion when the patient had been on aspirin and had also received Low Molecular weight Heparin intra-operative. The hospital stay ranged from 8 to 24 hours for liposuction as well as for liposuction with a lipectomy. Serous discharge from access sites, sero-sanguinous fluid accumulation requiring drainage were necessitated in less than 10% cases. Minor re-contouring touch ups were requested in 5% cases. Early ambulation was encouraged for mobilization of third space fluid shifts to expedite recovery and to prevent deep vein thrombosis. More than 10% patients were operated on for Liposuction of other areas, after a gap of 7 days to 6 months. Meticulous perioperative monitoring of systemic functions ensures safety in tumescent megaliposuction for the obese and rewarding results can be achieved in a single sitting.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2825130/
Atentamente
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
www.anestesia-dolor.org
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario