La efectividad de analgesia preemptiva epidural torácica en cirugía de tórax
The effectiveness of preemptive thoracic epidural analgesia in thoracic surgery.
Erturk E, Aydogdu Kaya F1, Kutanis D1, Besir A1, Akdogan A1, Geze S1, Tugcugil E2.
Biomed Res Int. 2014;2014:673682. doi: 10.1155/2014/673682. Epub 2014 Mar 13.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:The aim of this study is to investigate the effectiveness of preemptive thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) comparing conventional postoperative epidural analgesia on thoracotomy. MATERIAL AND METHODS:Forty-four patients were randomized in to two groups (preemptive: Group P, control: Group C). Epidural catheter was inserted in all patients preoperatively. In Group P, epidural analgesic solution was administered as a bolus before the surgical incision and was continued until the end of the surgery. Postoperative patient controlled epidural analgesia infusion pumps were prepared for all patients. Respiratory rates (RR) were recorded. Patient's analgesia was evaluated with visual analog scale at rest (VASr) and coughing (VASc). Number of patient's demands from the pump, pump's delivery, and additional analgesic requirement were also recorded. RESULTS:RR in Group C was higher than in Group P at postoperative 1st and 2nd hours. Both VASr and VASc scores in Group P were lower than in Group C at postoperative 1st, 2nd, and 4th hours. Patient's demand and pump's delivery count for bolus dose in Group P were lower than in Group C in all measurement times. Total analgesic requirements on postoperative 1st and 24th hours in Group P were lower than in Group C. CONCLUSION:We consider that preemptive TEA may offer better analgesia after thoracotomy.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3972946/pdf/BMRI2014-673682.pdf
http://www.hindawi.com/journals/bmri/2014/673682/
Bloqueos paravertebrales intraoperatorios para analgesia postoperatoria en toracotomía. Estudio randomizado, doble ciego y controlado con placebo
Intra-operative paravertebral block for postoperative analgesia in thoracotomy patients: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study.
Helms O, Mariano J, Hentz JG, Santelmo N, Falcoz PE, Massard G, Steib A.
Eur J Cardiothorac Surg. 2011 Oct;40(4):902-6. doi: 10.1016/j.ejcts.2011.01.067. Epub 2011 Mar 5.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE:Epidural analgesia is the gold standard for post-thoracotomy pain relief but is contraindicated in certain patients. An alternative is paravertebral block. We investigated whether ropivacaine, administered through a paravertebral catheter placed by the surgeon, reduced postoperative pain. METHODS:In a randomized double-blind study, adult patients with a paravertebral catheter placed by the thoracic surgeon after thoracotomy were randomly assigned to receive through this catheter, either a 0.1 mlkg(-1) bolus of 0.5% ropivacaine, followed by a continuous infusion of 0.1 mlkg(-1)h(-1) for 48 h, or saline at the same scheme of administration. Patients also benefited from patient-controlled analgesia with intravenous morphine (bolus 1mg, lockout time 7 min), paracetamol, and nefopam. The primary endpoint was pain intensity on a visual analog scale at rest and on coughing. Secondary endpoints were total morphine consumption and side effects during the first 48 postoperative hours. Surgeons, anesthesiologists, and all the nurses and caring staff involved in this study were blinded. Solutions of saline and ropivacaine were prepared identically by the central pharmacy, without any possible identification of the product. RESULTS:Forty-seven patients with contraindications to epidural anesthesia were included. There were no significant differences between the groups receiving ropivacaine and saline in terms of pain severity at rest and on coughing, mean postoperative morphine consumption (45.7 mg for ropivacaine, 43.2mg in controls), and incidence of morphine-related side effects (nausea and vomiting, urinary retention, pruritus, respiratory rate, and sedation). CONCLUSIONS:Paravertebral block using a catheter placed by the thoracic surgeon was ineffective on postoperative pain after thoracotomy and did not confirm the analgesic effect that has been observed after percutaneous catheter placement. A direct comparison of these two placement methods is required.
http://ejcts.oxfordjournals.org/content/40/4/902.full.pdf
Atentamente
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
www.anestesia-dolor.org
¿Que hay de nuevo sobre el volumen de líquidos en terapia intensiva?
What's new in volume therapy in the intensive care unit?
van Haren F, Zacharowski K.
Best Pract Res Clin Anaesthesiol. 2014 Sep;28(3):275-283. doi: 10.1016/j.bpa.2014.06.004. Epub 2014 Jul 17.
Abstract
The administration of intravenous fluid to critically ill patients is one of the most common but also one of the most fiercely debated interventions in intensive care medicine. During the past decade, a number of important studies have been published which provide clinicians with improved knowledge regarding the timing, the type and the amount of fluid they should give to their critically ill patients. However, despite the fact that many thousands of patients have been enrolled in these trials of alternative fluid strategies, consensus remains elusive and practice is widely variable. Early adequate resuscitation of patients in shock followed by a restrictive strategy may be associated with better outcomes. Colloids such as modern hydroxyethyl starch are more effective than crystalloids in early resuscitation of patients in shock, and are safe when administered during surgery. However, these colloids may not be beneficial later in the course of intensive care treatment and should best be avoided in intensive care patients who have a high risk of developing acute kidney injury. Albumin has no clear benefit over saline and is associated with increased mortality in neurotrauma patients. Balanced fluids reduce the risk of hyperchloraemic acidosis and possibly kidney injury. The use of hypertonic fluids in patients with sepsis and acute lung injury warrants further investigation and should be considered experimental at this stage. Fluid therapy impacts relevant patient-related outcomes. Clinicians should adopt an individualized strategy based on the clinical scenario and best available evidence. One size does not fit all.
http://www.clinicalanaesthesiology.com/article/S1521-6896(14)00052-4/pdf
¿Deberían las soluciones con hidroxietil almidón estar totalmente prohibidas?
Should hydroxyethyl starch solutions be totally banned?
Vincent JL, Kellum JA, Shaw A, Mythen MG.
Crit Care. 2013 Oct 1;17(5):193. doi: 10.1186/cc13027.
Abstract
The choice of which intravenous solution to prescribe remains a matter of considerable debate in intensive care units around the world. Trends have been moving away from using hydroxyethyl starch solutions following concerns about safety. But are the available data sufficient to clearly assess the risk-benefit balance for all patients, and is there enough evidence of harm to justify removing these drugs completely from our hospitals?
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3871763/pdf/cc13027.pdf
Riesgo de insuficiencia renal aguda en pacientes tratados con soluciones que tienen hidroxietil almidón
The risk of AKI in patients treated with intravenous solutions containing hydroxyethyl starch.
Shaw AD, Kellum JA.
Clin J Am Soc Nephrol. 2013 Mar;8(3):497-503. doi: 10.2215/CJN.10921012. Epub 2013 Jan 18.
Abstract
Intravenous fluids are arguably one of the most commonly administered inpatient therapies and for the most part have been viewed as part of the nephrologist's toolkit in the management of acute kidney disease. Recently, findings have suggested that intravenous fluids may be harmful if given in excess (quantitative toxicity) and that some may be more harmful than others (qualitative toxicity), particularly for patients who already have AKI. Recent clinical trials have investigated hydroxyethyl starch solutions and found worrying results for the renal community. In this brief review, we consider the published literature on the role of hydroxyethyl starch solutions in AKI, with particular emphasis on two large recent randomized clinical trials conducted in Europe and Australia.
http://cjasn.asnjournals.org/content/8/3/497.full.pdf
Atentamente
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
www.anestesia-dolor.org
La angiografía por sustracción digital no impide de manera fiable la paraplejia lumbar asociada con inyección transforaminal epidural de esteroides.
Digital subtraction angiography does not reliably prevent paraplegia associated with lumbar transforaminalepidural steroid injection.
Chang Chien GC1, Candido KD, Knezevic NN.
Pain Physician. 2012 Nov-Dec;15(6):515-23.
Abstract
Digital subtraction angiography (DSA) has been touted as a radiologic adjunct to interventional neuraxial procedures where it is imperative to identify vascular compromise during the injection. Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are commonly performed interventions for treating acute and chronic radicular spine pain. We present a case of instantaneous and irreversible paraplegia following lumbar TFESI wherein a local anesthetic test dose, as well as DSA, were used as adjuncts to fluoroscopy. An 80-year-old man with severe lumbar spinal stenosis and chronic L5 radiculopathic pain was evaluated at a university pain management center seeking symptomatic pain relief. Two prior lumbar interlaminar epiduralsteroid injections (LESI) provided only transient pain relief, and a decision was made to perform right-sided L5-S1 TFESI. A 5-inch, 22-gauge Quincke-type spinal needle with a curved tip was used. Foraminal placement of the needle tip was confirmed with anteroposterior, oblique, and lateral views on fluoroscopy. Aspiration did not reveal any blood or cerebrospinal fluid. Digital subtraction angiography was performed twice to confirm the absence of intravascular contrast medium spread. Subsequently, a 0.5 mL of 1% lidocaine test dose was performed without any changes in neurological status. Two minutes later, a mixture of one mL of 1% lidocaine with 80 mg triamcinolone acetonide was injected. Immediately followingthe completion of the injection, the patient reported extreme bilateral lower extremity pain. He became diaphoretic, followed by marked weakness in his bilateral lower extremities and numbness up to his lower abdomen. The patient was transferred to the emergency department for evaluation. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) of the lumbar and thoracic spine was completed 5 hours postinjection. It showed a small high T2 signal focus in the thoracic spinal cord at the T7-T8 level. The patient was admitted to the critical care unit for neurological observation and treatment with intravenous methylprednisolone. Follow-up MRI revealed a hyper-intense T2 and short-tau inversion recovery signal in the central portion of the spinal cord beginning at the level of the T6 superior endplate and extending caudally to the T9-T10 level with accompanying development of mild spinal cord expansion. The patient was diagnosed with paraplegia from acute spinal cord infarction. At discharge to an acute inpatient rehabilitation program, the patient had persistent bilateral lower extremity paralysis, and incontinence of bowel and bladder functions. In the present patient, DSA performed twice and an anesthetic test dose did not prevent a catastrophic spinal cord infarction and resulting paraplegia. DSA use is clearly not foolproof and may not be sufficient to identify potentially life-or-limb threatening consequences of lumbar TFESI. We believe that this report should open further discussion regarding adding the possibility of these catastrophic events in the informed consent process for lumbar TFESIs, as it has for cervical TFESI. Utilizing blunt needles or larger bevel needles in place of sharp, cutting needles may minimize the chances of this event occurring. Considering eliminating use of particulate steroids for TFESI should be evaluated, although the use of nonparticulate agents remains controversial due to the perception that their respective duration of action is less than that of particulate steroids.
http://www.painphysicianjournal.com/2012/december/2012;15;515-523.pdf
Detección de flujo intravascular durante inyecciones epidurales transforaminales: Evaluación prospectiva
Intravascular flow detection during transforaminal epidural injections: a prospective assessment.
El Abd OH, Amadera JE1, Pimentel DC, Pimentel TS.
Pain Physician. 2014 Jan-Feb;17(1):21-7.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Transforaminal epidural steroid injections (TFESI) are a mainstay in the treatment of spine pain. Though this commonly performed procedure is generally felt to be safe, devastating complications following inadvertent intra-arterial injections of particulate steroid have been reported. The use of digital subtraction angiography (DSA) has been suggested as a means of detecting intra-arterial needle placements prior to medication injection.OBJECTIVE:To examine the efficacy of DSA in detecting intra-arterial needle placements during TFESI.STUDY DESIGN:Prospective cohort study evaluating the impact of DSA on detecting intra-arterial needle placements during TFESI.METHODS:We enrolled 150 consecutive patients presenting to a university-affiliated spine center with discogenic and/or radicular symptoms affecting the cervical, lumbar, and sacral regions. For each injection, prior to imaging with DSA, traditional methods for vascular penetration detection were employed, including the identification of blood in the needle hub (flash), negative aspiration of blood prior to injection, and live fluoroscopic injection of contrast. Once these tests were performed and negative for signs of intra-arterial needle placement, DSA imaging was utilized prior to medication administration for identification of vascular flow.RESULTS:A total number of 222 TFESI were performed, 41 injections at the cervical levels (18.47%), 113 at the lumbar levels (50.9%), and 68 at the sacral levels (30.36%). Flash was observed in 13 injections performed (5.85% of the total number of injections): one (0.45%) in the cervical, 2 (0.9%) in the lumbar, and 10 (4.5%) in the sacral levels. In 11 TFESI blood aspiration was obtained (4.95% of all injections): 3 (1.3%) in cervical, 4 (1.8%) in lumbar, and 4 (1.8%) in sacral injections. Live fluoroscopy during contrast injection detected 46 (20.72%) intravascular flow patterns: 7 (3.1%) cervical, 17 (7.6%) lumbar, and 22 (9.9%) sacral. DSA identified an additional 5 intravascular injections after all previous steps had resulted in negative vascular penetration signs, which accounted for 2.25% of all injections.LIMITATIONS:This is a prospective, single-center study with a relatively small number of patients and no control group.CONCLUSION:
DSA detected additional 5.26% intravascular needle placements following traditional methods. Our findings also support other studies that conclude TFESI are generally a safe procedure. We recommend that special attention should be paid to the sacral injections as vascular penetration was statistically higher than at other levels.
http://www.painphysicianjournal.com/2014/january/2014;17;21-27.pdf
Atentamente
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
www.anestesia-dolor.org
Hemos completado la edición correspondiente al mes de Septiembre 2014, los artículos incluídos son los siguientes.
RESÚMENES EPISTEMONIKOS DE LA EVIDENCIA
¿Es efectivo el ácido ursodeoxicólico en cirrosis biliar primaria?
Gabriel Rada, Macarena Mac-Namara (Chile)
Medwave 2014 Sep;14(8):e6019
http://dx.doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2014.08.6019
ANÁLISIS CRÍTICO
Entrenamiento de fuerza isométrica para la disminución de la presión arterial sistólica: CAT
Alexis Espinoza Salinas, Pablo Sánchez Aguilera, Edson Zafra Santos, Cristian Cofre Bolados, Hugo Prado Núñez, Gustavo Pavés Von Martens (Chile)
Medwave 2014 Sep;14(8):e601
http://dx.doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2014.08.6017
ESTUDIOS PRIMARIOS
Calidad de sueño y atención selectiva en estudiantes universitarios: estudio descriptivo transversal
Silvia Alicia Fontana, Waldina Raimondi, María Laura Rizzo (Argentina)
Medwave 2014 Sep;14(8):e6015.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2014.08.6015
Estudio de exactitud diagnóstica que compara fosfatasa alcalina total con paratohormona intacta 1-84 para el diagnóstico de osteodistrofia renal de alto recambio en la insuficiencia renal crónica en hemodiálisis
Andrés Marcelo Rojas González, Marcela Opazo Valenzuela, Sergio Muñoz Navarro (Chile)
Medwave 2014 Sep;14(8):e6014
http://dx.doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2014.08.6014
ACTUALIDAD
Comisión presidencial sobre reforma de seguros privados de salud encaminada a proponer más que ajustes acotados de un sistema no mancomunado
Tania Herrera (Chile)
Medwave 2014 Sep;14(8):e6018
http://dx.doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2014.08.6018
TEMAS Y CONTROVERSIAS EN BIOESTADÍSTICA
Causalidad y predicción: diferencias y puntos de contacto
Luis Carlos Silva Ayçaguer (Cuba)
Medwave 2014 Sep;14(8):e6016
http://dx.doi.org/10.5867/medwave.2014.08.6016
PORTADA MEDWAVE
http://www.medwave.cl
Una reciente investigación ha descubierto en animales de experimentación un nuevo mecanismo que contribuye al mejor conocimiento del daño neuronal ocurrido tras un ictus. El trabajo abre la puerta al desarrollo de nuevos tratamientos neuroprotectores que palien los trastornos neurológicos provocados por la isquemia cerebral. Una parte importante del deterioro neuronal causado por una isquemia cerebral se debe a la alteración en los niveles de glutamato, el neurotransmisor excitador más abundante del cerebro, que actúa a su vez como una potente neurotoxina cuando su concentración se eleva, como ocurre durante la isquemia. El nuevo hallazgo pone de manifiesto la importancia de una molécula, el intercambiador cistina-glutámico (xCT), en el aumento de la concentración de glutamato hasta niveles tóxicos en modelos experimentales que reproducen las principales características del ictus en pacientes. Los resultados evidencian que, durante la isquemia, el glutamato se transporta fuera de la célula a través del intercambiador xCT, acumulándose hasta niveles letales para las neuronas. A su vez, mediante tomografía por emisión de positrones se ha observado que los niveles de xCT están elevados en ratas sometidas a isquemia, lo cual subraya su importancia en el proceso de ictus.
La liberación de glutamato contribuye al daño isquémico
Extrasynaptic glutamate release through cystine/glutamate antiporter contributes to ischemic damage.
Soria FN, Pérez-Samartín A, Martin A, Gona KB, Llop J, Szczupak B, Chara JC, Matute C, Domercq M.
J Clin Invest. 2014 Aug 1;124(8):3645-55. doi: 10.1172/JCI71886. Epub 2014 Jul 18.
Abstract
During brain ischemia, an excessive release of glutamate triggers neuronal death through the overactivation of NMDA receptors (NMDARs); however, the underlying pathways that alter glutamate homeostasis and whether synaptic or extrasynaptic sites are responsible for excess glutamate remain controversial. Here, we monitored ischemia-gated currents in pyramidal cortical neurons in brain slices from rodents in response to oxygen and glucose deprivation (OGD) as a real-time glutamate sensor to identify the source of glutamate release and determined the extent of neuronal damage. Blockade of excitatory amino acid transporters or vesicular glutamate release did not inhibit ischemia-gated currents or neuronal damage after OGD. In contrast, pharmacological inhibition of the cystine/glutamate antiporter dramatically attenuated ischemia-gated currents and cell death after OGD. Compared with control animals, mice lacking a functional cystine/glutamate antiporter exhibited reduced anoxic depolarization and neuronal death in response to OGD. Furthermore, glutamate released by the cystine/glutamate antiporter activated extrasynaptic, but not synaptic, NMDARs, and blockade of extrasynaptic NMDARs reduced ischemia-gated currents and cell damage after OGD. Finally, PET imaging showed increased cystine/glutamate antiporter function in ischemic rats. Altogether, these data suggest that cystine/glutamate antiporter function is increased in ischemia, contributing to elevated extracellular glutamate concentration, overactivation of extrasynaptic NMDARs, and ischemic neuronal death.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4109556/pdf/JCI71886.pdf
http://www.jci.org/articles/view/71886/pdf
Atentamente
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
www.anestesia-dolor.org
¿Deberían todos los pacientes tiener un ECG de reposo de 12 derivaciones antes de la cirugía electiva no cardiaca?
Should all patients have a resting 12-lead ECG before elective noncardiac surgery?
Sharma P, Dhungel S, Prabhakaran A.
Clev Clin J Med October 2014
http://www.ccjm.org/content/81/10/594.full.pdf+html
Valoración preoperatoria. De las pruebas de rutina a la investigación individualizada
Preoperative risk assessment--from routine tests to individualized investigation.
Böhmer AB1, Wappler F, Zwissler B.
Dtsch Arztebl Int. 2014 Jun 20;111(25):437-45; quiz 446. doi: 10.3238/arztebl.2014.0437.
Abstract
BACKGROUND:Risk assessment in adults who are about to undergo elective surgery (other than cardiac and thoracic procedures) involves history-taking, physical examination, and ancillary studies performed for individual indications. Further testing beyond the history and physical examination is often of low predictive value for perioperative complications.METHOD:
This review is based on pertinent articles that were retrieved by a selective search in the Medline and Cochrane Library databases and on the consensus-derived recommendations of the German specialty societies. RESULTS:The history and physical examination remain the central components of preoperative risk assessment. Advanced age is not, in itself, a reason for ancillary testing. Laboratory testing should be performed only if relevant organ disease is known or suspected, or to assess the potential side effects of pharmacotherapy. Electrocardiography as a screening test seems to add little relevant information, even in patients with stable heart disease. A chest X-ray should be obtained only if a disease is suspected whose detection would have clinical consequences in the perioperative period. CONCLUSION:In preoperative risk assessment, the history and physical examination are the strongest predictors of perioperative complications. Ancillary tests are indicated on an individual basis if the history and physical examination reveal that significant disease may be present.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4095591/pdf/Dtsch_Arztebl_Int-111-0437.pdf
Beneficios y daño de las pruebas preoperatorias de rutina. Efectividad comparativa
Benefits and Harms of Routine Preoperative Testing: Comparative Effectiveness [Internet].
Editors Balk EM, Earley A, Hadar N, Shah N, Trikalinos TA.
Rockville (MD): Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality (US); 2014 Jan. Report No.: 14-EHC009-EF. AHRQ Comparative Effectiveness Reviews.
Excerpt
OBJECTIVES:Preoperative testing is used to guide the action plan for patients undergoing surgical and other procedures that require anesthesia and to predict potential postoperative complications. There is uncertainty whether routine or per-protocol testing in the absence of a specific indication prevents complications and improves outcomes, or whether it causes unnecessary delays, costs, and harms due to false-positive results.DATA SOURCES:We searched MEDLINE® and Ovid Healthstar® (from inception to July 22, 2013), as well as Cochrane Central Trials Registry and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews.REVIEW METHODS:We included comparative and cohort studies of both adults and children undergoing surgical and other procedures requiring either anesthesia or sedation (excluding local anesthesia). We included all preoperative tests that were likely to be conducted routinely (in all patients) or on a per-protocol basis (in selected patients). For comparative studies, the comparator of interest was either no testing or ad hoc testing done at the discretion of the clinician. We also looked for studies that compared routine and per-protocol testing. The outcomes of interest were mortality, perioperative events, complications, patient satisfaction, resource utilization, and harms related to testing.RESULTS:Fifty-seven studies (14 comparative and 43 cohort) met inclusion criteria for the review. Well-conducted randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of cataract surgeries suggested that rout
i ne testing with electrocardiography, complete blood count, and/or a basic metabolic panel did not affect procedure cancellations (2 RCTs, relative risks [RRs] of 1.00 or 0.97), and there was no clinically important difference for total complications (3 RCTs, RR = 0.99; 95% confidence interval, 0.86 to 1.14). Two RCTs and six nonrandomized comparative studies of general elective surgeries in adults varied greatly in the surgeries and patients included, along with the routine or per-protocol tests used. They also mostly had high risk of bias due to lack of adjustment for patient and clinician factors, making their results unreliable. Therefore, they yielded insufficient evidence regarding the effect of routine or per-protocol testing on complications and other outcomes. There was also insufficient evidence for patients undergoing other procedures. No studies reported on quality of life, patient satisfaction, or harms related to testing. CONCLUSIONS:There is high strength of evidence that, for patients scheduled for cataract surgery, routine preoperative testing has no effect on total perioperative complications or procedure cancellation. There is insufficient evidence for all other procedures and insufficient evidence comparing routine and per-protocol testing. There is no evidence regarding quality of life or satisfaction, resource utilization, or harms of testing and no evidence regarding other factors that may affect the balance of benefits and harms. The findings of the cataract surgery studies are not reliably applicable to other patients undergoing other higher risk procedures. Except arguably for cataract surgery, numerous future adequately powered RCTs or well-conducted and analyzed observational comparative studies are needed to evaluate the benefits and harms of routine preoperative testing in specific groups of patients with different risk factors for surgical and anesthetic complications undergoing specific types of procedures and types of anesthesia.
http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmedhealth/PMH0063242/pdf/TOC.pdf
Atentamente
Anestesiología y Medicina del Dolor
www.anestesia-dolor.org
