Bitar George, Mullis William, Jacobs William, Matthews David, Beasley Michael, Smith Kevin, Watterson Paul, Getz Stanley, Capizzi Peter, Eaves Felmont
Charlotte Plastic Surgery Center, NC, USA.
Plast Reconstr Surg. 2003 Jan;111(1):150-6; discussion 157-8. doi: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000037756.88297.BC.
Office-based surgery has several potential benefits over hospital-based surgery, including cost containment, ease of scheduling, and convenience to both patients and surgeons. Scrutiny of office-based surgery by regulators and state-licensing agencies has increased and must be addressed by improved documentation of safety and efficacy. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the authors' office-based plastic surgery, a review was undertaken of 3615 consecutive patients undergoing 4778 outpatient plastic surgery procedures under monitored anesthesia care/sedation in a single office. The charts of 3615 consecutive patients who had undergone office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation between May of 1995 and May of 2000 were reviewed. In all cases, the anesthesia protocol used included sedation with midazolam, propofol, and a narcotic administered by a board-certified registered nurse anesthetist with local anesthesia provided by the surgeon. Charts were reviewed for patient profile, types of procedures, multiple procedures, duration of anesthesia, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and complications related to anesthesia. Outcomes measured included death, airway compromise, dyspnea, hypotension, venous thrombosis, pulmonary emboli, protracted nausea and vomiting lasting more than 24 hours, and unplanned hospital admissions. Statistical analyses were performed using the Microsoft Excel program and the SAS package. Results were as follows: 92.3 percent of the patients were female and 7.7 percent were male, with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 3 to 83 years). Patients underwent aesthetic (95.6 percent) and reconstructive (4.4 percent) plastic surgery procedures. Same-session multiple procedures occurred in 24.8 percent of patients. The vast majority of patients were healthy: 84.3 percent of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class I, 15.6 percent were class II, and 0.1 percent were class III. The operations required a mean of 111 minutes. There were no deaths, ventilator requirements, deep venous thromboses, or pulmonary emboli. Complications were as follows: 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had dyspnea that resolved, 0.2 percent (n = 6) of patients had protracted nausea and vomiting, and 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had unplanned hospital admissions (<24 hours). One patient had an emergent intubation. No prolonged adverse effects were noted. There was a 30-day follow-up minimum. Outpatient surgery is an important aspect of plastic surgery. It was shown that office-based surgery with intravenous sedation, performed by board-certified plastic surgeons and nurse anesthetists, is safe. Appropriate accreditation, safe anesthesia protocols, and proper patient selection constitute the basis for safe and efficacious office-based outpatient plastic surgery.
与医院手术相比,门诊手术有几个潜在的好处,包括成本控制、易于安排时间以及对患者和外科医生都方便。监管机构和州许可机构对门诊手术的审查有所增加,必须通过改进安全性和有效性的记录来加以应对。为了评估作者的门诊整形手术的安全性和有效性,对在单一办公室接受监测麻醉护理/镇静下进行4778例门诊整形手术的3615例连续患者进行了回顾性研究。回顾了1995年5月至2000年5月期间在门诊接受监测麻醉护理/镇静的3615例连续患者的病历。在所有病例中,所使用的麻醉方案包括咪达唑仑、丙泊酚镇静以及由具有执业资格的注册护士麻醉师给予的一种麻醉剂,并由外科医生提供局部麻醉。审查病历以了解患者概况、手术类型、多项手术、麻醉持续时间、美国麻醉医师协会分级以及与麻醉相关的并发症。所测量的结果包括死亡、气道梗阻、呼吸困难、低血压、静脉血栓形成、肺栓塞、持续超过24小时的长时间恶心和呕吐以及意外住院。使用Microsoft Excel程序和SAS软件包进行统计分析。结果如下:92.3%的患者为女性,7.7%为男性,平均年龄42.7岁(范围3至83岁)。患者接受美容整形手术(95.6%)和重建整形手术(4.4%)。24.8%的患者在同一次手术中进行了多项手术。绝大多数患者健康:84.3%的患者为美国麻醉医师协会I级,15.6%为II级,0.1%为III级。手术平均需要111分钟。没有死亡、需要呼吸机支持、深静脉血栓形成或肺栓塞的情况。并发症如下:0.05%(n = 2)的患者出现呼吸困难但已缓解,0.2%(n = 6)的患者出现长时间恶心和呕吐,0.05%(n = 2)的患者意外住院(<24小时)。1例患者进行了紧急插管。未观察到长期不良反应。至少有30天的随访。门诊手术是整形手术的一个重要方面。结果表明,由具有执业资格的整形外科医生和护士麻醉师进行的静脉镇静门诊手术是安全的。适当的认证、安全的麻醉方案以及合适的患者选择构成了安全有效的门诊整形手术的基础。