Suppr超能文献

白内障国家数据集对55567例手术的电子多中心审计:麻醉技术与并发症

The Cataract National Dataset Electronic Multi-centre Audit of 55,567 operations: anaesthetic techniques and complications.

作者信息

El-Hindy N, Johnston R L, Jaycock P, Eke T, Braga A J, Tole D M, Galloway P, Sparrow J M

机构信息

Eye Department, St James' University Hospital, Leeds, UK.

出版信息

Eye (Lond). 2009 Jan;23(1):50-5. doi: 10.1038/sj.eye.6703031. Epub 2008 Mar 14.

Abstract

PURPOSE

The primary aim of this study was to detail anaesthetic techniques and complications for cataract surgery in the UK.

METHODS

The Cataract National Dataset was extracted from 12 National Health Service Trusts that used the same electronic patient record system between November 2001 and July 2006 on a total of 55,567 cataract operations.

RESULTS

Anaesthesia was administered by an ophthalmologist in 56.7% of the cases, a career anaesthetist in 42.1% of the cases, a clinical assistant anaesthetist in 0.3% of the cases, and staff were not recorded in 0.9% of the cases. Local anaesthesia (LA) was used in 95.5%, with topical anaesthesia alone in 22.3% (range by site, 0-99.8%), topical and intracameral in 4.7% (range, 0-24.1%), subtenons in 46.9% (range, 0-81.8%), peribulbar in 19.5% (range, 0-63.4%), and retrobulbar in 0.5% (range, 0-5.3%). One or more minor complications occurred in 4.3% of 38,058 local blocks administered by either sharp needle or subtenons (blunt) cannula. Minor complications were 2.3 times more common with subtenons blocks (P<0.001). Serious complications, defined as sight or life threatening occurred in 25 eyes, 0.066%, undergoing sharp needle or subtenons cannula blocks. Sharp needle techniques had a 2.5-fold increased risk of serious complications compared with subtenons cannula techniques (P=0.026).

CONCLUSION

Subtenons anaesthesia was the most widely used anaesthetic technique for cataract surgery but wide variation existed by site. There was a low rate of reported LA complications. There was a statistically significant increased risk of serious complications with sharp needle anaesthesia compared with subtenons technique.

摘要

目的

本研究的主要目的是详细阐述英国白内障手术的麻醉技术及并发症。

方法

白内障国家数据集取自2001年11月至2006年7月期间使用相同电子病历系统的12家国民保健服务信托机构,共涉及55567例白内障手术。

结果

56.7%的病例由眼科医生实施麻醉,42.1%的病例由职业麻醉医生实施麻醉,0.3%的病例由临床助理麻醉医生实施麻醉,0.9%的病例未记录实施人员。95.5%的病例使用局部麻醉(LA),其中仅表面麻醉的占22.3%(各手术部位的范围为0 - 99.8%),表面麻醉联合前房内注射的占4.7%(范围为0 - 24.1%),球周下注射的占46.9%(范围为0 - 81.8%),球后注射的占19.5%(范围为0 - 63.4%),球后阻滞的占0.5%(范围为0 - 5.3%)。在38058例通过锐针或球周下(钝性)套管进行的局部阻滞中,4.3%出现了一种或多种轻微并发症。球周下阻滞出现轻微并发症的几率是其他方法的2.3倍(P<0.001)。在接受锐针或球周下套管阻滞的患者中,有25只眼(0.066%)出现了定义为威胁视力或生命的严重并发症。与球周下套管技术相比,锐针技术出现严重并发症的风险增加了2.5倍(P = 0.026)。

结论

球周下麻醉是白内障手术中使用最广泛的麻醉技术,但各手术部位存在较大差异。局部麻醉并发症的报告发生率较低。与球周下技术相比,锐针麻醉出现严重并发症的风险在统计学上显著增加。

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验