Mancuso Abigail C, Lee Kelsey, Zhang Ran, Hoover Elizabeth A, Stockdale Colleen, Hardy-Fairbanks Abbey J
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, IA.
University of Iowa Hospitals and Clinics, 200 Hawkins Drive, Iowa City, IA.
Contraception. 2017 Mar;95(3):288-291. doi: 10.1016/j.contraception.2016.09.012. Epub 2016 Oct 3.
Safety of outpatient dilation and evacuations with intravenous (iv) sedation without intubation has been demonstrated, but there is a paucity of data on deep iv sedation on an inpatient second trimester surgical termination population. The purpose of this study is to evaluate complications of deep sedation with propofol without the use of intubation during second trimester surgical terminations in an inpatient teaching institution.
A retrospective chart review of all obstetrical and anesthetic data from inpatient dilation and evacuations between gestational ages 15 0/7 and 24 0/7 during the years 2002 to 2015. We examined 332 patient charts. Primary outcomes included suspected perioperative pulmonary aspiration and conversion to an intubated general anesthesia.
No perioperative pulmonary aspiration cases were either suspected or confirmed. There were a total of 14 (4.2%) patients that had intubation compared to 313 with natural airway (94.3%) or laryngeal mask (1.5%). Of the 14 intubated, 9 (64%) were started with intubation, and 5 (36%) were converted during the procedure (1.7% of those started with nonintubated anesthesia). Cases requiring intubation were associated with longer procedure times (p=<0.001), higher American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class (p=0.038), greater estimated blood loss (p=<0.001) and a primary indication of maternal health (p=<0.001) for the dilation and evacuation.
Deep sedation without intubation appears safe in a hospital setting with few complications reported.
Deep sedation without intubation for operating room dilation and evacuation is a safe option that rarely resulted in conversion to intubation and, in most cases, should be the anesthesia method of choice at initiation in an inpatient setting.
已证实门诊静脉镇静下不插管进行扩张刮宫术是安全的,但关于住院中期妊娠手术终止妊娠时深度静脉镇静的数据较少。本研究的目的是评估在住院教学机构中,孕中期手术终止妊娠时使用丙泊酚进行深度镇静且不插管的并发症。
对2002年至2015年期间孕龄在15 0/7至24 0/7周之间住院扩张刮宫术的所有产科和麻醉数据进行回顾性图表审查。我们检查了332份患者病历。主要结局包括疑似围手术期肺误吸和转为插管全身麻醉。
未发现疑似或确诊的围手术期肺误吸病例。共有14例(4.2%)患者进行了插管,313例采用自然气道(94.3%)或喉罩(1.5%)。在14例插管患者中,9例(64%)一开始就进行了插管,5例(36%)在手术过程中转为插管(占非插管麻醉起始患者的1.7%)。需要插管的病例与手术时间较长(p<0.001)、美国麻醉医师协会(ASA)分级较高(p=0.038)、估计失血量较大(p<0.001)以及扩张刮宫术的主要指征为母体健康(p<0.001)有关。
在医院环境中,不插管的深度镇静似乎是安全的,报告的并发症较少。
手术室扩张刮宫术不插管的深度镇静是一种安全的选择,很少导致转为插管,在大多数情况下,应是住院环境中起始时的首选麻醉方法。