Suppr超能文献

减重手术中无阿片类药物麻醉:倾向评分匹配分析。

Opioid-Free Anesthesia in Bariatric Surgery: a Propensity Score-Matched Analysis.

机构信息

Department of Surgery, Lugano Regional Hospital, EOC, Via Tesserete, 6900, Lugano, Switzerland.

Department of Surgery, Locarno Regional Hospital, EOC, Via Dell'Ospedale, 6600, Locarno, Switzerland.

出版信息

Obes Surg. 2022 May;32(5):1673-1680. doi: 10.1007/s11695-022-06012-0. Epub 2022 Mar 16.

Abstract

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing bariatric surgery are at particular high risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Few studies have shown the superiority of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) over general anesthesia with opioids in bariatric surgery. The aim was to investigate the potential advantages of the OFA in bariatric surgery.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This is a retrospective study on a prospectively collected database that included bariatric patients over a 3-year period. All patients who underwent bariatric surgery at our institution were included and divided into opioid-free or standard anesthesia. The primary endpoint was the length of hospital stay. Data was collected and analyzed using a propensity score.

RESULTS

We included 344 patients, of these 209 (60.8%) received opioid-free and 135 (39.2%) received a standard anesthesia. Mean age was 46.2 ± 11.2 years, 265 (77.0%) patients were female, and 238 (69.2%) had at least one associated medical problem. The two groups were similar in terms of age, gender, BMI, associated medical problems, and type of operations. Postoperatively, we observed no significant difference in opioid requirement, while significantly less doses of antiemetics were administered in the OFA group at postoperative day 1 (0.4 ± 0.7 vs. 0.7 ± 1.0 doses, p = 0.006) and 2 (0.1 ± 0.4 vs. 0.2 ± 0.6 doses, p = 0.022). Length of stay was significantly shorter in the OFA group (2.8 ± 0.9 vs. 3.5 ± 2.0 days, p < 0.001) both in the overall and in the propensity score-matched analyses.

CONCLUSION

OFA is effective for patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Perioperative outcomes are similar, while OFA patients required less antiemetics and were discharged earlier from hospital.

摘要

目的

接受减重手术的患者术后恶心和呕吐(PONV)的风险特别高。很少有研究表明,在减重手术中,无阿片类药物麻醉(OFA)优于含阿片类药物的全身麻醉。本研究旨在探讨 OFA 在减重手术中的潜在优势。

材料和方法

这是一项对前瞻性收集的数据库进行的回顾性研究,该数据库纳入了 3 年内接受减重手术的患者。所有在我院接受减重手术的患者均被纳入并分为无阿片类药物或标准麻醉。主要终点是住院时间。使用倾向评分收集和分析数据。

结果

我们纳入了 344 例患者,其中 209 例(60.8%)接受了无阿片类药物麻醉,135 例(39.2%)接受了标准麻醉。平均年龄为 46.2±11.2 岁,265 例(77.0%)为女性,238 例(69.2%)至少有一种合并症。两组在年龄、性别、BMI、合并症和手术类型方面相似。术后,我们观察到两组在阿片类药物需求方面无显著差异,但在 OFA 组中,术后第 1 天(0.4±0.7 与 0.7±1.0 剂量,p=0.006)和第 2 天(0.1±0.4 与 0.2±0.6 剂量,p=0.022)使用的止吐药剂量明显更少。OFA 组的住院时间明显更短(2.8±0.9 与 3.5±2.0 天,p<0.001),总体和倾向评分匹配分析均如此。

结论

OFA 对接受减重手术的患者有效。围手术期结果相似,但 OFA 患者需要更少的止吐药,并且更早出院。

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