Suppr超能文献

正反方辩论:所有全身麻醉是否都应采用目标控制丙泊酚输注,并通过麻醉深度的客观监测来指导?

Pro-Con Debate: Should All General Anesthesia Be Done Using Target-Controlled Propofol Infusion Guided by Objective Monitoring of Depth of Anesthesia?

机构信息

From the Department for Anesthesiology, Intensive, Rescue and Pain medicine, Kantonsspital St Gallen, St Gallen, Switzerland.

Department of Anesthesiology, University of Groningen, University Medical Centre Groningen, Groningen, the Netherlands.

出版信息

Anesth Analg. 2023 Sep 1;137(3):565-575. doi: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000006293. Epub 2023 Aug 17.

Abstract

In this Pro-Con commentary article, we discuss whether all general anesthesia should be done using target-controlled propofol anesthesia guided by monitoring of depth of anesthesia. This is an ongoing debate since more than 25 years, representing a scientific, cultural as well as geographical divide in the anesthesia community. The Pro side argues that total intravenous anesthesia causes less postoperative nausea and higher patient satisfaction than anesthesia using volatile anesthetics. Target-controlled infusion (TCI) of anesthetic agents allows for better titration of intravenous anesthesia using pharmacokinetic models. Processed EEG monitors, such as bispectral index monitoring, allows for better assessing the effect of TCI anesthesia than solely assessment of clinical parameters, such as ECG or blood pressure. The combination of TCI propofol and objective depth of anesthesia monitoring allows creating a pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic profile for each patient. Finally, anesthesia using volatile anesthetics poses health risks for healthcare professionals and contributes to greenhouse effect. The Con side argues that for procedures accompanied with ischemia and reperfusion injury of an organ or tissue and for patients suffering from a severe inflammation' the use of volatile anesthetics might well have its advantages above propofol. In times of sudden shortage of drugs, volatile anesthetics can overcome the restriction in the operating theater or even on the intensive care unit, which is another advantage. Volatile anesthetics can be used for induction of anesthesia when IV access is impossible, end-tidal measurements of volatile anesthetic concentration allows confirmation that patients receive anesthetics. Taking environmental considerations into account, both propofol and volatile anesthetics bear certain harm to the environment, be it as waste product or as greenhouse gases. The authors therefore suggest to carefully considering advantages and disadvantages for each patient in its according environment. A well-balanced choice based on the available literature is recommended. The authors recommend careful consideration of advantages and disadvantages of each technique when tailoring an anesthetic to meet patient needs. Where appropriate, anesthesia providers are encouraged to account for unique features of anesthetic drug behavior, patient-reported and observed postoperative outcomes, and economic and environmental considerations when choosing any of the 2 described techniques.

摘要

在这篇正反方评论文章中,我们讨论了是否所有的全身麻醉都应该使用目标控制丙泊酚麻醉,并通过监测麻醉深度来指导。这是一个持续了 25 年以上的争论,代表了麻醉界在科学、文化和地理上的分歧。赞成方认为,全凭静脉麻醉比使用挥发性麻醉剂的麻醉引起的术后恶心和患者满意度更高。麻醉剂的目标控制输注 (TCI) 允许使用药代动力学模型更好地滴定静脉麻醉。处理后的脑电图监测仪,如双频谱指数监测仪,比仅评估心电图或血压等临床参数,能更好地评估 TCI 麻醉的效果。TCI 丙泊酚和客观麻醉深度监测的结合,为每位患者创造了一个药代动力学-药效学特征。最后,使用挥发性麻醉剂会对医护人员的健康造成风险,并导致温室效应。反对方认为,对于伴有器官或组织缺血再灌注损伤的手术和患有严重炎症的患者,使用挥发性麻醉剂可能比丙泊酚更有优势。在药物突然短缺的情况下,挥发性麻醉剂可以克服手术室甚至重症监护病房的限制,这是另一个优势。当静脉通路不可能时,挥发性麻醉剂可用于诱导麻醉,呼气末挥发性麻醉剂浓度的测量可确认患者接受了麻醉剂。考虑到环境因素,丙泊酚和挥发性麻醉剂都会对环境造成一定的危害,无论是作为废物还是温室气体。因此,作者建议在每个患者的相应环境中仔细考虑每种技术的优缺点。建议根据现有文献进行平衡选择。作者建议在根据患者需求调整麻醉时,仔细考虑每种技术的优缺点。在适当的情况下,鼓励麻醉提供者考虑麻醉药物行为的独特特征、患者报告和观察到的术后结果以及经济和环境因素,在这两种描述的技术中进行选择。

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