SavedAdd your journal

Journals / Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine / 2026 / Volume: 39 Issue: 2

Retrospective analysis of the patients undergoing neuroanaesthesia between the years 2015-2019

Hasan Çetinkaya(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-4228-9063
Binnur Sarıhasan(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-8012-8981
Sezgin Bilgin(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-3031-8488
Burhan Dost(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0002-4562-1172
Esra Turunç(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)0000-0003-0159-7403
Gamze Çetinkaya(ONDOKUZ MAYIS ÜNİVERSİTESİ)
Pages
—
Publication Date
2022-03-18
DOI
—
🏛️Bibliographic metadata and full text access for this article are provided via DergiPark.
DergiPark Record ↗
✨

AI Summary & Key Takeaways

AI Insight
⚡ TL;DR(Too Long; Didn't Read)

Conclusion: It was concluded that the repetition of retrospective studies at regular intervals would contribute to the development of anesthesiology by enabling both the evaluation of the practices in the same clinic and the comparison between clinics.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:In this study, it was aimed to retrospectively evaluate the patients who underwent neuroanesthesia in our clinic between 2015 and 2019.
📊
Key Findings & Data:Material and Method: All patients who underwent neuroanesthesia between 01.01.2015 and 31.12.2019 at Ondokuz Mayıs University Medical Faculty Hospital were included in the study.
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Conclusion: It was concluded that the repetition of retrospective studies at regular intervals would contribute to the development of anesthesiology by enabling both the evaluation of the practices in the same clinic and the comparison between clinics.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2015 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Neuroanesthesia · neurosurgery · perioperative period

Abstract

In this study, it was aimed to retrospectively evaluate the patients who underwent neuroanesthesia in our clinic between 2015 and 2019. Material and Method: All patients who underwent neuroanesthesia between 01.01.2015 and 31.12.2019 at Ondokuz Mayıs University Medical Faculty Hospital were included in the study. Demographic characteristics, comorbidities, type of surgery performed, anesthesia management and complications were recorded. Results: A total of 5172 patients were included in our study. 52.9% of the patients were male and the mean age was 43.2%. It was observed that the patients were operated most frequently for herniopathy (21.3%), shunt/external ventricular drainage (19.7%) and cranial mass (18.7%), and 77.3% of the cases were elective surgery. The average duration of anesthesia was 145.9 minutes. Thiopental (46.7%) and propofol (45.6%) were used most frequently as induction agents, while rocuronium (93.7%) was preferred as neuromuscular blocking agent in almost all patients. Remifentanil (81.4%) was the most commonly used intraoperative analgesic. While inhalation anesthesia was preferred for maintenance in 3077 (59.5%) patients, total intravenous anesthesia was used in 1811 (35.1%) patients. Complications developed in 24.1% of the patients, and cardiovascular complications were observed in 71.9% of the patients. It was determined that 1282 patients (24.8%) needed postoperative intensive care. Conclusion: It was concluded that the repetition of retrospective studies at regular intervals would contribute to the development of anesthesiology by enabling both the evaluation of the practices in the same clinic and the comparison between clinics. Keywords: Neuroanesthesia, neurosurgery, perioperative period, retrospective

🔖

Cite This Article

Çetinkaya, H., Sarıhasan, B., Bilgin, S., Dost, B., Turunç, E., Çetinkaya, G. (2022). Retrospective analysis of the patients undergoing neuroanaesthesia between the years 2015-2019. Journal of Experimental and Clinical Medicine, Volume: 39 Issue: 2. https://ajindex.com/articles/1423072

📄 Full Text PDF Viewer

📄

PDF görüntüleyici hazırlanıyor...

References (18)

  1. References: 1. Sarihasan B, Madenoglu H, Satırlar ZO, Ture H, Karacalar S, Neuroanesthesia. Neuroanesthesia study group.Kayseri. MG group printing company.; 2017.
  2. Morgan GJ, Mikhail M, Murray. Clinical Anesthesiology: Ankara. Gunes Bookstore; 2015.
  3. Miller RD. Miller’s Anesthesia. İzmir: Guven Bookstore; 2010.
  4. Gokduman C, Iplikcioglu C, Cosar M. Pineal Region Tumors. Turk Neurosurg 2005;15:271-8.
  5. Bozkurt K. Retrospective analysis of cases intubated under general anesthesia. 2006:42-6.
  6. Isik HS, Gokyar A, Yildiz O, Bostanci U, Ozdemir C. Pediatric head injuries, retrospective analysis of 851 patients: an epidemiological study. TJTES 2011;17(2):166-72.
  7. Isik H, Bostanci U, Yildiz O, Ozdemir C, Gokyar A. Retrospective analysis of 954 adult patients with head injury: an epidemiological study. TJTES 2011;17(1):46.
  8. Frerk C. Predicting difficult intubation. Anaesthesia 1991;46(12):1005-8.
  9. Yegin S, Sarihasan B, Ustun YB, Bilgic B. Retrospective analysis of patients who underwent anesthesia for intracranial mass surgery between 2000 and 2010. Turk J Anaesth Reanim 2012;40(6):315-20.
  10. Sabanci U, Topcu I, Tekin S, Ekici Nz, Luleci N. Comparison of the effectiveness of preoperative tests in predicting difficult endotracheal intubation. Turk J Anaesth Reanim 2006;34(5):312-9.
  11. Dimitriou V, Voyagis GS, Brimacombe JR. Flexible Lightwand–guided Tracheal Intubation with the Intubating Laryngeal Mask Fastrach TMin Adults after Unpredicted Failed Laryngoscope-guided Tracheal Intubation. Anesthesiology. 2002;96(2):296-9.
  12. Yamada M, Nishikawa K, Kawahara F, Yoshikawa D, Saito S, Goto F. Anesthetic management for clipping a giant basilar artery aneurysm with moderate hypothermia, extracorporeal circulation assistance, and propofol infusion. J Neurosurg Anesth. 2003;15(3):274-7.
  13. Oates J, Macleod A, Oates P, Pearsall F, Howie J, Murray G. Comparison of two methods for predicting difficult intubation. Brit j Anaesth. 1991;66(3):305-9.
  14. Hambidge O, John R. Anaesthesia for neurosurgery. Beitr inten. 2016;17:625-9.
  15. Benumof J, Saidman LJ. Anesthesia & perioperative complications: Year Book Medical Pub; 1999.
  16. Gercek A, Konya D, Toktas Z, Kilic T, Pamir MN. From the anesthesiologist’s perspective retrospective analysis of perioperative complications of transsphenoidal pituitary surgery. 2006.
  17. Minami K, Nakamura M, Horishita T, Ogata J, Sata T. Complications related to anesthesia in the University of Occupational and Environmental Health Hospital. Masui The Japanese Journal of Anesthesiology. 2005;54(8):929-33.
  18. Hambidge O, John R. Anaesthesia for neurosurgery. Beitr inten. 2016;17:625-9.