Journals / Şişli Etfal Hastanesi Tıp Bülteni / 2006 / Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 2

Our practice of regional anesthesia in orthopedic surgery between 2000-2004 years

2000-2004 yılları arası ortopedik cerrahide rejyonel anestezi pratiğimiz

Pages
28–32
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)

Using of regional anesthesia has got respectively decreased ratio through these years.Spinal anesthesia has still most preferable choice in regional anesthesia in our practise.

📌 3 Key Takeaways

🎯
Objective & Hypothesis:Objective: Regional anesthesia is the method of choice in the major lower extremity surgery.
📊
Key Findings & Data:While it is blunted of the endocrine and metabolic response to surgery, it also decreases blood loss and tromboembolic complications (I).
💡
Conclusion & Impact:Using of regional anesthesia has got respectively decreased ratio through these years.Spinal anesthesia has still most preferable choice in regional anesthesia in our practise.
🔬Design:Research Article
📍Scope:2000-2004 Verileri
⚙️Variables:Anestezi · blok · Ortopedik işlemler

Abstract

Objective: Regional anesthesia is the method of choice in the major lower extremity surgery. While it is blunted of the endocrine and metabolic response to surgery, it also decreases blood loss and tromboembolic complications (I). Regional anesthesia is more attractive to patients and surgeons due to the recent introductions of improved techniques and catheters for continuous peripheral nerve blocks which brings less opi-oid consumption, earlier patient rehabilitation and higher patient satisfaction (2,3). In this retrospecive sudy, we aimed to evaluate current anesthetic practice and regional anesthesia enthusiasm in our clinic. Study Design: Our clinic documentations belong to 2000-2004 years are analysed with retrospectively. Results: Our range of regional anaesthesia was 21.98 % in between 2000-2004 years. The most preferable type of regional anaesthesia was found to be spinal anaesthesia. Our success rate in regional anesthesia for orthopedic surgery was found to be 97.48 %. Conclusions: General anestesia has stil first choice in orthopedic surgery in our clinic managements. Using of regional anesthesia has got respectively decreased ratio through these years.Spinal anesthesia has still most preferable choice in regional anesthesia in our practise.

Özet

Amaç: Rejyonel anestezi,cerrahiye endokrin ve metaholik cevabı, kan kaybını ve tromboembolik komplikasyonlan azalttığı için major alt ekstremite cerrahisinde özellikle tercih nedenidir (I). Sürekli periferik sinir blok kata terleri ve teknikte ki gelişmeler daha az opioid tüketimi, daha çabuk hasta rehabilitasyonu ve daha yüksek hasta memnuniyetini de beraberinde getirdiğinden rejyonel anestezi gerek cerrahlar gerekse hastalar için daha çekici hale gelmiştir (2,3). Bu çalışmayı planlarken biz de anestezi pratiğimizi değerlendirmeyi ve rejyonel anesteziye ilgimizi araştırmayı amaçladık. Gereç ve Yöntem: 2000-2004 yılları arasındaki anestezi klinik kayıtları retrospektif olarak gözden geçirildi. Bulgular: Kliniğimizde 2000-2004 yılları arasında uygulanan ortopedik cerrahide ki rejyonel anestezi oranımız % 21.98 idi ve en çok tercih edilen rejyonel anestezi yöntemi spinal anestezi idi. Kliniğimizin ortopedik cerrahideki rejyonel anestezi başarı oranı % 97.48 bulundu. Sonuçlar: Kliniğimiz uygulamalarında genel anestezi ortopedik cerrahide halen birinci tercihdir. Rejyonel anestezi uygulaması yıllar içinde giderek azalan bir orana sahiptir. Spinal anestezi hala kliniğimizde en çok tercih edilen rejyonel anestezi tipidir.

🔖

Cite This Article

BAŞGÜL, A., ATALAN, G., HANCI, A., SİVRİKAYA, G. U. (2006). Our practice of regional anesthesia in orthopedic surgery between 2000-2004 years. Şişli Etfal Hastanesi Tıp Bülteni, Cilt: 40 - Sayı: 2, 28–32. https://ajindex.com/articles/363551

References (10)

  1. Covino BG. Rationale for spinal anesthesia. Int Anesthesiol Clin. 1989 Spring;27(l):8-12
  2. Indelli PF,Grant SA,Nielsen K,Vail TP.Regional anesthesia in hip surgery.Clin Orthop Relat Res.2005 Dec;441:250-5
  3. Bonnet F, Marret E.lnfluence of anaesthetic and analgesic techniques on outcome after surgery.Br J Anaesth.2005 Jul;95(l):52-8
  4. Va.Peduto,P.Chevallier, A.Casati.A multicenter survey on anaesthesia practice in Italy.Minerva Anestesiol.2004;70:473-91 5. Bang-Vojdanovski B. 10 years of spinal anesthesia in infants and children for orthopedic surgery. Our clinical experience. Anaesthesist. 1996 Mar;45(3):271-7
  5. Covino BG.Rationale for spinal anesthesia.Int Anesthesiol Clin. 1989 Spring;27 (1):8-12
  6. Oldman M, McCartney C, Leung A,et all.A survey of orthopedic surgeons' attitudes and knowledge regarding regional anesthesia.Anesth Analg 2004;98:1486-1490
  7. F.Clergue,Y. Auroy,F.Pequignet,et all.French survey of anesthesia in 1996.Anesthesiology 1999;91:1509-20 9. Grau T, Fatehi S, Motsch J, Bartusseck E.Survey on current practice of regional anaesthesia in Germany, Austria, and Switzerland. Part 2: Use, success rates and tech-niques.Anaesthesist. 2004 Sep;53(9):847-55
  8. Holmstrom B, Rawal N, Arner S.The use of central regional anesthesia techniques in Sweden: results of a nation-wide survey. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1997 May;41(5):565-72
  9. U. N.Seo,Y.Kawashima, K.Irita,et all.Annual report of perioperative mortality and morbidity fort he year 2000 at certified training hospitals of Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists:with a special reference to anesthetic methods.Report of the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists Committee on Operating RRoom Safety. Masui 2002;51:542-556 12. Pedersen T.Complications and death following anaesthesia.A prospective study with special reference to the influence of patient-,anaesthesia-,and surgery-related risk factors.Dan Med Bull. 1994 Jun;41(3):319-31
  10. Puolakka R.Haasio J,Pitkanen MT,et all.Technical aspects and postoperative sequelae of spinal and epidural anesthesia:a prospective study of 3230 orthopedic patients.Reg Anesth Pain Med.2000 Sep-Oct;25 (5):488-97.