...
首页> 外文期刊>BMC Anesthesiology >Initial experience with percutaneous coronary sinus catheter placement in minimally invasive cardiac surgery in an academic center
【24h】

Initial experience with percutaneous coronary sinus catheter placement in minimally invasive cardiac surgery in an academic center

机译:在学术中心进行微创心脏手术的经皮冠状静脉窦导管置入的初步经验

获取原文
   

获取外文期刊封面封底 >>

       

摘要

Background Placement of a percutaneous coronary sinus catheter (CSC) by an anesthesiologist for retrograde cardioplegia in minimally invasive cardiac surgery is relatively safe in experienced hands. However, the popularity of its placement remains limited to a small number of centers due to its perceived complexity and potential complications. Methods We retrospectively reviewed all cardiac cases performed by one surgeon between December 2009 and April 2012. The reviewed cases were divided into two groups: cardiac cases with percutaneous CSC placement (CSC group) and cardiac cases without placement (control group). Anesthesia preparation time (APT) was then compared between the CSC group and control group. In the CSC group, cases were further divided into two groups. One group contained cases with an APT of less than 90?min (success group) and the other contained cases with an APT greater than or equal to 90?min or cases with CSC placement failure (delay/failure group). Patients’ characteristics, type of surgery, and transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) findings were compared between the two groups (success group vs. delay/failure group) to identify variables associated with prolongation of the APT or CSC placement failure. Results Percutaneous CSC placement was required in 83 cases (CSC group). The catheter was successfully placed in 74 of those cases. We experienced one complication, coronary sinus injury after multiple attempts at placing the catheter. The mean APT was 102?±?31?min in the CSC group ( n =?81) and 42?±?15?min in the control group ( n =?285). We could not identify any variables associated with prolongation of the APT or catheter placement failure. Conclusions The success rate of the placement was 89.1?% in our academic center. On average, placing the CSC added approximately one additional hour to the APT. This time is not an accurate representation of true catheter placement time, as it included time for preparation of the CSC, TEE, and fluoroscopy. We experienced one documented complication (coronary sinus injury), which was immediately diagnosed by TEE and fluoroscopy in the operating room. No variables associated with prolongation of APT or CSC placement failure were identified.
机译:背景技术由麻醉师在经微创心脏手术中放置逆行性心脏麻痹的经皮冠状静脉窦导管(CSC)在经验丰富的手中相对安全。但是,由于它的复杂性和潜在的复杂性,其布局的受欢迎程度仍然局限于少数几个中心。方法回顾性分析2009年12月至2012年4月由一名外科医生进行的所有心脏手术病例,将其分为两组:经皮CSC放置的心脏病例(CSC组)和不放置CSC的心脏病例(对照组)。然后在CSC组和对照组之间比较麻醉准备时间(APT)。在CSC组中,病例被进一步分为两组。一组包含APT小于90?min的病例(成功组),另一组包含APT大于或等于90?min的病例或CSC放置失败的病例(延迟/失败组)。比较两组患者的特征,手术类型和经食道超声心动图(TEE)结果(成功组vs.延迟/失败组),以确定与APT或CSC放置失败时间延长相关的变量。结果83例(CSC组)需要经皮CSC放置。在其中74例病例中,导管被成功放置。在多次尝试放置导管后,我们经历了一种并发症,冠状窦损伤。 CSC组的平均APT为102?±?31?min(n =?81),而对照组的平均APT为42?±?15?min(n =?285)。我们无法确定与APT延长或导管放置失败相关的任何变量。结论在我们的学术中心,实习的成功率为89.1%。平均而言,放置CSC会使APT大约增加一小时。此时间不能准确表示真实的导管放置时间,因为它包括准备CSC,TEE和荧光检查的时间。我们经历了一种记录在案的并发症(冠状窦损伤),该并发症在手术室中通过TEE和透视检查立即诊断出来。没有发现与APT延长或CSC放置失败相关的变量。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号