首页> 外文期刊>Pferdeheilkunde >Comparison of non-assisted versus head and tail rope-assisted recovery after emergency abdominal surgery in horses
【24h】

Comparison of non-assisted versus head and tail rope-assisted recovery after emergency abdominal surgery in horses

机译:马紧急腹部手术后非辅助与头和尾绳辅助恢复的比较

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

The objective of this study was to compare anaesthetic recoveries without assistance (group NA) to a head and tail rope-assisted technique (group A) after emergency abdominal surgery in horses. Additionally, possible risk factors for the quality of recovery (S: safe, NS: non-safe) were investigated and possible complications associated to the head and tail rope technique recorded. For that purpose 200 anaesthetic protocols (100 NA, 100A) from horses that all received a standardised medetomidine-isoflurane balanced anaesthesia regime and medetomidine in combination with morphine for recovery were analysed retrospectively. No significant difference regarding recovery score was detected between NA and A horses. Fatalitalities (3/100 in each group) were similarly distributed between groups. However, in group NA only one horse died because of trauma during recovery. The other two horses died before attempting to stand up. All 3 horses that died in group A were euthanized because of trauma. Hypoxemia (defined as arterial oxygen partial pressure <60mmHg) during anaesthesia was a risk factor for non-safe recoveries. No influence was detected for age, weight, duration of general anaesthesia, reason of colic surgery, recovery technique (A, NA), hypotension during anaesthesia, time in lateral recumbency, time in sternal recumbency and time until standing. Several technical complications (material fail, twisting of ropes, halters slipping off and loss of ropes) were observed using the head and tail ropes, probably being partially responsible for the unexpectedly high number of dangerous and fatal recoveries observed in group A. The present study could not demonstrate that the head and tail rope technique can reduce fatalities or improve anaesthetic recovery scores after emergency abdominal surgery in horses. Hypoxemia during general anaesthesia increases the risk of non-safe recovery.
机译:这项研究的目的是比较在进行紧急腹部手术后,在没有帮助的情况下(NA组)的麻醉恢复与在头和尾绳辅助下的技术(A组)的麻醉恢复。此外,还调查了恢复质量的可能危险因素(S:安全,NS:不安全),并记录了与头和尾绳技术有关的可能并发症。为此,回顾性分析了所有均接受标准美托咪定-异氟醚平衡麻醉方案和美托咪定联合吗啡恢复的马的200种麻醉方案(100 NA,100A)。在NA和A马之间未发现关于恢复分数的显着差异。致命性(每组3/100)在各组之间相似地分布。但是,在NA组中,只有一匹马由于康复过程中的创伤而死亡。另外两匹马在试图站起来之前死亡。 A组中所有3匹死亡的马都因为外伤而被安乐死。麻醉期间的低氧血症(定义为动脉氧分压<60mmHg)是非安全恢复的危险因素。未检测到年龄,体重,全身麻醉持续时间,绞痛手术的原因,恢复技术(A,NA),麻醉期间低血压,侧卧位时间,胸骨卧位时间和直立时间的影响。使用头绳和尾绳观察到一些技术上的复杂性(材料失效,绳索扭曲,吊带滑落和绳索丢失),可能部分归因于A组中观察到的意外大量危险和致命恢复。本研究尚不能证明在急诊腹部手术后,马匹的头尾绳技术可以减少死亡或提高麻醉剂的恢复评分。全身麻醉期间的低氧血症会增加非安全恢复的风险。

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