These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


Pubmed for Handhelds

PUBMED FOR HANDHELDS

Search MEDLINE/PubMed

  • Title: Minimally Invasive Strip Craniectomy Simplifies Anesthesia Practice in Patients With Isolated Sagittal Synostosis.
    Author: van Nunen DP, Stubenitsky BM, Woerdeman PA, Han KS, Breugem CC, Mink van der Molen AB, de Graaff JC.
    Journal: J Craniofac Surg; 2016 Nov; 27(8):1985-1990. PubMed ID: 28005739.
    Abstract:
    BACKGROUND: Traditional open corrective surgery for isolated sagittal synostosis entails significant blood loss, transfusion rates, morbidity, and a lengthy hospitalization. Minimally invasive strip craniectomy (MISC) was introduced to avoid the disadvantages of open techniques. OBJECTIVES: The aim of the study was, first, to compare the anesthesia practice in MISC and open extended strip craniectomy (OESC), and, second, to evaluate the incidence of perioperative complications in both surgical procedures. METHODS: A retrospective analysis was conducted for all consecutive patients receiving either OESC or MISC for nonsyndromic isolated sagittal synostosis between January 2006 and February 2014. The primary endpoints were the volume of blood loss, the volume of infused blood products, the duration of surgery, the anesthesia time, the intubation time, and the length of admission to high care units and the hospital. RESULTS: In MISC, the median duration of surgery (90 versus 178 min.), anesthesia time (178 versus 291 min), and intubation time (153 versus 294 min) were all significantly (P < 0.001) shorter than in OESC. Intraoperative blood loss was less in MISC than in OESC (3.8 versus 29.7 mL/kg, P < 0.001), requiring less crystalloids (33.3 versus 76.9 mL/kg, P < 0.001) as well as less erythrocyte transfusions (0.0 versus 19.7 mL/kg, P < 0.001) in a smaller number of patients (2/20 versus 13/15). The improved hemodynamic stability in MISC allowed for placement of less arterial and central venous catheters. After OESC all 15 patients were admitted to high care units, compared with 9 of 20 in MISC. The overall median hospital stay was shorter in MISC than in OESC (4 versus 6 d, P < 0.001). Although the incidence of technical complications was similar in both techniques, patients in MISC were less affected by perioperative electrolyte and acid-base disturbances and postoperative pyrexia. CONCLUSIONS: Minimally invasive strip craniectomy simplifies anesthesia practice relative to OESC with shorter operative times, decreased needs for replacement fluids and blood products, lessened requirements for invasive monitoring, and reduced demands for postoperative high care beds.
    [Abstract] [Full Text] [Related] [New Search]