• R A Mason, G B Newton, W Cassel, F Maneksha, and F Giron.
• Department of Surgery, State University of New York, Stony Brook School of Medicine.
• J Cardiovasc Surg. 1990 Jul 1;31(4):442-7.

AbstractThe perioperative course of 144 consecutive patients undergoing aortic reconstructive surgery was studied to assess the potential benefit of employing a combined epidural and light general anesthesia technique. A group of 67 patients had general anesthesia alone (GA), while in the group of 77 remaining patients, a combined epidural and general anesthesia (Epi-GA) was employed. The two groups were similar in regards to age, medical risk factors, preoperative assessment of cardiac and pulmonary function, and type of surgical reconstruction. There was no significant difference in the anesthetic, operative time, or operative fluid requirements between the two groups. There was a lower rate pressure product in the Epi-GA group during aortic cross clamping (P less than 0.05). More patients in the GA group required a prolonged ventilatory support (P less than 0.05) and a high parenteral narcotic administration (P less than 0.025) during the first 48 hours. While the mortality rate was similar for the two groups (3.0% for GA group vs 5.2% for Epi-GA group), there was a higher percent of postoperative pulmonary complications observed in the GA group (7.6%) compared to the Epi-GA group (2.6%). By facilitating early extubation and a decreased need for systemic narcotics in the early postoperative period, Epi-GA may be beneficial in the high risk pulmonary patient undergoing aortic reconstruction.

21 keywords...

hide…