Minerva anestesiologica
-
Minerva anestesiologica · Mar 1999
Review[Subarachnoid hemorrhage and systemic arterial pressure. Physiopathology and perioperative management].
A correct assessment of arterial pressure state during subarachnoid haemorrhage (SAH) is one of most critical issue in neurologic intensive care and in neuroanesthesia. It is important to evaluate two different clinical conditions during SAH: before and after aneurysmal clipping or embolization. ⋯ In this review the Authors examine the pathophysiology of SAH and SAH complications as rebleeding, vasospasm and ischemia. According to international data, they propose pressure parameters appropriated for SAH according to timing of treatment so as to prevent and treat SAH complications.
-
Minerva anestesiologica · Jan 1999
Review[Preemptive analgesia or balanced periemptive analgesia?].
"Preemptive analgesia" means that analgesia given before the painful stimulus prevents or reduces subsequent pain. The concept of preemptive analgesia originates from basic science and experimental studies. However, in some clinical studies preemptive effect is not always present. ⋯ Postoperative pain can be reduced making a pharmacological treatment before surgery, for the whole time of painful stimulus. For this reason, the term "preemptive analgesia", like "analgesia given before surgery" is not adequate. The authors suggest that the concept of prevention of postoperative pain is well defined by the term of "balanced periemptive analgesia"; it is a new approach that use many modalities of analgesia in different times to prevent and control painful stimulus for the whole time of its origin: before and/or during operation and, if necessary, in the postoperative period for the residual pain.
-
Minerva anestesiologica · Oct 1998
ReviewExperimental and clinical studies about the preemptive analgesia with local anesthetics. Possible reasons of the failure.
Though we fully agree with the truthfulness of the physiopathological sequences proving the phenomena of the hyperalgesia onset and therefore a prolongation of the postoperative pain, we do not believe, as stated by some authors that the studies carried out up to now, both experimental and clinical, are sufficient, the first ones to confirm the preemptive analgesia, while the second ones to be defined as contrasting and totally inadequate to confirm the preemptive analgesia effect. The lack of positive clinical data is why some authors have suggested a "revision" and a "reduction" of the word preemptive analgesia. On the contrary, we believe that differences which seem to originate from the clinical works can also be found in the experimental ones if we examine them with the same methodological principle. ⋯ However, an important characteristic that seems to come out from these works is connected to two elements strictly linked each other: the intensity and the duration of the nociceptive impulse produced and the level and the type of the induced block. In our opinion, the failure of many of these works can be attributed to the inadequacy of the analgesic levels (intensity of the block) reached and maintained in the pre-and intraoperative period. Therefore we believe that before thinking of a "review" and "reduction" of the word preemptive analgesia is necessary to take a step backward and to face again the methodological problems of the preemptive analgesia.