Literature DB >> 12194127

Elective delayed midgut reduction-No anesthesia for gastroschisis: Selection and conversion criteria.

A Bianchi1, A P Dickson, N K Alizai.   

Abstract

BACKGROUND/
PURPOSE: In 1998 Bianchi and Dickson published their proposal for elective delayed midgut reduction without anaesthesia (EDMR-No GA). The study has been prospectively extended to develop "selection and conversion criteria" to ensure safe application of the technique.
METHODS: In a prospective study from 1993 to date, EDMR-No GA was considered as first-line postnatal management in 35 children. The protocol and technique were those described by Bianchi and Dickson in 1998.
RESULTS: EDMR-No GA was completed successfully in 25 children, of whom, 23 are normal with an aesthetic, scarless abdomen. Two children had bowel necrosis and died of short bowel state. A trial EDMR-No GA was converted to a staged silo reduction in 2 children who are both alive and well. EDMR-No GA was considered contraindicated in 8. Five had an elective, staged silo reduction, 2 had EDMR under anesthesia, and one 27-week-gestation baby died of severe hypothermia and acidosis before any procedure.
CONCLUSIONS: No single technique is applicable in all circumstances, and "selection and conversion criteria" are relevant to safe EDMR-No GA. These include poor general condition, significant vital organ anomaly, bowel-to-abdomen disproportion and "at risk" bowel circulation. The development of distress and progressive metabolic acidosis during and after EDMR-No GA, are indications for urgent conversion to avoid serious bowel injury. Experience with EDMR-No GA hones the surgeon's sensitivity in assessing abdominal. Copyright 2002, Elsevier Science (USA). All rights reserved.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2002        PMID: 12194127     DOI: 10.1053/jpsu.2002.35003

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  J Pediatr Surg        ISSN: 0022-3468            Impact factor:   2.545


  9 in total

1.  Ward reduction of gastroschisis: risk stratification helps optimise the outcome.

Authors:  Kate Leadbeater; Rajendra Kumar; Rob Feltrin
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2010-10       Impact factor: 1.827

Review 2.  Gastroschisis: an update.

Authors:  Andrew J A Holland; Karen Walker; Nadia Badawi
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2010-08-05       Impact factor: 1.827

3.  Gastroschisis closure: a technique for improved cosmetic repair.

Authors:  Christoph Heinrich Houben; Shailesh Patel
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2008-08-05       Impact factor: 1.827

4.  Infectious complications in the management of gastroschisis.

Authors:  Robert Baird; Pramod Puligandla; Erik Skarsgard; Jean-Martin Laberge
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2011-12-08       Impact factor: 1.827

5.  Factors determining outcome in gastroschisis: clinical experience over 18 years.

Authors:  L Cara Jager; Hugo A Heij
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2007-06-19       Impact factor: 1.827

6.  Scheduled preterm delivery for gastroschisis improves postoperative outcome.

Authors:  Thomas Gelas; Daniela Gorduza; Simone Devonec; Pascal Gaucherand; Esther Downham; Olivier Claris; Rémi Dubois
Journal:  Pediatr Surg Int       Date:  2008-07-31       Impact factor: 1.827

7.  Gastroschisis: one year outcomes from national cohort study.

Authors:  Timothy J Bradnock; Sean Marven; Anthony Owen; Paul Johnson; Jennifer J Kurinczuk; Patsy Spark; Elizabeth S Draper; Marian Knight
Journal:  BMJ       Date:  2011-11-15

8.  Bedside repair of omphalocele.

Authors:  Yavuz Yilmaz; Gulsum Kadioglu; Hulya Ozkan-Ulu; Sema Arayici; Omer Erdeve
Journal:  J Neonatal Surg       Date:  2012-10-01

Review 9.  Ward reduction without general anaesthesia versus reduction and repair under general anaesthesia for gastroschisis in newborn infants.

Authors:  M W Davies; R M Kimble; P G Woodgate
Journal:  Cochrane Database Syst Rev       Date:  2002
  9 in total

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.