Literature DB >> 12496575

Safety and efficacy of office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation in 4778 consecutive plastic surgery procedures.

George Bitar1, William Mullis, William Jacobs, David Matthews, Michael Beasley, Kevin Smith, Paul Watterson, Stanley Getz, Peter Capizzi, Felmont Eaves.   

Abstract

Office-based surgery has several potential benefits over hospital-based surgery, including cost containment, ease of scheduling, and convenience to both patients and surgeons. Scrutiny of office-based surgery by regulators and state-licensing agencies has increased and must be addressed by improved documentation of safety and efficacy. To evaluate the safety and efficacy of the authors' office-based plastic surgery, a review was undertaken of 3615 consecutive patients undergoing 4778 outpatient plastic surgery procedures under monitored anesthesia care/sedation in a single office. The charts of 3615 consecutive patients who had undergone office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation between May of 1995 and May of 2000 were reviewed. In all cases, the anesthesia protocol used included sedation with midazolam, propofol, and a narcotic administered by a board-certified registered nurse anesthetist with local anesthesia provided by the surgeon. Charts were reviewed for patient profile, types of procedures, multiple procedures, duration of anesthesia, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, and complications related to anesthesia. Outcomes measured included death, airway compromise, dyspnea, hypotension, venous thrombosis, pulmonary emboli, protracted nausea and vomiting lasting more than 24 hours, and unplanned hospital admissions. Statistical analyses were performed using the Microsoft Excel program and the SAS package. Results were as follows: 92.3 percent of the patients were female and 7.7 percent were male, with a mean age of 42.7 years (range, 3 to 83 years). Patients underwent aesthetic (95.6 percent) and reconstructive (4.4 percent) plastic surgery procedures. Same-session multiple procedures occurred in 24.8 percent of patients. The vast majority of patients were healthy: 84.3 percent of patients were American Society of Anesthesiologists class I, 15.6 percent were class II, and 0.1 percent were class III. The operations required a mean of 111 minutes. There were no deaths, ventilator requirements, deep venous thromboses, or pulmonary emboli. Complications were as follows: 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had dyspnea that resolved, 0.2 percent (n = 6) of patients had protracted nausea and vomiting, and 0.05 percent (n = 2) of patients had unplanned hospital admissions (<24 hours). One patient had an emergent intubation. No prolonged adverse effects were noted. There was a 30-day follow-up minimum. Outpatient surgery is an important aspect of plastic surgery. It was shown that office-based surgery with intravenous sedation, performed by board-certified plastic surgeons and nurse anesthetists, is safe. Appropriate accreditation, safe anesthesia protocols, and proper patient selection constitute the basis for safe and efficacious office-based outpatient plastic surgery.

Entities:  

Mesh:

Year:  2003        PMID: 12496575     DOI: 10.1097/01.PRS.0000037756.88297.BC

Source DB:  PubMed          Journal:  Plast Reconstr Surg        ISSN: 0032-1052            Impact factor:   4.730


  20 in total

1.  Periocular anesthesia in aesthetic surgery.

Authors:  Bentley C Skibell; Charles N S Soparkar; Robert N Tower; James R Patrinely
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2007-02       Impact factor: 2.314

2.  Sedation monitor for the office-based plastic surgery setting.

Authors:  Robert G W Girling V; Mark Salisbury
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.314

3.  Assessing patient safety in Canadian ambulatory surgery facilities: A national survey.

Authors:  Jamil Ahmad; Olivia A Ho; Wayne W Carman; Achilles Thoma; Donald H Lalonde; Frank Lista
Journal:  Plast Surg (Oakv)       Date:  2014       Impact factor: 0.947

4.  Comparison of electrophysiologic monitors with clinical assessment of level of sedation.

Authors:  Christopher J Chisholm; Joseph Zurica; Dmitry Mironov; Robert R Sciacca; Eugene Ornstein; Eric J Heyer
Journal:  Mayo Clin Proc       Date:  2006-01       Impact factor: 7.616

5.  Minimal invasive parathyroidectomy with local anesthesia for well-localized primary hyperparathyroidism: "Cerrahpasa experience".

Authors:  Serkan Teksoz; Yusuf Bukey; Murat Ozcan; Akif Enes Arikan; Safak Emre Erbabacan; Ates Ozyegin
Journal:  Updates Surg       Date:  2013-02-21

Review 6.  Using continuous quantitative capnography for emergency department procedural sedation: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis.

Authors:  Nicholas Matthew Mohr; Andrew Stoltze; Azeemuddin Ahmed; Elizabeth Kiscaden; Dan Shane
Journal:  Intern Emerg Med       Date:  2016-12-28       Impact factor: 3.397

7.  Evaluation of Monitored Anesthesia Care in Sialendoscopy.

Authors:  Oscar Trujillo; Madeleine A Drusin; Parwane P Pagano; Gulce Askin; Rahmatullah Rahmati
Journal:  JAMA Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg       Date:  2017-08-01       Impact factor: 6.223

8.  A multi-institutional, propensity-score-matched comparison of post-operative outcomes between general anesthesia and monitored anesthesia care with intravenous sedation in umbilical hernia repair.

Authors:  M M Vu; R D Galiano; J M Souza; C Du Qin; J Y S Kim
Journal:  Hernia       Date:  2016-02-09       Impact factor: 4.739

9.  Office-based plastic surgery with general anesthesia: efficiency of cost and time.

Authors:  Michelle A Spring; David A Stoker; John Holloway; Marcia Weintraub; W Grant Stevens
Journal:  Semin Plast Surg       Date:  2007-05       Impact factor: 2.314

10.  Usefulness of Intravenous Anesthesia Using a Target-controlled Infusion System with Local Anesthesia in Submuscular Breast Augmentation Surgery.

Authors:  Kyu-Jin Chung; Kyu-Ho Cha; Jun-Ho Lee; Yong-Ha Kim; Tae-Gon Kim; Il-Guk Kim
Journal:  Arch Plast Surg       Date:  2012-09-12
View more

北京卡尤迪生物科技股份有限公司 © 2022-2023.