Intra-oral masses in neonates can seriously compromise the airway, potentially causing hypoxia and death if not recognized and managed appropriately. We report a case in which an intra-oral mass was diagnosed on antenatal ultrasound scan. Preparation for delivery involved a multidisciplinary team approach, with a strategy for management at delivery. The child was delivered by elective Caesarean section and had a patent airway. A tracheostomy was performed immediately after delivery. The infant underwent a debulking procedure 3 weeks after birth. A histological diagnosis of embryonal rhabdomyosarcoma was made and a course of chemotherapy commenced. The child had a partial response to treatment with considerable shrinkage of the tongue mass. We discuss the management options in neonates with intra-oral masses to provide an adequate airway and maintain fetal oxygenation. The differential diagnosis of fetal oral masses is reviewed.
279Purpose: To compare the cost and effectiveness of small-dose spinal anesthesia (SP) with general anesthesia (GA) for outpatient laparoscopy. Methods: A retrospective record analysis of 24 patients who received SP were compared with 28 patients who received GA in our Daycare centre. The costs of anesthesia and recovery were calculated, from an institutional perspective, using 1997 Canadian Dollar values. Effectiveness was measured in terms of time for anesthesia and recovery, and postoperative antiemetic and analgesic requirements.Results: Both groups were well matched for age, weight, duration and type of surgery. The mean total cost for the SP group of $53.45 ± 10.40 was no different from that for the GA group of $48.92 ± 10.25 (95% CI -10.3,1.2). Time to administer anesthesia was longer in the SP group with a mean time of 18 ± 8 min compared with 10 ± 3 min in the GA group (CI -11.3, -4.7). Recovery time in the PACU was longer in the SP group 123 ± 51 min compared with 94 ± 48 min (CI -56.6,-1.4). Postoperative antiemetic requirements were similar: 8% in SP group vs 14% in GA group, whereas analgesic requirements were less in the SP group with 25% receiving analgesia compared with 75% in the GA group (P < 0.05). Conclusion:The total cost of anesthesia and recovery using SP is similar to that for GA when used for outpatient laparoscopy. Spinal anesthesia was less effective than GA in time to administer anesthesia and in duration of recovery. Postoperative analgesic requirements were reduced using SP.Objectif : Comparer le coût et l'efficacité de la rachianesthésie à faibles doses (RA) avec ceux de l'anesthésie générale (AG) pour la laparoscopie ambulatoire. Méthode : Une analyse rétrospective des dossiers de 24 patients qui ont reçu une RA a été comparée à celle des dossiers de 28 patients qui ont reçu une AG à notre centre ambulatoire. Le coût de l'anesthésie et de la récupération a été calculé, d'un point de vue institutionnel, en utilisant les valeurs en dollars canadiens. L'efficacité a été mesurée selon le temps dévolu à l'anesthésie et à la récupération et selon les demandes postopératoires d'antiémétiques et d'analgésiques.Résultats : L'appariement des deux groupes a été réalisé suivant l'âge, le poids, la durée et le type d'intervention chirurgicale. Le coût total moyen dans le groupe RA, de 53,45 $ ± 10,40, était semblable dans le groupe AG, de 48,92 $ ± 10,25 (IC 95 % -10,3 ; 1,2). Le temps précédant l'administration de l'anesthésie a été plus long dans le groupe RA, le temps moyen a été de 18 ± 8 min comparé à 10 ± 3 min dans le groupe AG 3 ;7). La récupération en salle de réveil a été plus longue dans le groupe RA, 123 ± 51 min comparée à 94 ± 48 min 6 ;4). La demande d'antiémétiques a été similaire : 8 % pour la RA vs 14 % pour l'AG, tandis que la demande d'analgésiques a été moindre dans le groupe RA, 25 % comparé à 75 % dans le groupe AG (P < 0,05).Conclusion : Le coût total de l'anesthésie et de la récupération est similaire, qu'on utilise la RA ou l'AG, dans le cadre de la laparoscopie ambul...
EA is widely used in the United Kingdom following upper abdominal surgery. A degree of consensus exists on the choice of drug types, their method of administration and duration. There is no consensus as to whether the technique should be used on a general ward, which opioid should be used or the timing of heparin.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
customersupport@researchsolutions.com
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.