4.6 Article

Perioperative Quality Initiative consensus statement on intraoperative blood pressure, risk and outcomes for elective surgery

期刊

BRITISH JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIA
卷 122, 期 5, 页码 563-574

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2019.01.013

关键词

anaesthesia; arterial pressure; hypotension; mortality; myocardial injury; postoperative outcome; renal injury; surgery

资金

  1. Edwards Lifesciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Intraoperative mortality is now rare, but death within 30 days of surgery remains surprisingly common. Perioperative myocardial infarction is associated with a remarkably high mortality. There are strong associations between hypotension and myocardial injury, myocardial infarction, renal injury, and death. Perioperative arterial blood pressure management was thus the basis of a Perioperative Quality Initiative consensus-building conference held in London in July 2017. Methods: The meeting featured a modified Delphi process in which groups addressed various aspects of perioperative arterial pressure. Results: Three consensus statements on intraoperative blood pressure were established. 1) Intraoperative mean arterial pressures below 60-70mm Hg are associated with myocardial injury, acute kidney injury, and death. Injury is a function of hypotension severity and duration. 2) For adult non-cardiac surgical patients, there is insufficient evidence to recommend a general upper limit of arterial pressure at which therapy should be initiated, although pressures above 160 mm Hg have been associated with myocardial injury and infarction. 3) During cardiac surgery, intraoperative systolic arterial pressure above 140 mm Hg is associated with increased 30 day mortality. Injury is a function of arterial pressure severity and duration. Conclusions: There is increasing evidence that even brief durations of systolic arterial pressure <100 mm Hg and mean arterial pressure <60-70 mm Hg are harmful during non-cardiac surgery.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据