4.4 Article

Impact of preoperative fasting times on blood glucose concentration, ketone bodies and acid-base balance in children younger than 36 months A prospective observational study

期刊

EUROPEAN JOURNAL OF ANAESTHESIOLOGY
卷 32, 期 12, 页码 857-861

出版社

LIPPINCOTT WILLIAMS & WILKINS
DOI: 10.1097/EJA.0000000000000330

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

BACKGROUND In contrast to preoperative fasting guidelines in paediatric anaesthesia, actual fasting times are often too long. OBJECTIVE The objective of this study was to evaluate the effect of preoperative fasting on glucose concentration, ketone bodies and acid-base balance in children. DESIGN A prospective, noninterventional, clinical observational study. SETTING A single-centre trial, study period from June 2014 to November 2014. PATIENTS One hundred children aged 0 to 36 months scheduled for elective paediatric surgery. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Patient demographics, fasting times, haemodynamic data, glucose and ketone body concentrations, and acid-base parameters after induction of anaesthesia were documented using a standardised case report form. RESULTS Mean fasting period was 7.8 +/- 4.5 (3.5 to 20) h, and deviation from guideline (Delta GL) was 3.3 +/- 3.2 (-2 to 14) h. Linear regression showed a significant correlation between fasting times and ketone bodies, anion gap, base excess, osmolality as well as bicarbonate (for each, P < 0.05), but not glucose or lactate. In children with Delta GL more than 2 h (54%), ketone bodies, osmolality and anion gap were significantly higher and base excess significantly lower than children with Delta GL less than 2 h (for each, P < 0.05). CONCLUSION After prolonged preoperative fasting, children younger than 36 months can present with ketoacidosis and (low) normal blood glucose concentrations. Actual fasting times should be optimised according to existing guidelines. In small infants, deviations from fasting guidelines should be as short as possible and not longer than 2 h.

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

4.4
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