CorSalud 2012 Oct-Dec;4(4)

This article is only available in Spanish

Antonio de Arazoza Hernández, MD, MSc^1a; Fausto Leonel Rodríguez Salgueiro, MD^2b, Elizabeth Rodríguez Rosales, MD^3c; Amaury Fernández Molina, MD^4b; Miguel Ángel Carrasco Molina, MD^5a and Osvaldo Valdés Dupeirón, MD, MSc^6a
______________

1. First Degree Specialist in General Medicine and Second Degree Specialist in Anesthesiology and Resuscitation. Master in Medical Emergencies. Diploma Course in Cardiovascular Anesthesiology. Assistant Professor.

2. Second Degree Specialist in Anesthesiology. Diploma Course in Cardiovascular Anesthesiology. Associate Researcher and Professor.

3. First Degree Specialist in General Medicine and Cardiology.

4. First Degree Specialist in Anesthesiology. Diploma Course in Cardiovascular Anesthesiology.

5. First Degree Specialist in General Surgery and Cardiovascular Surgery.

6. First Degree Specialist in Cardiovascular Surgery. Master in Medical Emergencies.

1. Cardiocentro del Centro de Investigaciones Médico−Quirúrgicas (CIMEQ). Havana, Cuba.

2. Instituto de Cardiología y Cirugía Cardiovascular. Havana, Cuba.

3. Hospital Clínico−Quirúrgico "Hermanos Ameijeiras". Havana, Cuba.

Correspondence: A de Arazoza Hernández. CIMEQ. Calle 216 y 11B. Rpto Siboney, Playa. CP 12100, La Habana, Cuba.
Email address: dearazoza@infomed.sld.cu

Abstract

Introduction and Objectives: Minimally invasive cardiac surgery offers many advantages for high−risk patients, but the difficulties of these procedures do not only depend on the surgical technique, but on the anesthetic management, which is a challenge for the cardiovascular anesthesiologist. The objective of this research was to demonstrate the feasibility of the anesthetic management for video−assisted surgical techniques designed at Cardiocentro CIMEQ, and to compare the behavior of some variables in two study groups. Method: A retrospective study of patients who underwent heart surgery in the past three years at Cardiocentro CIMEQ. They were divided into two groups according to the surgical technique used. Patients operated using conventional cardiac surgery (median sternotomy) were included in group 1, and those with minimally invasive cardiac surgery were included in group 2, to whom an anesthetic technique designed for this purpose was used. Results: The anesthetic, surgical, extracorporeal circulation and aortic clamping time and the number of units of transfused red blood cells per patient was significantly lower in the video−assisted cardiac surgery group. The stay in the Intensive Care Unit and in the cardiology department was similar, and so was the onset of walking and postoperative complications. Conclusions: The anesthesia management with this work protocol is safe and feasible. Patients operated with this technique have a very good recovery, few postoperative complications, and shorter hospital stays. In addition, it is a good choice for high−risk patients in need of surgery, which do not meet the criteria for percutaneous treatment.
Key words: Anesthesiology; Anesthesia, conduction; Video-assisted cardiac surgery; Minimally invasive surgical procedures