Anesthetic Management of Narcolepsy Patients During Surgery: A Systematic Review
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
BACKGROUND: Narcolepsy is a rare sleep disorder characterized by excessive daytime sleepiness, sleep paralysis, and/or hypnagogic/hypnopompic hallucinations, and in some cases cataplexy. The response to anesthetic medications and possible interactions in narcolepsy patients is unclear in the perioperative period. In this systematic review, we aim to evaluate the current evidence on the perioperative outcomes and anesthetic considerations in narcolepsy patients. METHODS: Electronic literature search of Medline, Medline in-process, Embase, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews databases, international conference proceedings, and abstracts was conducted in November 2015 according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis Protocols guideline. A total of 3757 articles were screened using a 2-stage strategy (title-abstract followed by full text). We included case studies/series, cohort studies, and randomized controlled trials of narcolepsy patients undergoing surgical procedures under anesthesia or sedation. Preoperative narcolepsy symptoms and sleep study data, anesthetic technique, and perioperative complications were extracted. Screening of articles, data extraction, and compilation were conducted by 2 independent reviewers and any conflict was resolved by the senior author. RESULTS: A total of 19 studies including 16 case reports and 3 case series were included and evaluated. The majority of these patients received general anesthesia, whereas a small percentage of patients received regional anesthesia. Reported complications of narcolepsy patients undergoing surgeries were mainly related to autonomic dysregulation, or worsening of narcolepsy symptoms intra/postoperatively. Narcolepsy symptoms worsened only in those patient populations where the preoperative medications were either discontinued or reduced (mainly in obstetric patients). In narcolepsy patients, use of depth of anesthesia monitoring and total intravenous technique may have some advantage in terms of safety profile. Several patients undergoing neurosurgery involving the hypothalamus or third or four ventricles developed new-onset narcolepsy. CONCLUSIONS: We found a paucity of prospective clinical trials in this patient population, as most of the studies were case reports or observational studies. Continuation of preoperative medications, depth of anesthesia monitoring, use of multimodal analgesia with short-acting agents and regional anesthesia techniques were associated with favorable outcomes. Obstetric patients may be at greater risk for worsening narcolepsy symptoms, possibly related to a reduction or discontinuation of medications. For neurosurgical procedures involving the hypothalamus or third and fourth ventricle, postoperative considerations should include monitoring for symptoms of narcolepsy. Future studies are needed to better define perioperative risks associated with anesthesia and surgery in this population of patients.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction machine sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Le volet Gemma est une étiquette directe du modèle pour chaque travail de la base, lue sur la notice réduite au titre. Le volet Codex est un classifieur appris des 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et calibré sur les taux pondérés de l'échantillon; les champs sans appui suffisant ne portent aucun appel Codex. Le mode candidate est l'union des deux volets; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont pas des étiquettes humaines.
Scores du classifieur distillé par catégorie (deux têtes)
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,005 | 0,022 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,007 | 0,008 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,006 | 0,007 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,001 | 0,001 |
| Communication savante | 0,002 | 0,002 |
| Science ouverte | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,002 | 0,001 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,003 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule source (Gemma direct ou Codex distillé), pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».