Objective To evaluate whether to defer abdomen surgery in patients having poorly controlled or untreated hypertension before operation. MethodsThe perioperative clinical data of 531 patients with hypertension in our hospital from January 1997 to December 1998 was retrospectively analyzed. ResultsThe modility of perioperative hypertensive events was not significantly different, between controlled and uncontrolled patients with grade one and grade two（Pgt;0.05）. In grade three and systolic hypertension, certain complications in patients with poorly controlled hypertension were higher than in those with wellcontrolled hypertension（P＜0.05）. Conclusion The patients with grade one and grade two hypertension are not at increased operative risk. In patients with grade three and systolic hypertension, perioperative complications are increased and elective surgery should be postponed until their blood pressure is brought under 24/14.7 kPa （180/110 mm Hg） over 1 to 2 weeks.
Objective We searched and reviewed medical evidence to find the guide of bowel preparation we should choose before large bowel preparation. Method Firstly, we put forward clinical questions. Secondly, we searched medical evidence from PubMed, MEDLINE, EMbase, Cochrane Library, Science and ACP in recent 10 years. And then we reviewed the results. Results We finally identified 17 literatures including 2 system reviews, 6 meta-analyses and 9 randomized control trials which included 4 multicentre randomized clinical trials. Most of literature suggested that there was no evidence showing the benefit of mechanical bowel preparation (MBP). No MBP before large bowel surgery would not increase rate of anastomotic leakage. On the contrary, MBP may increase the percentage of anastomotic leakage and wound infection. Considering the research with the clinical situation, we produced a new method of simplified MBP to treat the patient. It reached the predictive effect. Conclusion No evidence of systematic review and meta-analysis supports the benefit of BMP. The new simplified bowel preparation before surgery in West China Hospital was worthy to test.
目的 探讨冲击法在甲状腺功能亢进症（简称甲亢）围手术期处理中的应用价值。 方法 对2006年2月至2011年1月期间笔者所在医院收治的36例应用传统方法和32例应用冲击法进行围手术期处理的甲亢患者的临床资料进行回顾性分析，比较采用两种不同术前准备方法的患者在住院时间、术后并发症、住院费用及甲状腺激素水平变化的差异。 结果 2组患者手术过程均顺利，术后均未出现窒息、呼吸困难、声嘶、呛咳、甲状腺危象等并发症。术前准备时间、住院时间和住院费用在冲击法组分别是（8.09±1.03） d、（10.69±1.45） d和（2 230.78±220.74）元，传统方法组分别是（15.83±1.61） d、（17.97±1.44） d和（5 549.69±560.55）元，冲击法组明显短于或少于传统方法组（P＜0.05）。在给药后第7天，冲击法组患者的FT3和FRT4水平下降幅度均高于传统方法组（P＜0.05）。 结论 冲击法在甲亢围手术期处理中是安全可靠的，是甲亢的一种快速术前准备方法。
ObjectiveTo analyze and explore the thyroid defunctionalization method for preoperative preparation of hyperthyroidism patients in endoscopic thyroid surgery. MethodsThe clinical data of 45 cases of hyperthyroidism treated with endoscopic surgery in this hospital from June 2009 to June 2014 were analyzed retrospectively. These patients were divided into study group (n=20) and control group (n=25) according to the preoperative preparation method, the study group was prepared with thyroid defunctionalization method, the control group was prepared with antithyroid drugs and iodine. The intraoperative blood loss, conversion to open surgery, and postoperative complications were compared in these two groups. ResultsThe intraoperative blood loss and the operation time of the study group were significantly less than those of the control group﹝intraoperative blood loss: (120.32±50.26) mL versus (200.63±60.95) mL, P < 0.05; operation time: (120.43±40.56) min versus (180.76±50.92) min, P < 0.05﹞. There was no case of conversion to open surgery in the study group, there were three cases of conversion to open surgery in the control group. The incidence of postoperative complications of the study group was significantly lower than that of the control group﹝10% (2/20) versus 24% (6/25), P < 0.05﹞. ConclusionThyroid defunctionalization method is more suitable as compared with the traditional method for the preoperative preparation of hyperthyroidism in endoscopic thyroid surgery.
ObjectivesTo systematically review the efficacy of dyclonine and lidocaine for preparation before gastroscopy.MethodsPubMed, CNKI, CBM, VIP and WanFang Data databases were electronically searched to collect randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of dyclonine vs. lidocaine for preparation before gastroscopy from inception to December 31st, 2017. Two reviewers independently screened literature, extracted data and assessed the risk of bias of included studies. Meta-analysis was then performed by using RevMan 5.3 software.ResultsA total of 11 RCTs were included. The results of meta-analysis showed that: dyclonine could improve anesthetic effect (RR=1.38, 95%CI 1.31 to 1.47, P<0.000 01), and was more capable to remove bubble (RR=1.40, 95%CI 1.28 to 1.52,P<0.000 01), and had superior textures (RR=1.43, 95%CI 1.18 to 1.74,P=0.000 3).ConclusionsOral dyclonine can improve the visual definition of gastric mucosa and anesthetic effect, and has superior textures. Thus, dyclonine can be regarded as a recommended option prior to gastroscopy. Due to limited quality and quantity of the included studies, more high quality studies are required to verify above conclusions.