gms | German Medical Science

83. Jahresversammlung der Deutschen Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie e. V.

Deutsche Gesellschaft für Hals-Nasen-Ohren-Heilkunde, Kopf- und Hals-Chirurgie e. V.

16.05. - 20.05.2012, Mainz

Postoperative monitoring of patients with OSA

Meeting Abstract

  • corresponding author Christian Köhler - Univ. HNO-Klinik, Würzburg, Germany
  • presenting/speaker Sophie Glas - Univ. HNO-Klinik, Würzburg, Germany
  • presenting/speaker Norbert H. Kleinsasser - Univ. HNO-Klinik, Würzburg, Germany
  • presenting/speaker Christian Ginzkey - Univ. HNO-Klinik, Würzburg, Germany

German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery. 83rd Annual Meeting of the German Society of Oto-Rhino-Laryngology, Head and Neck Surgery. Mainz, 16.-20.05.2012. Düsseldorf: German Medical Science GMS Publishing House; 2012. Doc12hno64

DOI: 10.3205/12hno64, URN: urn:nbn:de:0183-12hno646

Veröffentlicht: 23. Juli 2012

© 2012 Köhler et al.
Dieser Artikel ist ein Open Access-Artikel und steht unter den Creative Commons Lizenzbedingungen (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/3.0/deed.de). Er darf vervielfältigt, verbreitet und öffentlich zugänglich gemacht werden, vorausgesetzt dass Autor und Quelle genannt werden.


Gliederung

Text

Introduction: It is known that patients with OSA have a higher complication rate after elective surgery. Therefore postoperative ICU observation for one night is standard in many clinics. The question came up, whether such a monitoring may reduce compli-cations.

Method: The data of all patients, who experienced postoperative monitoring at the ICU due to the diagnosis or reasoned suspicion of OSA in 2010, were analysed retrospectively (n=102).

Results: 78% of the patients had at least one additional disease, which required regular medication (e.g. hypertonia, coronary heart disease, diabetes). Besides the diagnosis of OSA, 41% of the patients had further reasons for a monitoring at the ICU. An intensive care intervention was necessary in 8% during the first postoperative night, e.g. cardiological diagnostics in a case of stenocardia. All patients, who needed interventions, had additional reasons for a monitoring beside the OSA. In the postoperative follow-up one patient died at the 3rd postoperative night after transfer to the regular ward. Another patient needed ICU monitoring at the 4th postoperative night again. These two patients were monitored because of reasons beside the diagnosis of OSA, too.

Discussion: In conclusion, the high rate of comorbidities in patients with OSA makes ICU control necessary in all cases with relevant concomitant diseases. Complications should be expected in patients who are classified “endangered postoperatively” due to additional diseases.