Comparison of ultrafast and fast track extubation after secundum atrial septal defect surgery in pediatric age group

Abstract

Bacground

Patients who underwent ultrafast track on the operating table and fast track extubation in the pediatric intensive care unit for 2 to 6 h after secundum atrial septal defect surgery in the pediatric age group were compared.

Methods

Between January 2013 and February 2017, 60 pediatric patients (24 boys, 36 girls; Mean age 7.5 ± 4.6 years) whose secundum atrial defect was closed were retrospectively analyzed. The patients were separated as those who were extubated on the operating table (Group1,n = 28) and those extubated in the pediatric intensive care unit within 2-6 h postoperatively (Group2,n = 32).

Results

No difference was found in demographic data and preoperative catheter information between the groups. Cardiopulmonary bypass time was 20(18–25)/27.5(20–30)minutes (p:0.001), the cross-clamp time was 10(10–15)/15(11–20)minutes(p:0.004), the postoperative drainage amount was 50(25-50)/60(32.5–100)ml(p:0.013), the length of stay in the intensive care unit was 1(1-–1)/1(1–2)day(p:0.025), the length of stay after intensive care was 3(2–3)/3(3–4)days(p:0.001) and the total hospital stay was 4(3–4)/5(4–5.5) days (p < 0.001), which were respectively shorter for the group 1 compared to 2. Postoperative blood product replacement, positive inotrope support, pericardial effusion, mortality, and morbidity were not detected in either groups.

Conclusion

In this study, it was observed that the UFT extubation was safe for the patients who were operated for secundum ASD, in the pediatric age group, and had a cross-clamp time not exceeding 15 min. It was found that the amount of drainage, length of stay in the intensive care unit, post-intensive care unit, and the total hospital stay of patients extubated on the operating table were shorter.

Keywords:

• Ultrafast
• extubation
• pediatric
• atrial septal defect
• fast track

Disclosure statement

The authors declared no conflicts of interest concerning the authorship and/or publication of this article.

Additional information

Funding

The authors received no financial support for the research and/or authorship of this article.