Project description:BackgroundMachine learning (ML) is developing fast with promising prospects within medicine and already has several applications in perioperative care. We conducted a scoping review to examine the extent and potential limitations of ML implementation in perioperative anesthetic care, specifically in cardiac surgery patients.MethodsWe mapped the current literature by searching three databases: MEDLINE (Ovid), EMBASE (Ovid), and Cochrane Library. Articles were eligible if they reported on perioperative ML use in the field of cardiac surgery with relevance to anesthetic practices. Data on the applicability of ML and comparability to conventional statistical methods were extracted.ResultsForty-six articles on ML relevant to the work of the anesthesiologist in cardiac surgery were identified. Three main categories emerged: (I) event and risk prediction, (II) hemodynamic monitoring, and (III) automation of echocardiography. Prediction models based on ML tend to behave similarly to conventional statistical methods. Using dynamic hemodynamic or ultrasound data in ML models, however, shifts the potential to promising results.ConclusionsML in cardiac surgery is increasingly used in perioperative anesthetic management. The majority is used for prediction purposes similar to conventional clinical scores. Remarkable ML model performances are achieved when using real-time dynamic parameters. However, beneficial clinical outcomes of ML integration have yet to be determined. Nonetheless, the first steps introducing ML in perioperative anesthetic care for cardiac surgery have been taken.
Project description:Protective ventilation is associated with a lower incidence of pulmonary complications. However, there are few published data on routine pulmonary management in adult cardiac surgery. The present study's primary objective was to survey pulmonary management in this high-risk population, as practiced by anesthesiologists in France. All 460 registered France-based cardiac anesthesiologists were invited (by e-mail) to participate in an online survey in January-February 2015. The survey's questionnaire was designed to assess current practice in pre-, per-, and postoperative pulmonary management. In all, 198 anesthesiologists (43% of those invited) participated in the survey. Other than during the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) per se, 179 anesthesiologists (91% of respondees) [95% confidence interval (CI): 87-95] used a low-tidal-volume approach (6-8 mL/kg), whereas techniques based on positive end-expiratory pressure and recruitment maneuvers vary greatly from 1 anesthesiologist to another. During CPB, 104 (53%) [95% CI: 46-60] anesthesiologists withdrew mechanical ventilation (with disconnection, in some cases) and 97 (49%) [95% CI: 42-56] did not prescribe positive end-expiratory pressure. One hundred sixty-five (83%) [95% CI: 78-88] anesthesiologists stated that a written protocol for peroperative pulmonary management was not available. Twenty (10%) [95% CI: 6-14] and 11 (5%) [95% CI: 2-8] anesthesiologists stated that they did use protocols for ventilator use and recruitment maneuvers, respectively. The preoperative period (pulmonary examinations and prescription of additional assessments) and the postoperative period (extubation, and noninvasive ventilation) periods vary greatly from 1 anesthesiologist to another. The great majority of French cardiac anesthesiologists use a low tidal volume during cardiac surgery (other than during CPB per se). However, pulmonary management procedures varied markedly from 1 anesthesiologist to another. There is a clear need for large clinical studies designed to identify best practice in pulmonary management.
Project description:AimsMost cardiac surgery patients, with or without diabetes, develop perioperative hyperglycaemia, for which intravenous insulin is the only therapeutic option. This is labour-intensive and carries a risk of hypoglycaemia. We hypothesized that preoperative administration of the glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonist liraglutide reduces the number of patients requiring insulin for glycaemic control during cardiac surgery.Materials and methodsIn this randomized, blinded, placebo-controlled, parallel-group, balanced (1:1), multicentre randomized, superiority trial, adult patients undergoing cardiac surgery in four Dutch tertiary hospitals were randomized to receive 0.6 mg subcutaneous liraglutide on the evening before surgery and 1.2 mg after induction of anaesthesia or matching placebo. Blood glucose was measured hourly and controlled using an insulin-bolus algorithm. The primary outcome was insulin administration for blood glucose >8.0 mmol/L in the operating theatre. Research pharmacists used centralized, stratified, variable-block, randomization software. Patients, care providers and study personnel were blinded to treatment allocation.ResultsBetween June 2017 and August 2018, 278 patients were randomized to liraglutide (139) or placebo (139). All patients receiving at least one study drug injection were included in the intention-to-treat analyses (129 in the liraglutide group, 132 in the placebo group). In the liraglutide group, 55 (43%) patients required additional insulin compared with 80 (61%) in the placebo group and absolute difference 18% (95% confidence interval 5.9-30.0, P = 0.003). Dose and number of insulin injections and mean blood glucose were all significantly lower in the liraglutide group. We observed no difference in the incidence of hypoglycaemia, nausea and vomiting, mortality or postoperative complications.ConclusionsPreoperative liraglutide, compared with placebo, reduces insulin requirements while improving perioperative glycaemic control during cardiac surgery.
Project description:BackgroundAntithrombotic drugs increase the risk of bleeding, especially in patients who need urgent surgery without an adequate wash-out period. This review aims to evaluate perioperative bleeding complications in patients on dual antiplatelet therapy (DAPT) or direct-acting oral anticoagulants (DOACs) undergoing high-bleeding risk cardiovascular surgery and to present currently available potential solutions to mitigate antithrombotic therapy-related bleeding complications.MethodsAs a first step, we searched for relevant articles, over the last 10 years, in Medline (PubMed) and abstracted clinical information based on pre-defined criteria for bleeding complications. In the next step, an additional search evaluating potential solutions to mitigate bleeding complications was performed. The literature screening and selection process followed the principles derived from the PRISMA statement.ResultsFrom all reviewed studies, a total of 19 articles could be included evaluating the risk for bleeding in cardiac surgery related to DAPT or DOACs and 10 papers evaluating antithrombotic drug reversal or removal in the setting of cardiovascular surgery. Reported bleeding rates ranged between 18% and 41%. The variability of the reported data is remarkable. Idarucizumab is reported to provide optimal perioperative hemostasis in up to 93% of patients. It has been observed that andexanet alfa causes unresponsiveness to the anticoagulant effects of heparin. Antithrombotic removal by intraoperative hemoadsorption is found to be associated with a significant decrease in re-thoracotomy rate, overall procedure duration, administered transfusion volumes, chest-tube drainage, and length of hospitalization.DiscussionBleeding complications in patients treated with DAPT or DOACs in cardiac surgery are high. New costly reversal agents are available but have not been sufficiently tested in the cardio-surgical setting so far. Interestingly, bleeding-related complications seem to be effectively reduced by applying innovative intraoperative hemoadsorption techniques. Expected results from the ongoing trials should provide better insights concerning the efficacy and safety of several potential solutions. Currently, the variability of reports and the deficit of high-quality studies in this specific setting represent the major limitation for the unbiased conclusion of this review.
Project description:BACKGROUND:The correct perioperative management of antiplatelet therapy (APT) in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery (NCS) is often debated by clinicians. American College of Cardiology (ACC) and American Heart Association (AHA) guidelines recommend postponing elective NCS at least 3 months after stent implantation. Regardless of the timing of surgery, ACC/AHA guidelines recommend continuing at least ASA throughout the perioperative period and ideally continuing dual APT (DAPT) therapy "unless surgery demands discontinuation." The objective of this review was to ascertain the risks and benefits of APT in the perioperative period, to assess how these risks and benefits vary by APT management, and the significance of length of time since stent implantation before operative intervention. METHODS:PubMed, Web of Science, and Scopus were searched from inception through October 2017. Articles were included if patients were post PCI with stent placement (bare metal [BMS] or drug eluting [DES]), underwent elective NCS, and had rates of major adverse cardiac events (MACE) or bleeding events associated with pre and perioperative APT therapy. RESULTS:Of 4882 screened articles, we included 16 studies in the review (1 randomized controlled trial and 15 observational studies). Studies were small (< 50: n = 5, 51-150: n = 5, >150: n = 6). All studies included DES with 7 of 16 also including BMS. Average time from stent to NCS was variable (< 6 months: n = 3, 6-12 months: n = 1, > 12 months: n = 6). At least six different APT strategies were described. Six studies further utilized bridging protocols using three different pharmacologic agents. Studies typically included multiple surgical fields with varying degrees of invasiveness. Across all APT strategies, rates of MACE/bleeding ranged from 0 to 21% and 0 to 22%. There was no visible trend in MACE/bleeding rates within a given APT strategy. Stratifying the articles by type of surgery, timing of discontinuation of APT therapy, bridging vs. no bridging, and time since stent placement did not help explain the heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS:Evidence regarding perioperative APT management in patients with cardiac stents undergoing NCS is insufficient to guide practice. Other clinical factors may have a greater impact than perioperative APT management on MACE and bleeding events. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION:PROSPERO CRD42016036607.
Project description:Malnutrition is a major issue in gastrointestinal perioperative situations, as only 40% of malnourished patients are finally treated. This literature review investigates the inconsistencies regarding the diagnostic approach to both preoperative and postoperative patients and the various underlying causes, as well as the efficiency of the various therapeutic regimens. A literature search was conducted until August 2023 in MEDLINE and Scopus. Clinical studies involving perioperative nutritional assessment in adult gastrointestinal surgery patients during the last 10 years were included in the present review. Finally, 19 articles were included in the study. Preoperative nutritional therapy is increasingly recognized as a key component of surgical care. Malnourished patients who are hospitalized and operated on, have significantly worse clinical results. Gastrointestinal postoperative malnutrition coexists with metabolic stress, as patients usually suffer from minor chronic inflammations; therefore, postoperative malnutrition is the result of a combination of the effects of inflammation and a lack of food intake. Postoperative malnutrition leads to prolonged hospitalizations and hospital complications and therefore the need to treat it is essential. There are many recognized tools for detecting malnutrition. However, all tools showed inconsistent results regarding their validity. Per os feeding after surgery, and dietary supplements when necessary, have been recommended. Therefore, it is very important to reduce malnutrition and define clear strategies towards that direction.
Project description:We describe the case of a young woman with Takayasu arteritis with severe stenosis in the main trunk of the left coronary artery. After administration of prednisolone and tocilizumab to control disease activity, coronary artery bypass grafting was performed. Here, we report the successful perioperative management of this cardiac surgery. (Level of Difficulty: Advanced.).
Project description:Historically, patients with pleural malignant mesothelioma have had a poor prognosis and survival rate. Recently, new surgical approaches and chemotherapy delivery techniques have been developed. One of this treatment options is thoracic cytoreductive surgery and HITHOC (hyperthermic intrathoracic chemotherapy perfusion), a promising strategy in selected patients, offering significantly longer median survival length and tumour-free survival rate. However, there is little experience and little is known regarding the optimal perioperative management of this patients. Given that they usually present with poor preoperative status and the surgery is aggressive, prolonged and associated with significant hemodynamic repercussions, this procedure poses a true challenge to the anaesthesiologist. We will discuss optimal patient selection and optimization, as well as premedication, recommended monitoring aspects on top of the usual for any anaesthetic procedure, induction and anaesthetic agents, blood management and one lung ventilation. Also, we expose the importance of adequate pain control during the surgery and postoperatively, the hemodynamic disturbances that occur during the procedure and the potential complications that could occur afterwards. In a few words, this review intends to offer recommendations for the management of patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery and HITHOC for the perioperative care, based on the scarce evidence and our clinical experience.
Project description:Patients undergoing major vascular surgery have an increased risk of perioperative major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE). Accordingly, in this population, it is of particular importance to appropriately risk stratify patients' risk for these complications and optimize risk factors prior to surgical intervention. Comorbidities that portend a higher risk of perioperative MACE include coronary artery disease, heart failure, left-sided valvular heart disease, and significant arrhythmic burden. In this review, we provide a current approach to risk stratification prior to major vascular surgery and describe the strengths and weaknesses of different cardiac risk indices; discuss the role of noninvasive and invasive cardiac testing; and review perioperative pharmacotherapies.
Project description:PurposeThe use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) has evolved to include patients undergoing high-risk non-cardiac procedures and patients with significant cardiac disease undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Implementation of basic TEE education in training programs has increased across a broad spectrum of procedures in the perioperative arena. This paper describes the use of perioperative TEE in non-cardiac surgery and provides an overview of the basic TEE examination.Principal findingsPerioperative TEE is used to monitor hemodynamic parameters in non-cardiac procedures where there is a high risk of hemodynamic instability. Its use extends to include moderate-risk procedures for patients with significant cardiac diseases such as low ejection fraction, hypertrophic cardiomyopathy, severe valve lesions, or congenital heart disease. Vascular procedures involving the aorta, blunt trauma, and liver transplantation are all examples of procedures that may benefit from TEE. Transesophageal echocardiography examination allows assessment of volume status, ventricular function, diagnosis of gross valvular pathology and pericardial tamponade, as well as close monitoring of cardiac output, response to therapy, and the impact of ongoing surgical manipulation. In patients with unexplained and unexpected hemodynamic instability, "rescue TEE" can be used to help identify the underlying cause.ConclusionsPerioperative TEE is emerging as a preferred tool to manage hemodynamics in high-risk procedures and in high-risk patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. A rescue TEE examination protocol is a helpful approach for early identification of the etiology of hemodynamic instability.