Anesthetic Considerations in Facial Transplantation: Experience at NYU Langone Health and Systematic Review.
ABSTRACT: Anesthetic considerations are integral to the success of facial transplantation (FT), yet limited evidence exists to guide quality improvement. This study presents an institutional anesthesia protocol, defines reported anesthetic considerations, and provides a comprehensive update to inform future directions of the field. Methods:An institutional "FT Anesthesia Protocol" was developed and applied to 2 face transplants. A systematic review of 3 databases captured FTs in the peer-reviewed literature up to February 2020. Two reviewers independently screened titles and abstracts to include all clinical articles with FT recipient and/or donor-specific preoperative, intraoperative, and relevant postoperative anesthetic variables. Data charting guided a narrative synthesis, and quantitative synthesis reported variables as median (range). Results:Our institutional experience emphasizes the importance of on-site rehearsals, anticipation of patient-specific anesthetic and resuscitative requirements, and long-term pain management. Systematic search identified 1092 unique records, and 129 met inclusion criteria. Reports of 37 FTs in the literature informed the following anesthetic axes: donor pre- and intraoperative management during facial allograft procurement, recipient perioperative care, immunotherapy, antimicrobial prophylaxis, and pain management. Quantitative synthesis of 30 articles showed a median operative time of 18 hours (range, 9-28) and fluid replacement with 13?L (5-18) of crystalloids, 13 units (0-66) of packed red blood cells, 10 units (0-63) of fresh frozen plasma, and 1 unit (0-9) of platelets. Conclusions:Anesthetic considerations in FT span the continuum of care. Future efforts should guide standard reporting to establish evidence-based strategies that promote quality improvement and patient safety.
Project description:Facial transplantation (FT) has become a feasible reconstructive solution for patients with devastating facial injuries. Secondary revisions to optimize functional and aesthetic outcomes are to be expected, yet the optimal timing and approach remain to be determined. The purpose of this study was to analyze all facial allograft revisions reported to date, including the senior author's experience with 3 FTs. Methods:A literature review was performed, with 2 reviewers independently conducting title and abstract screening, followed by a full-text review. All articles mentioning FT revision surgeries were evaluated. The medical records of the senior author's 3 FT recipients were additionally reviewed. Results:Initially, 721 articles were captured and 37 were included in the final analysis. Thirty-two FTs were reported to have involved posttransplant allograft revisions, with FT recipients undergoing a mean of 4.8 ± 4.6 revision procedures. The mean duration between FT and the first revision procedure was 149 ± 179 days. A wide spectrum of revisions was identified and categorized as involving the soft tissues, craniofacial skeleton, dentition, oronasal cavity, salivary glands, facial nerve, or ocular region. In the senior author's experience, when indicated, posttransplant occlusal changes and integrity of the donor-recipient intraoral interface were successfully addressed with secondary procedures without allograft compromise or loss. Conclusions:The worldwide experience shows that secondary procedures are nearly ubiquitous after FT and can be safely performed at various timepoints. The authors thereby establish 5 distinct categories of facial allograft revisions and define 7 critical principles to optimize posttransplant procedures.
Project description:The contribution of ultrasound-assisted thoracic paravertebral block to postoperative analgesia remains unclear. We compared the effect of a combination of ultrasound assisted-thoracic paravertebral block and propofol general anesthesia with opioid and sevoflurane general anesthesia on volatile anesthetic, propofol and opioid consumption, and postoperative pain in patients having breast cancer surgery.Patients undergoing breast cancer surgery were randomly assigned to ultrasound-assisted paravertebral block with propofol general anesthesia (PPA group, n = 121) or fentanyl with sevoflurane general anesthesia (GA group, n = 126). Volatile anesthetic, propofol and opioid consumption, and postoperative pain intensity were compared between the groups using noninferiority and superiority tests.Patients in the PPA group required less sevoflurane than those in the GA group (median [interquartile range] of 0 [0, 0] vs. 0.4 [0.3, 0.6] minimum alveolar concentration [MAC]-hours), less intraoperative fentanyl requirements (100 [50, 100] vs. 250 [200, 300]?g,), less intense postoperative pain (median visual analog scale score 2 [1, 3.5] vs. 3 [2, 4.5]), but more propofol (median 529 [424, 672] vs. 100 [100, 130] mg). Noninferiority was detected for all four outcomes; one-tailed superiority tests for each outcome were highly significant at P<0.001 in the expected directions.The combination of propofol anesthesia with ultrasound-assisted paravertebral block reduces intraoperative volatile anesthetic and opioid requirements, and results in less post operative pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery.ClinicalTrial.gov NCT00418457.
Project description:Background:The aim of this randomized, triple-blind trial was to determine the anesthetic, analgesic, and hemodynamic effects of articaine and bupivacaine in the extraction of impacted mandibular third molar teeth. Methods:Twenty-six patients who underwent removal of bilaterally symmetric mandibular third molars were randomly assigned to articaine and bupivacaine groups in a split-mouth design. The onset of anesthetic action, intraoperative comfort, total amount of solution used, duration of postoperative anesthesia and analgesia, rescue analgesic use, postoperative pain, intraoperative bleeding, and hemodynamic parameters were evaluated. Results:In the articaine group, the onset of anesthetic activity was faster, intraoperative comfort was greater, and effective anesthesia required less local anesthetic solution. The bupivacaine group showed a significantly longer duration of postoperative anesthesia and analgesia, in addition to lower visual analog scale values at 6 and 48 hours postoperatively. There were no significant differences between the two solutions regarding rescue analgesic medication use, intraoperative bleeding, or hemodynamics. Conclusion:Articaine showed greater clinical efficacy than bupivacaine in intraoperative anesthesia, achieving faster onset of anesthetic action and greater patient comfort while also requiring less reinforcement during surgery. However, bupivacaine was superior in terms of postoperative anesthesia, reducing postoperative pain due to its residual anesthetic and analgesic effects. Both anesthetic solutions led to similar hemodynamics at low doses in mandibular third molar surgery.
Project description:Coffin-Lowry syndrome (CLS) is a rare inherited disease with specific clinical features, such as mental retardation, facial dysmorphism, and cardiac abnormality. In particular, the characteristic facial features of CLS, including retrognathia and large tongue, are associated with difficult ventilation and/or intubation, which is a serious problem of anesthesia management. However, case reports on anesthesia management of CLS are very limited as there are only two published English reports till date. In this case report, we discuss anesthetic and postoperative considerations in patients with CLS, focusing on difficult airway management, and summarize past reports including some Japanese articles.A 25-year-old man with CLS was planning to undergo laminectomy because of progressive quadriplegia caused by calcification of the yellow ligament. We suspected difficulty in airway management because of several factors in his facial features, short thyromental and sternomental distances in computed tomography, severe obesity, and sleep apnea syndrome.Difficult airway was suspected. However, because of mental retardation, awake intubation was considered difficult.We selected bronchofiberscope-guided nasotracheal intubation, maintaining spontaneous breathing under moderate sedation with a propofol target-controlled infusion.Airway management was safely performed during anesthesia induction.In many patients with CLS, difficult intubation was reported, and sedation or slow induction maintaining spontaneous breathing was mainly selected for anesthesia induction. Spontaneous breathing should be maintained during anesthesia induction in case of CLS patients.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Traumatic injury of the femur resulting in femoral fracture may result in significant postoperative pain. As with other causes of acute pain, regional anesthesia may offer a benefit over conventional therapy with intravenous opioids. This study prospectively assesses the effects of femoral nerve blockade with a lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block (FN-LFCN) on intraoperative anesthetic requirements, postoperative pain scores, and opioid requirements. MATERIALS AND METHODS:Seventeen pediatric patients (age 2-18 years) undergoing surgical repair of a traumatic femur fracture fulfilled the study criteria and were randomly assigned to general anesthesia with either an FN-LFCN block (n = 10) or intravenous opioids (n = 7). All patients received a general anesthetic with isoflurane for maintenance anesthesia during the surgical repair of the femur fracture. Patients randomized to the FN-LFCN block group received ultrasound-guided nerve blockade using ropivacaine (0.2%/0.5% based on patient weight). At the conclusion of surgery, the airway device was removed once tracheal extubation criteria were achieved, and patients were transported to the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) for recovery and assessment of pain by a blinded study nurse. RESULTS:The final study cohort included 17 patients (n = 10 for FN-LFCN block group; n = 7 for the intravenous opioid group). Although the median of the maximum postoperative pain scores in the regional group was 0, this did not reach statistical significance when compared to the median pain score of 3 in the intravenous opioid group. Likewise, no difference between the two groups was noted when comparing intraoperative anesthetic requirements, opioid requirements (intraoperative, in the post-anesthesia recovery room, and in the inpatient ward), and the time to first opioid requirement postoperatively in the inpatient ward. CONCLUSION:This prospective, randomized, double-blinded study failed to demonstrate a clear benefit of regional anesthesia over intravenous opioids intraoperatively and postoperatively during repair of femoral shaft fractures in the pediatric population.
Project description:<h4>Purpose</h4>Patients receiving surgery with wide-awake local anesthesia typically report little or no intraoperative pain. However, self-report assessments of pain are susceptible to bias. In the present study, patient self-report ratings were supplemented with objective physiological measures of electrodermal activity.<h4>Methods</h4>Fifteen patients receiving forefoot surgery using wide-awake local anesthesia were recruited. Pain ratings and skin conductance responses were acquired during the initial anesthetic injection (into unanesthetized tissue), during a follow-up anesthetic injection (into anesthetized tissue), and during five intraoperative procedures.<h4>Results</h4>The highest ratings of self-reported pain coincided with the initial anesthetic injection, and pain ratings were similarly low at all remaining measurement points. Fourteen patients reported no pain beyond the initial injection, whereas one patient reported minimal pain during two intraoperative procedures. Skin conductance data were consistent with pain ratings such that responses to the initial injection were significantly larger than responses at any subsequent measurement point.<h4>Conclusion</h4>These results provide further evidence that patients experience little or no pain during surgery with wide-awake local anesthesia.
Project description:Emergency anesthesia in elderly patients aged 65 years and older is complex. The occurrence of intraoperative incidents and arterial hypotension is conditioned by patients' initial health status and by the quality of intraoperative management. This study aimed to determine the incidence of intra-anesthetic arterial hypotension in elderly patients during emergency surgery and to assess the involvement of certain factors in its occurrence: age, sex, patient's history, ASA class, anesthetic technique. We conducted a retrospective descriptive and analytical study in the Emergency Surgery Department at the Aristide Le Dantec University Hospital from 1 March 2014 to 28 February 2015. We collected data from 210 patients out of 224 elderly patients aged 65 years and older undergoing emergency anesthesias (10.93%). Data of 101 men and 109 women were included in the analysis, of whom 64.3% had at least one defect. Patients' preoperative status was assessed using American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification: 71% of patients were ASA class 1 and 2 and 29% were ASA class 3 and 4. Locoregional anesthesia was the most practiced anesthetic technique (56.7%). 28 patients (13.33%) had intra-anesthetic arterial hypotension, of whom 16 under general anesthesia and 12 under locoregional anesthesia. It was more frequent in patients with high ASA class and a little less frequent in patients with PAH and underlying heart disease. Arterial hypotension in elderly patients during emergency surgery exposes the subject to the risk of not negligible intraoperative hypotension, especially in patients with high ASA class. Prevention is based on adequate preoperative assessment and anesthetic management.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Advancements in virtual reality (VR) technology have resulted in its expansion into health care. Preliminary studies have found VR to be effective as an adjunct to anesthesia to reduce pain and anxiety for patients during upper gastrointestinal endoscopies, dental procedures and joint arthroplasties. Current standard care practice for upper extremity surgery includes a combination of regional anesthesia and intraoperative propofol sedation. Commonly, patients receive deep propofol sedation during these cases, leading to potentially avoidable risks of over-sedation, hypotension, upper airway obstruction, and apnea. The objective of this study is to evaluate the effectiveness of VR technology to promote relaxation for patients undergoing upper extremity surgery, thereby reducing intraoperative anesthetic requirements and improving the perioperative patient experience. METHODS:In this single-center, randomized controlled trial, 40 adult patients undergoing upper extremity orthopedic surgery will be randomly allocated to either intraoperative VR immersion or usual care. VR immersion is designed to provide patients with a relaxing virtual environment to alleviate intraoperative anxiety. All patients receive a peripheral nerve block prior to surgery. Patients in the intervention group will select videos or immersive environments which will be played in the VR headset during surgery. An anesthesia provider will perform their usual clinical responsibilities intraoperatively and can administer anesthetic medications if and when clinically necessary. Patients in the control arm will undergo perioperative anesthesia according to standard care practice. The primary outcome is the difference in intraoperative propofol dose between the groups. Secondary outcomes include postoperative analgesia requirements and pain scores, length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit, overall patient satisfaction and postoperative functional outcomes. DISCUSSION:It is unknown whether the use of VR during upper extremity surgery can reduce intraoperative anesthetic requirements, reduce perioperative complications, or improve the postoperative patient experience. A positive result from this clinical trial would add to the growing body of evidence that demonstrates the effectiveness of VR as an adjunct to anesthesia in reducing intraoperative pain and anxiety for multiple types of procedure. This could lead to a change in practice, with the introduction of a nonpharmacologic intervention potentially reducing the burden of over-sedation while still providing a satisfactory perioperative experience. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03614325. Registered on 9 July 2018.
Project description:BACKGROUND:Clinical histological studies demonstrate that the distribution of natural killer (NK) cells, other immune cells and ?-opioid receptors (MOR) within cancer tissue can predict cancer prognosis. No clinical study has evaluated whether anesthetic technique influences immune cell and MOR expression within human breast cancer. METHODS:Excised preoperative biopsies and intraoperative breast cancer specimens from 20 patients randomly chosen from patients previously enrolled in an ongoing, prospective, randomized trial (NCT00418457) investigating the effect of anesthetic technique on long-term breast cancer outcome were immunohistochemically stained and microscopically examined by two independent investigators, masked to randomization, to quantify MOR and immune cell infiltration: CD56, CD57 (NK cells), CD4 (T helper cells), CD8 (cytotoxic T cells) and CD68 (macrophages). Patients had been randomized to receive either a propofol-paravertebral anesthetic with continuing analgesia (PPA, n?=?10) or balanced general anesthetic with opioid analgesia (GA, n?=?10). RESULTS:There were no differences between the groups in staining intensity in preoperative biopsy specimens. Expression intensity values (median 25-75%) for MOR in intraoperative resected biopsy were higher in GA 8.5 (3-17) versus PPA 1 (0-10), p?=?0.04. The numbers of MOR-positive cells were also higher in GA patients. Expression and absolute numbers of CD56, CD57, CD4 and CD68 were similar in resected tumor in both groups. CONCLUSION:General anesthesia with opioid analgesia increased resected tumor MOR expression compared with propofol-paravertebral anesthetic technique, but the anesthetic technique did not significantly influence the expression of immune cell markers.
Project description:As life expectancy increases, more patients ?65 years undergo general anesthesia. Anesthetic agents may contribute to postoperative cognitive dysfunction, and incidence may differ with anesthetic agents or intraoperative anesthesia depth. Responses to anesthetic adjuvants vary among elderly patients. Processed electroencephalography guidance of anesthetic may better ensure equivalent cerebral suppression. This study investigates postoperative cognitive dysfunction differences in elderly patients given desflurane or sevoflurane using processed electroencephalography guidance.IRB approved, randomized trial enrolled consenting patients ?65 years scheduled for elective surgery requiring general anesthesia ?120 minute duration. After written informed consent, patients were randomly assigned to sevoflurane or desflurane. No perioperative benzodiazepines were administered. Cognitive impairment was measured by an investigator blinded to group assignment using mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) at baseline; 1, 6, and 24 hours after the end of anesthesia. Mean arterial pressure was maintained within 20% of baseline. Anesthetic dose was adjusted to maintain moderate general anesthesia per processed electroencephalograpy (Patient State Index 25 to 50). The primary outcome measure was intergroup difference in MMSE change 1 hour after anesthesia (median; 95% confidence interval).110 patients consented; 26 were not included for analysis (no general anesthesia; withdrew consent; baseline MMSE abnormality; inability to perform postoperative MMSE; data capture failure); 47 sevoflurane and 37 desflurane were analyzed. There were no significant differences in patient characteristics; intraoperative mean blood pressure (desflurane 86.4; 81.3 to 89.6 versus sevoflurane 82.5; 80.2 to 86.1 mmHg; p?=?0.42) or Patient State Index (desflurane 41.9; 39.0 to 44.0 versus sevoflurane 41.0; 37.5 to 44.0; p?=?0.60) despite a lower MAC fraction in desflurane (0.82; 0.77 to 0.86) versus sevoflurane (0.96; 0.91 to 1.03; p?<?0.001). MMSE decreased 1 hour after anesthesia (p?<?0.001). The decrease at one hour was larger in sevoflurane (-2.5; -3.3 to -1.8) than desflurane (-1.3; -2.2 to -0.5; p?=?0.03). MMSE returned to baseline by 6 hours after anesthesia.For elderly patients in whom depth of anesthesia is maintained in the moderate range, both desflurane and sevoflurane are associated with transient decreases in cognitive function as measured by MMSE after anesthesia, with clinically insignificant differences between them in this setting.ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01199913.