Perioperative colloids: From theory to practice.

INTRODUCTION: Fluid administration is the cornerstone in hypovolemic patient's reanimation. Clinical guidelines restrict colloid administration favouring crystalloids. Currently, we don't know exactly which is the daily clinical practice during the perioperative period. The objective of this study is to describe perioperative use of colloids analysing possible reasons aiming to use them. MATERIAL AND METHODS: Prospective, cross-section, national, multicentre observational study. Fluid Day sub-study. We enrolled all patient's older than 18 years old who underwent surgery during the 24 h of the 2-days study (February, 2019, 18th and 20th). We registered demographic data, comorbidities, anaesthetic and surgical procedure data, fluids administered, perioperative bleeding and monitoring type used during the perioperative period. RESULTS: A total of 5928 cases were analysed and 542 patients (9.1%) received any type of colloids, being hydroxiethyl-starch the most frequently used (5.1%). Patients receiving colloids suffered more longing surgery (150 [90-255] vs. 75 [45-120] min), were urgently operated (13.7 vs. 7.5%) and were more frequent classified as high risk (22 vs. 4.8%). Their recovery was mostly in critical care units (45.1 vs.15.8%). Patients with bleeding less than 500 ml received colloids in a percentage of 5.9 versus 45.9% when this figure was overcome. Patients who received colloids were anaemic more frequently: 29.4 vs. 16.3%. Colloids administration had a higher risk for transfusion (OR 15.7). Advanced monitoring also increased the risk for receiving colloids (OR 9.43). CONCLUSIONS: In our environment with routine clinical practice, colloids administration is limited and close linked to perioperative bleeding.

L4 erector spinal plane block after lumbar spine arthrodesi: A case-series. / Bloqueo del plano del erector espinal en L4 en cirugía de artrodesis lumbar: serie de casos.

INTRODUCTION: Thoracic erector spinae plane block is now performed in many different surgical procedures, including lumbar spinal fusion. We evaluated the analgesic effect of lumbar ESP performed at L4 after lumbar spinal fusion surgery. METHODS AND CASE SERIES: Eight patients scheduled for lumbar spinal fusion were included in the case series. Erector spinae plane block was performed at L4 preoperatively, administering 20ml of 0.2% ropivacaine on each side. We recorded patient-reported pain intensity during the first 48 postoperative hours using a visual analogue scale (VAS) and rescue analgesia requirements. Pain at rest was controlled in all patients (VAS 0 to 3), although pain on movement ranged from mild to severe (VAS 0 to 8). Rescue analgesia consumption ranged from 1 to 22mg morphine. CONCLUSIONS: Lumbar ESP appears to contribute to pain control during the first 48hours after lumbar spinal fusion.

[Implementation of blood sparing programs in Spain: results of a survey of departments of anesthesiology and resuscitation]. / Implementación de los programas de ahorro de sangre en España: resultados de la encuesta a los servicios de anestesiología y reanimación.

The objective of this article is to determine the availability of a perioperative transfusion management program (Patient Blood Management [PBM]) in various hospitals through a survey that included a description of the preanesthesia visit, the availability and use of the various blood-sparing techniques and the factors limiting their implementation in elective surgery. The survey included 42 questions, directed at the representative departments of anesthesiology of hospitals in Spain (n=91). The survey was conducted from September to November 2012. We analyzed the 82 surveys in which all the questions were answered (90%). Preoperative consultations are routinely performed (>70%) in 87% of the hospitals. The time from the consultation to surgery varied between 1 week and 2 months for 74% of the patients scheduled for orthopedic or trauma surgery, 78% of those scheduled for oncologic surgery and 77% of those scheduled for cardiac surgery. Almost all hospitals (77, 94%) had a transfusion committee, and 90% of them had an anesthesiologist on the committee. Seventy-nine percent of the hospitals had a blood-sparing program, and the most widely used technique was the use of antifibrinolytic agents (75% of hospitals), followed by intraoperative and postoperative blood recovery in equal proportions (67%). Optimization of preoperative hemoglobin was routinely performed with intravenous iron in 39% of the hospitals and with recombinant erythropoietin in 28% of the hospitals. The absence of a well-established circuit and the lack of involvement and collaboration with the surgical team were the main limiting factors in implementing PBM. Currently, the implementation of PBM in Spain could be considered acceptable, but it could also be improved, especially in the treatment of preoperative anemia. The implementation of PBM requires multidisciplinary collaboration among all personnel responsible for perioperative care, including the health authorities.

[The first pillar of patient blood management. Types of anemia and diagnostic parameters]. / Primer pilar del "Patient Blood Management". Tipos de anemia y parámetros diagnósticos.

Patient Blood Management (PBM) is the design of a personalized, multimodal multidisciplinary plan for minimizing transfusion and simultaneously achieving a positive impact on patient outcomes. The first pillar of PBM consists of optimizing the erythrocyte mass. The best chance for this step is offered by preoperative preparation. In most cases, a detailed medical history, physical examination and laboratory tests will identify the cause of anemia. A correct evaluation of parameters that assess the state and function of iron, such as ferritin levels, and the parameters that measure functional iron, such as transferrin saturation and soluble transferrin receptor levels, provide us with essential information for guiding the treatment with iron. The new blood count analyzers that measure hypochromia (% of hypochromic red blood cells and reticulocyte hemoglobin concentrations) provide us useful information for the diagnosis and follow-up of the response to iron treatment. Measuring serum folic acid and vitamin B12 levels is essential for treating deficiencies and thereby achieving better hemoglobin optimization.

[Algorithm for treating preoperative anemia]. / Algoritmo para el tratamiento de la anemia preoperatoria.

Hemoglobin optimization and treatment of preoperative anemia in surgery with a moderate to high risk of surgical bleeding reduces the rate of transfusions and improves hemoglobin levels at discharge and can also improve postoperative outcomes. To this end, we need to schedule preoperative visits sufficiently in advance to treat the anemia. The treatment algorithm we propose comes with a simple checklist to determine whether we should refer the patient to a specialist or if we can treat the patient during the same visit. With the blood count test and additional tests for iron metabolism, inflammation parameter and glomerular filtration rate, we can decide whether to start the treatment with intravenous iron alone or erythropoietin with or without iron. With significant anemia, a visit after 15 days might be necessary to observe the response and supplement the treatment if required. The hemoglobin objective will depend on the type of surgery and the patient's characteristics.

[Optimization of preoperative hemoglobin levels in patients without anemia and/or patients who undergo surgery with high blood loss]. / Optimización de la hemoglobina preoperatoria en pacientes no anémicos y/o sometidos a cirugía de elevada pérdida hemática.

To minimize allogeneic blood transfusions (ABTs) during complex surgery and surgery with considerable blood loss risk, various blood-sparing techniques are needed (multimodal approach). All surgical patients should be assessed with sufficient time to optimize hemoglobin levels and iron reserves so that the established perioperative transfusion strategy is appropriate. Even if the patient does not have anemia, improving hemoglobin levels to reduce the risk of ABT is justified in some cases, especially those in which the patient refuses a transfusion. Treatment with iron and/or erythropoietic agents might also be justified for cases that need a significant autologous blood reserve to minimize ABT during surgery with considerable blood loss.

[Treatment of anemia in patients undergoing bariatric surgery]. / Tratamiento de la anemia en pacientes intervenidos de cirugía bariátrica.

Iron deficiency in patients with morbid obesity can occur before bariatric surgery due to its inflammatory component and after surgery as the result of implementing the malabsorptive techniques. For patients with morbid obesity, micronutrient deficiencies, such as vitamin B12, iron and folate, should be suspected. Iron deficiency and other hematinics should be corrected, even when anemia has not been established. Normal ferritin levels do not allow us to rule out a possible iron deficiency, given that ferritin can increase due to the chronic inflammatory condition of obesity. After bariatric surgery, patients should take iron supplements; however, these supplements are frequently poorly tolerated. Rapid and effective correction of hemoglobin levels might require the intravenous administration of iron preparations.

Forum for debate: Safety of allogeneic blood transfusion alternatives in the surgical/critically ill patient.

In recent years, several safety alerts have questioned or restricted the use of some pharmacological alternatives to allogeneic blood transfusion in established indications. In contrast, there seems to be a promotion of other alternatives, based on blood products and/or antifibrinolytic drugs, which lack a solid scientific basis. The Multidisciplinary Autotransfusion Study Group and the Anemia Working Group España convened a multidisciplinary panel of 23 experts belonging to different healthcare areas in a forum for debate to: 1) analyze the different safety alerts referred to certain transfusion alternatives; 2) study the background leading to such alternatives, the evidence supporting them, and their consequences for everyday clinical practice, and 3) issue a weighted statement on the safety of each questioned transfusion alternative, according to its clinical use. The members of the forum maintained telematics contact for the exchange of information and the distribution of tasks, and a joint meeting was held where the conclusions on each of the items examined were presented and discussed. A first version of the document was drafted, and subjected to 4 rounds of review and updating until consensus was reached (unanimously in most cases). We present the final version of the document, approved by all panel members, and hope it will be useful for our colleagues.