Primary Adrenal Insufficiency due to Cryptococcus With Persistent Adrenal Enlargement and Insufficiency.

Background/Objective: Infiltrative fungal infections are an unusual cause of primary adrenal insufficiency (AI). Our objective is to present a long-term follow-up of a patient with AI due to cryptococcal adrenalitis. Case Report: A 47-year-old woman presented in January 2004, with 50-lb weight loss, nausea, emesis, and headache with diplopia. During the 6 months prior to her presentation the patient had multiple admissions for evaluation of recurrent nausea and emesis. Prior to the most recent of these admissions, the patient developed a headache; evaluation of her cerebrospinal fluid revealed the presence of Cryptococcus, and she was treated with a 2-week course of amphotericin B. Physical examination demonstrated a temperature of 101.1 °F, heart rate of 110 bpm, and blood pressure of 94/65 mm Hg. She appeared ill and was underweight with dry mucous membranes and photophobia. Laboratory tests revealed random cortisol of 0.5 µg per dL. CT imaging showed bilateral adrenal gland enlargement and fine needle aspiration of the adrenal gland revealed encapsulated budding yeast. Stress dose intravenous glucocorticoids were administered and switched to oral hydrocortisone and fludrocortisone because the patient clinically improved with a second course of amphotericin B. Further evaluation in 2017 revealed persistently enlarged adrenal glands, positive cryptococcus antigen, and low IgG levels. Discussion: Our literature review noted few publications of AI caused by disseminated cryptococcus with no long-term follow-up of these cases beyond a 1- to 4-year time frame. Conclusion: Patients with AI due to disseminated fungal infection need long-term follow-up to assess for resolution of adrenal enlargement and evaluation of immunocompromised status.

Feasibility of intraoperative continuous glucose monitoring: An observational study in general surgery patients.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative hyperglycemia is associated with adverse outcomes in surgical patients, and major societies recommend intraoperative monitoring and treatment targeting glucose <180-200 mg/dL. However, compliance with these recommendations is poor, in part due to fear of unrecognized hypoglycemia. Continuous Glucose Monitors (CGMs) measure interstitial glucose with a subcutaneous electrode and can display the results on a receiver or smartphone. Historically CGMs have not been utilized for surgical patients. We investigated the use of CGM in the perioperative setting compared to current standard practices. METHOD: This study evaluated the use of Abbott Freestyle Libre 2.0 and/or Dexcom G6 CGMs in a prospective cohort of 94 participants with diabetes mellitus undergoing surgery of ≥3 h duration. CGMs were placed preoperatively and compared to point of care (POC) BG checks obtained by capillary samples analyzed with a NOVA glucometer. Frequency of intraoperative blood glucose measurement was at the discretion of the anesthesia care team, with a recommendation of once per hour targeting BG of 140-180 mg/dL. Of those consented, 18 were excluded due to lost sensor data, surgery cancellation, or rescheduling to a satellite campus resulting in 76 enrolled subjects. There were zero occurrences of failure with sensor application. Paired POC BG and contemporaneous CGM readings were compared with Pearson product-moment correlation coefficients, and Bland-Altman plots. RESULTS: Data for use of CGM in perioperative period was analyzed for 50 participants with Freestyle Libre 2.0, 20 participants with Dexcom G6, and 6 participants with both devices worn simultaneously. Lost sensor data occurred in 3 participants (15%) wearing Dexcom G6, 10 participants wearing Freestyle Libre 2.0 (20%) and 2 of the participants wearing both devices simultaneously. The overall agreement of the two CGM's utilized had a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.731 in combined groups with 0.573 in Dexcom arm evaluating 84 matched pairs and 0.771 in Libre arm with 239 matched pairs. Modified Bland-Altman plot of the difference of CGM and POC BG indicated for the overall dataset a bias of -18.27 (SD 32.10). CONCLUSIONS: Both Dexcom G6 and Freestyle Libre 2.0 CGMs were able to be utilized and functioned well if no sensor error occurred at time of initial warmup. CGM provided more glycemic data and further characterized glycemic trends more than individual BG readings. Required time of CGM warm up was a barrier for intraoperative use as well as unexplained sensor failure. CGMs had a fixed warm of time, 1 h for Libre 2.0 and 2 h for Dexcom G6 CGM, before glycemic data obtainable. Sensor application issues did not occur. It is anticipated that this technology could be used to improve glycemic control in the perioperative setting. Additional studies are needed to evaluate use intraoperatively and assess further if any interference from electrocautery or grounding devices may contribute to initial sensor failure. It may be beneficial in future studies to place CGM during preoperative clinic evaluation the week prior to surgery. Use of CGMs in these settings is feasible and warrants further evaluation of this technology on perioperative glycemic management.

Multiobjective optimization challenges in perioperative anesthesia: A review.

Physicians use perioperative decision-support tools to mitigate risks and maximize benefits to achieve the most successful outcome for patients. Contemporary risk-assessment practices augment surgeons' judgement and experience with decision-support algorithms driven by big data and machine learning. These algorithms accurately assess risk for a wide range of postoperative complications by parsing large datasets and performing complex calculations that would be cumbersome for busy clinicians. Even with these advancements, large gaps in perioperative risk assessment remain; decision-support algorithms often cannot account for risk-reduction therapies applied during a patient's perioperative course and do not quantify tradeoffs between competing goals of care (eg, balancing postoperative pain control with the risk of respiratory depression or balancing intraoperative volume resuscitation with the risk for complications from pulmonary edema). Multiobjective optimization solutions have been applied to similar problems successfully but have not yet been applied to perioperative decision support. Given the large volume of data available via electronic medical records, including intraoperative data, it is now feasible to successfully apply multiobjective optimization in perioperative care. Clinical application of multiobjective optimization would require semiautomated pipelines for analytics and reporting model outputs and a careful development and validation process. Under these circumstances, multiobjective optimization has the potential to support personalized, patient-centered, shared decision-making with precision and balance.

Delirium History and Preoperative Mild Neurocognitive Disorder: An Opportunity for Multidisciplinary Patient-Centered Care.

BACKGROUND Delirium is a well-established clinical phenomenon that remains largely underdiagnosed. In light of its association with diminished postoperative outcomes, recent efforts involve implementing preventive strategies and fostering early detection. This report highlights how multidisciplinary interventions can inform risk for delirium and the challenges that accompany identifying at-risk patients. CASE REPORT A 75-year-old male with a history of postoperative cognitive complications including delirium and mild cognitive impairment. He was attending an outpatient preoperative anesthesia clearance assessment prior to a planned removal for a left frontoethmoidal sinus mucocele. As part of clinical care, an in-house neuropsychologist completed a neurobehavioral exam to assess current cognitive status and guide perioperative cognitive care recommendations. Findings were consistent with mild neurocognitive disorder. CONCLUSIONS Given the patient's history and current status, he was listed as a high delirium risk. The team provided information on delirium and delirium risk factors, encouraged the patient to speak to his surgeon and also a geriatric specialist to assist with decision making. Due to their concern about delirium, the patient and his caregiver opted to postpone the left frontoethmoidal sinus mucocele removal.