Efficacy and Safety of Sugammadex versus Neostigmine in Reversing Neuromuscular Blockade in Morbidly Obese Adult Patients: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

CONTEXT: Sugammadex is known to reverse neuromuscular blockade (NMB) more rapidly and reliably than neostigmine. However, data remain limited in bariatric patients. In this review, we systematically evaluated the efficacy and safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine in reversing NMB in morbidly obese (MO) patients undergoing bariatric surgery. AIMS: Our primary objective was to determine the recovery time from drug administration to a train-of-four (TOF) ratio >0.9 from a moderate or deep NMB. SETTINGS AND DESIGN: This systematic review and meta-analysis (SR and MA) was conducted in accordance with the Preferred Items for SRs and MAs guidelines. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: A systematic search was conducted within multiple databases for studies that compared sugammadex and neostigmine in MO patients. STATISTICAL ANALYSIS USED: We reported data as mean difference (MD) or odds ratios (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using random-effects models. A two-sided P < 0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Seven studies with 386 participants met the inclusion criteria. Sugammadex significantly reduced the time of reversal of moderate NMB-to-TOF ratio >0.9 compared to neostigmine, with a mean time of 2.5 min (standard deviation [SD] 1.25) versus 18.2 min (SD 17.6), respectively (MD: -14.52; 95% CI: -20.08, -8.96; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 96%). The number of patients who had composite adverse events was significantly lower with sugammadex (21.2% of patients) compared to neostigmine (52.5% of patients) (OR: 0.15; 95% CI: 0.07-0.32; P < 0.00001; I 2 = 0%). CONCLUSIONS: Sugammadex reverses NMB more rapidly with fewer adverse events than neostigmine in MO patients undergoing bariatric surgery.

Post-discharge after surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring-1 (PVC-RAM-1) technology versus standard care: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) technology versus standard care increases days alive at home among adults discharged after non-elective surgery during the covid-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 8 acute care hospitals in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 905 adults (≥40 years) who resided in areas with mobile phone coverage and were to be discharged from hospital after non-elective surgery were randomised either to virtual care and RAM (n=451) or to standard care (n=454). 903 participants (99.8%) completed the 31 day follow-up. INTERVENTION: Participants in the experimental group received a tablet computer and RAM technology that measured blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, temperature, and body weight. For 30 days the participants took daily biophysical measurements and photographs of their wound and interacted with nurses virtually. Participants in the standard care group received post-hospital discharge management according to the centre's usual care. Patients, healthcare providers, and data collectors were aware of patients' group allocations. Outcome adjudicators were blinded to group allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up. The 12 secondary outcomes included acute hospital care, detection and correction of drug errors, and pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation. RESULTS: All 905 participants (mean age 63.1 years) were analysed in the groups to which they were randomised. Days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up were 29.7 in the virtual care group and 29.5 in the standard care group: relative risk 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.02); absolute difference 0.2% (95% confidence interval -0.5% to 0.9%). 99 participants (22.0%) in the virtual care group and 124 (27.3%) in the standard care group required acute hospital care: relative risk 0.80 (0.64 to 1.01); absolute difference 5.3% (-0.3% to 10.9%). More participants in the virtual care group than standard care group had a drug error detected (134 (29.7%) v 25 (5.5%); absolute difference 24.2%, 19.5% to 28.9%) and a drug error corrected (absolute difference 24.4%, 19.9% to 28.9%). Fewer participants in the virtual care group than standard care group reported pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation: absolute differences 13.9% (7.4% to 20.4%), 11.9% (5.1% to 18.7%), and 9.6% (2.9% to 16.3%), respectively. Beneficial effects proved substantially larger in centres with a higher rate of care escalation. CONCLUSION: Virtual care with RAM shows promise in improving outcomes important to patients and to optimal health system function. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04344665.

Incidence, Risk Factors, and Outcomes of Perioperative Atrial Fibrillation following Noncardiothoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Regression Analysis of Observational Studies.

BACKGROUND: Atrial fibrillation (AF) occurs in 16-30% of patients after cardiac and thoracic surgery and can lead to serious complications like hypoperfusion of vital organs, pulmonary edema, and myocardial infarction. The evidence on risk factors and complications associated with perioperative AF after noncardiothoracic surgery is limited. METHODS: The primary objective was to determine demographic and clinical risk factors for new-onset atrial fibrillation associated with noncardiothoracic surgery. A secondary aim was to identify the incidence and odds of perioperative complications associated with the new-onset atrial fibrillation. A systematic search within multiple databases was conducted for studies that explicitly reported on new-onset atrial fibrillation after noncardiothoracic surgery. We reported data on demographics, comorbidities, and perioperative complications as mean difference (MD) or odds ratios (OR) and corresponding 95% confidence interval (CI) using random effects models. A two-sided P value of less than 0.05 was considered significant. We performed meta-regression and sensitivity analysis of various subgroups to confirm the inference of our findings. RESULTS: Eleven studies reporting on 121,517 patients were included, of whom 2,944 developed perioperative AF (incidence rate: 3.7%; 95% CI: 2.3%--6.2%). Advanced age (AF group versus control group: 69.36 ± 10.5 versus 64.37 ± 9.53 years; MD: 4.06; 95% CI: 1.67--6.44; P=0.0009), male gender (52.85% versus 43.59%; OR: 1.08; 95% CI: 0.54 to 1.62; I 2: 84%; P < 0.0001), preoperative hypertension (60.42% versus 56.51%; OR: 1.15; 95% CI: 1.08 to 1.23; I 2: 0%; P < 0.00001), diabetes mellitus (22.6% versus 23.04%; OR: 0.97; 95% CI: 0.89 to 1.05; I 2: 0; P < 0.00001), and cardiac disease (30.64% versus 8.49%; OR: 2.3; 95% CI: 0.28 to 4.31; I 2: 93%; P=0.03) were found to be significant predictors for perioperative AF. The AF group was at increased odds of developing postoperative cardiac complications (34.1% versus 5%; OR: 5.44; 95% CI: 0.49 to 10.39; I 2: 82%; P=0.03), postoperative stroke (0.5% versus 0.1%; OR: 3; 95% CI: 0.65 to 5.35; I 2: 0%; P=0.01), and mortality (7.40% versus 1.92%; OR: 3.58; 95% CI: 0.14 to 7.02; I 2: 0%; P=0.04). Study quality assessment by meta-regression and sensitivity analysis of the various subgroups did not affect the final inference of the results. CONCLUSION: We identified advanced age, male gender, preoperative hypertension, diabetes mellitus, and cardiac disease as important risk factors for perioperative atrial fibrillation. The atrial fibrillation group was at increased odds for postoperative cardiac complications, stroke, and higher mortality, emphasizing the need for risk stratification and close monitoring.

Post Discharge after Surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring Technology (PVC-RAM): protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: After nonelective (i.e., semiurgent, urgent and emergent) surgeries, patients discharged from hospitals are at risk of readmissions, emergency department visits or death. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we are undertaking the Post Discharge after Surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring Technology (PVC-RAM) trial to determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) compared with standard care will increase the number of days adult patients remain alive at home after being discharged following nonelective surgery. METHODS: We are conducting a randomized controlled trial in which 900 adults who are being discharged after nonelective surgery from 8 Canadian hospitals are randomly assigned to receive virtual care with RAM or standard care. Outcome adjudicators are masked to group allocations. Patients in the experimental group learn how to use the study's tablet computer and RAM technology, which will measure their vital signs. For 30 days, patients take daily biophysical measurements and complete a recovery survey. Patients interact with nurses via the cellular modem-enabled tablet, who escalate care to preassigned and available physicians if RAM measurements exceed predetermined thresholds, patients report symptoms, a medication error is identified or the nurses have concerns they cannot resolve. The primary outcome is number of days alive at home during the 30 days after randomization. INTERPRETATION: This trial will inform management of patients after discharge following surgery in the COVID-19 pandemic and offer insights for management of patients who undergo nonelective surgery in a nonpandemic setting. Knowledge dissemination will be supported through an online multimedia resource centre, policy briefs, presentations, peer-reviewed journal publications and media engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04344665.

Perioperative Satisfaction and Health Economic Questionnaires in Patients Undergoing an Elective Hip and Knee Arthroplasty: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

Background: Early hospital discharge shifts the recovery burden toward the patient and can leave patients and their caregivers anxious about the recovery process. Postoperative home care must be broadened to include appropriate and adequate support to address recovery at home. In this prospective study, patient and caregiver perspectives on the level of preparation/satisfaction and cost associated with management of recovery in the postoperative period were evaluated. Methods: We designed this prospective study to measure patient-reported outcomes and to inform the design of a postoperative home monitoring system. Patients undergoing inpatient total hip or knee replacements were recruited from a preadmission clinic at a university hospital. Patients and caregivers completed preoperative, postoperative, and health economic questionnaires. Bivariate analyses were conducted to understand factors associated with satisfaction with care. Results: Of 239 patients and caregivers recruited, preoperative questionnaire was completed by 98.8% of patients, the postoperative follow-up questionnaire was completed by 94.2% of patients, 75% of informal caregivers completed the postoperative follow-up questionnaires, and 93.7% completed the health economic questionnaire. The postoperative satisfaction scores were higher than the preoperative needs/expectation scores for both the overall and individual subscales. Patients undergoing hip arthroplasty reported higher satisfaction scores for postoperative pain management than patients undergoing knee arthroplasty (hip arthroplasty vs. knee arthroplasty: 4.07 ± 1.11 vs. 3.37 ± 1.51; P < 0.001). Patients who underwent knee arthroplasty reported better satisfaction scores with regard to having enough information on how to manage leg stiffness at home compared to patients undergoing hip arthroplasty (knee arthroplasty vs. hip arthroplasty: 3.13 ± 1.35 vs. 2.78 ± 1.30; P = 0.04). Conclusion: Overall, patients are generally satisfied with perioperative care, but they have distinct needs and expectations regarding perioperative medication and postoperative pain management. Virtual postoperative monitoring may be a useful tool during postoperative care to address many of patients' concerns.

Evaluation of a preoperative personalized risk communication tool: a prospective before-and-after study.

PURPOSE: Patients want personalized information before surgery; most do not receive personalized risk estimates. Inadequate information contributes to poor experience and medicolegal complaints. We hypothesized that exposure to the Personalized Risk Evaluation and Decision Making in Preoperative Clinical Assessment (PREDICT) app, a personalized risk communication tool, would improve patient knowledge and satisfaction after anesthesiology consultations compared with standard care. METHODS: We conducted a prospective clinical study (before-after design) and used patient-reported data to calculate personalized risks of morbidity, mortality, and expected length of stay using a locally calibrated National Surgical Quality Improvement Program risk calculator embedded in the PREDICT app. In the standard care (before) phase, the application's materials and output were not available to participants; in the PREDICT app (after) phase, personalized risks were communicated. Our primary outcome was knowledge score after the anesthesiology consultation. Secondary outcomes included patient satisfaction, anxiety, feasibility, and acceptability. RESULTS: We included 183 participants (90 before; 93 after). Compared with standard care phase, the PREDICT app phase had higher post-consultation: knowledge of risks (14.3% higher; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.5 to 22.0; P < 0.001) and satisfaction (0.8 points; 95% CI, 0.1 to 1.4; P = 0.03). Anxiety was unchanged (- 1.9%; 95% CI, - 4.2 to 0.5; P = 0.13). Acceptability was high for patients and anesthesiologists. CONCLUSION: Exposure to a patient-facing, personalized risk communication app improved knowledge of personalized risk and increased satisfaction for adults before elective inpatient surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03422133); registered 5 February 2018.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: Les patients veulent disposer d'informations personnalisées avant leur chirurgie, mais la plupart d'entre eux ne reçoivent pas d'estimations de leur risque personnalisées. Des informations inadéquates contribuent à une mauvaise expérience et à des plaintes médicolégales. Nous avons émis l'hypothèse qu'une exposition à l'application PREDICT (Personalized Risk Evaluation and Decision Making in Preoperative Clinical Assessment), un outil de communication du risque personnalisé, améliorerait les connaissances et la satisfaction des patients après leurs consultations en anesthésiologie comparativement à des soins standard. MéTHODE: Nous avons réalisé une étude clinique prospective (de type avant-après) et utilisé les données rapportées par les patients afin de calculer leur risque personnalisé de morbidité et de mortalité, ainsi que la durée de séjour anticipée à l'aide d'un calculateur de risque tiré du Programme national d'amélioration de la qualité chirurgicale que nous avons calibré localement et intégré à l'application PREDICT. Dans la phase de soins standard (avant), le contenu et les résultats de l'application n'étaient pas divulgués aux participants; dans la phase comportant l'application PREDICT (après), les risques personnalisés étaient communiqués. Notre critère d'évaluation principal était le score des connaissances des patients après la consultation en anesthésiologie. Les critères d'évaluation secondaires comprenaient la satisfaction des patients et leur niveau d'anxiété ainsi que la faisabilité et l'acceptabilité d'une telle approche. RéSULTATS: Nous avons inclus 183 participants (90 avant; 93 après). Comparativement à la phase de soins standard, la phase avec l'application PREDICT a démontré un niveau plus élevé de connaissances des risques post consultation (14,3 % plus élevé; intervalle de confiance [IC] 95 %, 6,5 à 22,0; P < 0,001) et de satisfaction (0,8 point; IC 95 %, 0,1 à 1,4; P = 0,03). L'anxiété est demeurée inchangée (− 1,9 %; IC 95 %, − 4,2 à 0,5; P = 0,13). L'acceptabilité était élevée, tant chez les patients que chez les anesthésiologistes. CONCLUSION: L'exposition des patients à une application de communication du risque personnalisé a amélioré leurs connaissances de leur risque personnalisé et augmenté la satisfaction des adultes avant une chirurgie non urgente et non ambulatoire. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: www.clinicaltrials.gov (NCT03422133); enregistrée le 5 février 2018.

Frailty and long-term postoperative disability trajectories: a prospective multicentre cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Frailty is associated with early postoperative outcomes. How frailty influences long-term postoperative recovery is poorly described. Our objective was to evaluate the association of frailty with postoperative disability trajectories in the year after surgery. METHODS: Prespecified 1-yr follow-up of a prospective multicentre cohort study. Patients ≥65 yr were assessed for frailty before major elective noncardiac surgery (Clinical Frailty Scale [CFS] and Fried Phenotype [FP]). The primary outcome was patient-reported disability score (using the WHO Disability Assessment Schedule 2.0) at baseline, 30, 90, and 365 days after surgery. Repeated measures linear regression estimated the association of preoperative frailty with changes in disability scores over time, adjusted for procedure. Group-based trajectory modelling was used to identify subgroup trajectories of people with frailty. RESULTS: One-year follow-up was complete for 687/702 (97.9%) participants. Frailty was associated with a significant difference in disability trajectory (P<0.0001). Compared with baseline, people with frailty experienced a decrease in disability score at 365 days (CFS frailty: -7.3 points, 95% confidence interval [CI] -10.2 to -4.5); (FP frailty: -5.4 points, 95% CI -8.5 to -2.3); people without frailty had no significant change in their disability score from baseline (no CFS frailty: +0.8 points, 95% CI -1.7 to 3.2; no FP frailty: +1.1 points, 95% CI -3.5 to 1.3). More than one-third of people with frailty experienced an early increase in disability before achieving a net decrease in disability. CONCLUSIONS: Decision-making and care planning should integrate the possible trade-offs between early adverse outcomes with longer-term benefit when frailty is present in older surgical patients.

Risk of stroke and other adverse outcomes in patients with perioperative atrial fibrillation 1 year after non-cardiac surgery.

AIMS: To determine the 1-year risk of stroke and other adverse outcomes in patients with a new diagnosis of perioperative atrial fibrillation (POAF) after non-cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: The PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation (POISE)-1 trial evaluated the effects of metoprolol vs. placebo in 8351 patients, and POISE-2 compared the effect of aspirin vs. placebo, and clonidine vs. placebo in 10 010 patients. These trials included patients with, or at risk of, cardiovascular disease who were undergoing non-cardiac surgery. For the purpose of this study, we combined the POISE datasets, excluding 244 patients who were in atrial fibrillation (AF) at the time of randomization. Perioperative atrial fibrillation was defined as new AF that occurred within 30 days after surgery. Our primary outcome was the incidence of stroke at 1 year of follow-up; secondary outcomes were mortality and myocardial infarction (MI). We compared outcomes among patients with and without POAF using multivariable adjusted Cox proportional hazards models. Among 18 117 patients (mean age 69 years, 57.4% male), 404 had POAF (2.2%). The stroke incidence 1 year after surgery was 5.58 vs. 1.54 per 100 patient-years in patients with and without POAF, adjusted hazard ratio (aHR) 3.43, 95% confidence interval (CI) 2.00-5.90; P < 0.001. Patients with POAF also had an increased risk of death (incidence 31.37 vs. 9.34; aHR 2.51, 95% CI 2.01-3.14; P < 0.001) and MI (incidence 26.20 vs. 8.23; aHR 5.10, 95% CI 3.91-6.64; P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: Patients with POAF have a significantly increased risk of stroke, MI, and death at 1 year. Intervention studies are needed to evaluate risk reduction strategies in this high-risk population.

Frailty as a Predictor of Death or New Disability After Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: To compare the accuracy of the modified Fried Index (mFI) and the Clinical Frailty Scale (CFS) to predict death or patient-reported new disability 90 days after major elective surgery. BACKGROUND: The association of frailty with patient-reported outcomes, and comparisons between preoperative frailty instruments are poorly described. METHODS: This was a prospective multicenter cohort study. We determined frailty status in individuals ≥65 years having elective noncardiac surgery using the mFI and CFS. Outcomes included death or patient-reported new disability (primary); safety incidents, length of stay (LOS), and institutional discharge (secondary); ease of use, usefulness, benefit, clinical importance, and feasibility (tertiary). We measured the adjusted association of frailty with outcomes using regression analysis and compared true positive and false positive rates (TPR/FPR). RESULTS: Of 702 participants, 645 had complete follow up. The CFS identified 297 (42.3%) with frailty, the mFI 257 (36.6%); 72 (11.1%) died or experienced a new disability. Frailty was significantly associated with the primary outcome (CFS adjusted odds ratio, OR, 2.51, 95% confidence interval, CI, 1.50-4.21; mFI adjusted-OR 2.60, 95% CI 1.57-4.31). TPR and FPR were not significantly different between instruments. Frailty was the only significant predictor of death or new disability in a multivariable analysis. Need for institutional discharge, costs and LOS were significantly increased in individuals with frailty. The CFS was easier to use, required less time and had less missing data. CONCLUSIONS: Older people with frailty are significantly more likely to die or experience a new patient-reported disability after surgery. Clinicians performing frailty assessments before surgery should consider the CFS over the mFI as accuracy was similar, but ease of use and feasibility were higher.

A Systematic Review of the Impact of Surgical Special Care Units on Patient Outcomes and Health Care Resource Utilization.

Perioperative intermediate care units (termed surgical special care units) have been widely implemented across health systems because they are believed to improve surveillance and management of high-risk surgical patients. Our objective was to conduct a systematic review to investigate the effects of a 3-level model of perioperative care delivery (ie, ward, surgical special care unit, or intensive care unit) compared to a 2-level model of care (ie, ward, intensive care unit) on postoperative outcomes. Our protocol was registered with PROSPERO, the international prospective register of systematic reviews (CRD42015025155). Randomized controlled studies and nonrandomized comparator studies were included. We performed a systematic search of Medline, Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature, Embase, and the Cochrane library (inception - 11/2017). The primary outcome was mortality; secondary outcomes included length of stay and hospital costs. We identified 1995 citations with our search, and 21 studies met eligibility criteria (2 randomized controlled studies and 19 nonrandomized comparator studies; 44,134 patients in total). Surgical special care units were characterized by continuous monitoring (12 studies), the absence of mechanical ventilation (8 studies), nurse-to-patient ratios (range, 1:2-1:4), and number of beds (median: 5; range: 3-33). Thirteen studies reported on mortality. Notable findings included no observed difference in overall in-hospital mortality, but an apparent increase in intensive care unit mortality in a 3-level model of care. This may reflect a decanting of lower acuity patients from the intensive care unit to the surgical special care unit. No significant difference was found in hospital length of stay; however, 2 studies demonstrated reductions in hospital costs with the implementation of a surgical special care unit. Significant clinical and methodological heterogeneity precluded pooled analysis. Given the prevalence of surgical special care units, the results of our review suggest that additional methodologically rigorous investigations are needed to understand the effect of these units on the surgical population.

Postoperative Home Monitoring After Joint Replacement: Feasibility Study.

BACKGROUND: We conducted a prospective observational study of patients undergoing elective primary hip or knee replacements to examine the feasibility of a postoperative home monitoring system as transitional care to support patients following their surgery in real time. OBJECTIVE: The primary outcome was the mean percentage of successful wireless transmissions from home of blood pressure levels, heart rate, oxygen saturation levels, and pain scores until postoperative day 4 with a feasibility target of ≥90%. METHODS: Patients with an expected length of stay ≤1 day, age 18-80 years, Revised Cardiac Risk Index ≤ class 2, and caretakers willing to assist at home were eligible. Patient satisfaction, as a secondary outcome, was also evaluated. Wireless monitoring equipment (remote patient monitoring, Telus Canada) was obtained and a multidisciplinary care team was formed. RESULTS: We conducted the study after obtaining Research Ethics Board approval; 54 patients completed the study: 21 males, 33 females. In total, we evaluated 9 hips, 4 hip resurfacing, 26 total knees, and 15 hemi-knees. The mean transmission rate was 96.4% (SD 5.9%; 95% CI 94.8-98.0). The median response to "I would recommend the Remote Monitoring System program to future patients" was 4.5 (interquartile range 4-5), with 1 being "strongly disagree" and 5 "strongly agree." At 30 days postop, there was no mortality or readmission. CONCLUSIONS: This is an evolving new paradigm for postoperative care and the first feasibility study on monitoring biometrics after primary hip or knee replacement. Postoperative home monitoring combines current technology with real-time support by a multidisciplinary transitional care team after discharge, facilitating postsurgical care with successful wireless transmission of vitals. The postoperative home monitoring implementation is, therefore, generalizable to other surgical discharges from hospitals. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02143232; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02143232 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/71ugAhhIk).

Postoperative Home Monitoring After Joint Replacement: Retrospective Outcome Study Comparing Cases With Matched Historical Controls.

BACKGROUND: A retrospective cohort study was conducted in patients undergoing postoperative home monitoring (POHM) following elective primary hip or knee replacements. OBJECTIVE: The objectives of our study were to compare the cost per patient, readmissions rate, emergency room visits, and mortality within 30 days to the historical standard of care using descriptive analysis. METHODS: After Research Ethics Board approval, patients who were enrolled and had completed a POHM study were individually matched to historical controls by age, American Society of Anesthesiology class, and procedure at a ratio 1:2. RESULTS: A total of 54 patients in the study group and 107 in the control group were eligible for the analysis. Compared with the historical standard of care, the average cost per case was Can $5826.32 (SD 1418.89) in the POHM group and Can $9198.58 (SD 1513.59) for controls. After 30 days, there were 2 emergency room visits (3.7%) and 0 readmissions in the POHM group, whereas there were 8 emergency room visits (7.5%) and 2 readmissions (1.9%) in the control group. No mortalities occurred in either group. CONCLUSIONS: The POHM study offers an early hospital discharge pathway for elective hip and knee procedures at a 38% reduction of the standard of care cost. The multidisciplinary transitional POHM team may provide a reliable forum to minimize readmissions, and emergency room visits within 30 days postoperatively. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT02143232; https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02143232 (Archived by WebCite at http://www.webcitation.org/73WQ9QR6P).

Assessment of safety and efficacy of mesenchymal stromal cell therapy in preclinical models of acute myocardial infarction: a systematic review protocol.

BACKGROUND: Despite advances in treatment, acute myocardial infarction (MI) is still associated with significant morbidity and mortality, especially in patients with extensive damage and scar formation. Based on some promising preclinical studies, there is interest in the use of mesenchymal stromal cells (MSCs) to promote cardiac repair after acute MI. However, there is a need for a systematic review of this evidence to summarize the efficacy and safety of MSCs in preclinical models of MI. This will better inform the translation of MSC therapy for acute MI and guide the design of a future clinical trial. METHODS/DESIGN: A systematic literature search of MEDLINE, Embase, and BIOSIS Previews will be conducted. We will identify comparative preclinical studies (randomized and non-randomized) of myocardial infarction that include animals given MSC therapy versus a vehicle/placebo. The primary outcome will be left ventricular ejection fraction. Secondary and tertiary outcomes will include death, infarct size, measures of cardiac function, biochemical outcomes, and MSC retention and differentiation. Risk of bias will be assessed using the Cochrane Risk of Bias Tool. Subgroup analyses will be performed to measure how various sources of preclinical study heterogeneity affect the direction and magnitude of the primary outcome. We will meta-analyze data using inverse variance random effects modeling. DISCUSSION: This systematic review of preclinical evidence will provide a summary of the efficacy and safety of MSCs in animal models of MI. The results will help determine whether sufficient evidence exists to conduct a clinical trial in humans and inform its design.

Association of delay of urgent or emergency surgery with mortality and use of health care resources: a propensity score-matched observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Delay of surgery for hip fracture is associated with increased risk of morbidity and mortality, but the effects of surgical delays on mortality and resource use in the context of other emergency surgeries is poorly described. Our objective was to measure the independent association between delay of emergency surgery and in-hospital mortality, length of stay and costs. METHODS: We identified all adult patients who underwent emergency noncardiac surgery between January 2012 and October 2014 at a single tertiary care centre. Delay of surgery was defined as the time from surgical booking to operating room entry exceeding institutionally defined acceptable wait times, based on a standardized 5-level priority system that accounted for surgery type and indication. Patients with delayed surgery were matched to those without delay using propensity scores derived from variables that accounted for details of admission and the hospital stay, patient characteristics, physiologic instability, and surgical urgency and risk. RESULTS: Of 15 160 patients, 2820 (18.6%) experienced a delay. The mortality rates were 4.9% (138/2820) for those with delay and 3.2% (391/12 340) for those without delay (odds ratio [OR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.30-1.93). Within the propensity-matched cohort, delay was significantly associated with mortality (OR 1.56, 95% CI 1.18-2.06), increased length of stay (incident rate ratio 1.07, 95% CI 1.01-1.11) and higher total costs (incident rate ratio 1.06, 95% CI 1.01-1.11). INTERPRETATION: Delayed operating room access for emergency surgery was associated with increased risk of inhospital mortality, longer length of stay and higher costs. System issues appeared to underlie most delays and must be addressed to improve the outcomes of emergency surgery.

Predictors, Prognosis, and Management of New Clinically Important Atrial Fibrillation After Noncardiac Surgery: A Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: Despite the frequency of new clinically important atrial fibrillation (AF) after noncardiac surgery and its increased association with the risk of stroke at 30 days, there are limited data informing their prediction, association with outcomes, and management. METHODS: We used the data from the PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation trial to determine, in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, the association of new clinically important AF with 30-day outcomes, and to assess management of these patients. We also aimed to derive a clinical prediction rule for new clinically important AF in this population. We defined new clinically important AF as new AF that resulted in symptoms or required treatment. We recorded an electrocardiogram 6 to 12 hours postoperatively and on the 1st, 2nd, and 30th days after surgery. RESULTS: A total of 211 (2.5% [8351 patients]; 95% confidence interval, 2.2%-2.9%) patients developed new clinically important AF within 30 days of randomization (8140 did not develop new AF). AF was independently associated with an increased length of hospital stay by 6.0 days (95% confidence interval, 3.5-8.5 days) and vascular complications (eg, stroke or congestive heart failure). The usage of an oral anticoagulant at the time of hospital discharge among patients with new AF and a CHADS2 score of 0, 1, 2, 3, and ≥4 was 6.9%, 10.2%, 23.0%, 9.4%, and 33.3%, respectively. Two independent predictors of patients developing new clinically important AF were identified (ie, age and surgery). The prediction rule included the following factors and assigned weights: age ≥85 years (4 points), age 75 to 84 years (3 points), age 65 to 74 years (2 points), intrathoracic surgery (3 points), major vascular surgery (2 points), and intra-abdominal surgery (1 point). The incidence of new AF based on scores of 0 to 1, 2, 3 to 4, and 5 to 6 was 0.5%, 1.0%, 3.1%, and 5.3%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Age and surgery are independent predictors of new clinically important AF in the perioperative setting. A minority of patients developing new clinically important AF with high CHADS2 scores are discharged on an oral anticoagulant. There is a need to develop effective and safe interventions to prevent this outcome and to optimize the management of this event when it occurs.

Postoperative real-time electrocardiography monitoring detects myocardial ischemia: a case report.

PURPOSE: This case report outlines the utility and challenges of remote continuous postoperative electrocardiography ECG) monitoring, which is routed through a secure smartphone to provide real-time detection and management of myocardial ischemia. CLINICAL FEATURES: A 42-yr-old male with previous myocardial infarction and angioplasty underwent a radical prostatectomy. At three hours and 45 min postoperatively, remote real-time ECG monitoring was initiated upon the patient's arrival on a regular surgical ward. Monitor alerts were routed to a study clinician's smartphone. About six hours postoperatively, alarms were received and horizontal ST segment depressions were observed. A 12-lead ECG validated the ST segment changes, prompting initiation of a metoprolol iv and a red blood cell transfusion. Approximately seven hours and 30 min postoperatively, the ST segments normalized. The patient was discharged on postoperative day 3 and followed for four years without any sequelae. CONCLUSION: This case report illustrates the use of remote ECG monitoring and clinician response in real time with the use of a smartphone. With each alert, a small ECG strip is transmitted to the smartphone for viewing. In our view, this technology and management system provides a possible means to interrupt myocardial ischemic cascades in real time and prevent postoperative myocardial infarction.

Professionalism in anesthesia.

PURPOSE: Is professionalism in medicine just another bureaucratic imposition on our practice or a fundamental concept for physicians at all stages in their career? In this review, the historical perspectives of professionalism are explored as well as the what, why, and how questions concerning this topic. SOURCE: The key words "professionalism" and "anesthesia" were used to conduct a search of the PubMed database, the policies and publications of relevant Canadian and international physician regulatory bodies and organizations, historical documents, and other internet publications. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Professionalism in anesthesia has a long history. While there are many definitions for professionalism, some very dated, all are based on virtues, behaviour, or professional identity. Professionalism plays a central role in the balance between physician autonomy and social contract, and it has a significant impact on patient safety and medicolegal litigation. CONCLUSION: Considerable evidence exists to suggest that professionalism must be treated seriously, particularly in these times of social accountability and budgetary pressures.

Signal Quality Analysis of Ambulatory Electrocardiograms to Gate False Myocardial Ischemia Alarms.

OBJECTIVE: The objective of this study is to propose and validate an alarm gating system for a myocardial ischemia monitoring system that uses ambulatory electrocardiogram. The PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation study recommended the selective administration of ß blockers to patients at risk of cardiac events following noncardiac surgery. Patients at risk are identified by monitoring ST segment deviations in the electrocardiogram (ECG); however, patients are encouraged to ambulate to improve recovery, which deteriorates the signal quality of the ECG leading to false alarms. METHODS: The proposed alarm gating system computes a signal quality index (SQI) to quantify the ECG signal quality and rejects alarms with a low SQI. The system was validated by artificially contaminating ECG records with motion artifact records obtained from the long-term ST database and MIT-BIH noise stress test database, respectively. RESULTS: Without alarm gating, the myocardial ischemia monitoring system attained a Precision of 0.31 and a Recall of 0.78. The alarm gating improved the Precision to 0.58 with a reduction of Recall to 0.77. CONCLUSION: The proposed system successfully gated false alarms with future work exploring the misidentification of fiducial points by myocardial ischemia monitoring systems. SIGNIFICANCE: The reduction of false alarms due to the proposed system will decrease the incidence of the alarm fatigue condition typically found in clinicians. Alarm fatigue condition was rated as the top patient safety hazard from 2012 to 2015 by the Emergency Care Research Institute.