Anesthesia practice for Cesarean delivery in Japan: a retrospective cohort study.

PURPOSE: General anesthesia for Cesarean delivery affects maternal and neonatal outcomes. We aimed to evaluate temporal trends in anesthesia management for Cesarean deliveries over 16 years and analyze interinstitutional variations in general anesthesia use in Japan. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we obtained patient data from the nationwide health insurance claims database containing data for ten million individuals. We included patients who underwent Cesarean delivery between 1 January 2005 and 31 August 2021. The primary outcome was the use of general anesthesia. We evaluated institutional variations in general anesthesia use in medical facilities using two-level hierarchical logistic regression analyses with median odds ratios and intraclass correlation coefficients. RESULTS: The cohort included 86,793 patients who underwent 102,617 Cesarean deliveries at 2,496 institutions. General anesthesia was used in 3.7% (95% confidence interval [CI], 3.6 to 3.9) of all Cesarean deliveries. The temporal trend in the use of general anesthesia decreased gradually from 10.8% in 2005 to 2.9% in 2021 (P for trend < 0.001). The adjusted median odds ratio for medical facilities was 6.1 (95% CI, 5.9 to 6.7), and the intraclass correlation coefficient was 0.52 (95% CI, 0.51 to 0.55). CONCLUSION: Although the rate of general anesthesia use for Cesarean delivery in Japan decreased gradually from 2005 to 2021, general anesthesia was used in 3.7% of all Cesarean deliveries. The use of general anesthesia varied significantly across institutions, and 52% of the overall variations in general anesthesia practice can be explained by differences between facilities.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: L'anesthésie générale pour l'accouchement par césarienne affecte les issues maternelles et néonatales. Notre objectif était d'évaluer les tendances temporelles de la prise en charge anesthésique pour les accouchements par césarienne sur 16 ans et d'analyser les variations interinstitutionnelles dans l'utilisation de l'anesthésie générale au Japon. MéTHODE: Dans cette étude de cohorte rétrospective, nous avons obtenu des données sur les patient·es à partir de la base de données nationale des réclamations d'assurance maladie contenant des données pour dix millions de personnes. Nous avons inclus les personnes ayant bénéficié d'un accouchement par césarienne entre le 1er janvier 2005 et le 31 août 2021. Le critère d'évaluation principal était le taux d'utilisation de l'anesthésie générale. Nous avons évalué les variations institutionnelles dans l'utilisation de l'anesthésie générale dans les établissements médicaux à l'aide d'analyses de régression logistique hiérarchique à deux niveaux avec des rapports de cotes médians et des coefficients de corrélation intraclasse. RéSULTATS: La cohorte comprenait 86 793 patient·es ayant bénéficié de 102 617 accouchements par césarienne dans 2496 établissements. L'anesthésie générale a été utilisée dans 3,7 % (intervalle de confiance [IC] à 95 %, 3,6 à 3,9) de tous les accouchements par césarienne. La tendance temporelle de l'utilisation de l'anesthésie générale a diminué graduellement, passant de 10,8 % en 2005 à 2,9 % en 2021 (P pour la tendance < 0,001). Le rapport de cotes médian ajusté pour les établissements médicaux était de 6,1 (IC 95 %, 5,9 à 6,7), et le coefficient de corrélation intraclasse était de 0,52 (IC 95 %, 0,51 à 0,55).

The association between intraoperative anesthesia methods used during gastric cancer surgery and long-term mortality: A retrospective observational study using a Japanese claims database.

PURPOSE: Various basic and clinical studies have investigated the association between the types of anesthetic agents and prognosis. However, the results have varied among studies and remain controversial. In the present study, we aimed to investigate whether the risk of all-cause mortality differs between inhaled or intravenous anesthetics in patients with gastric cancer undergoing gastrectomy. METHODS: Using a Japanese nationwide insurance claims database, we analyzed patients who underwent gastrectomy under general anesthesia for gastric cancer between January 2005 and September 2019. Postoperative outcomes were compared between two groups: those who received inhaled anesthetics (Sevoflurane, Isoflurane, or Desflurane) and those who received intravenous anesthetics (propofol), using a multivariable Cox proportional hazards model. The primary outcome was overall survival. RESULTS: Among 2671 eligible patients, 2105 were in the inhaled anesthetic group, and 566 were in the intravenous anesthetic group. The median (interquartile range) age was 58 (51-63) years, and 1979 (74.1%) were men. The median follow-up period was 795 days. We identified 56 (2.7%) and 16 (2.8%) deaths during the follow-up period in the inhaled and intravenous anesthetic use groups, respectively. There was no difference in postoperative overall survival between the two groups (hazard ratio, 0.97; 95% confidence interval, 0.56-1.70; P = 0.93). CONCLUSIONS: We found no significant difference in the postoperative risks of overall survival between inhaled and intravenous anesthesia in patients with gastric cancer undergoing gastrectomy.

Consensus statement on smoking cessation in patients with pain.

Smoking is closely associated with the development of various cancers and tobacco-related illnesses such as cardiovascular and respiratory disorders. However, data are scarce on the relationship between smoking and both acute and chronic pain. In addition to nicotine, tobacco smoke contains more than 4000 different compounds. Although nicotine is not the sole cause of smoking-induced diseases, it plays a critical role in pain-related pathophysiology. Despite the acute analgesic effects of nicotine, long-term exposure leads to tolerance and increased pain sensitivity due to nicotinic acetylcholine receptor desensitization and neuronal plastic changes. The purpose of smoking cessation interventions in smoking patients with pain is primarily not only to reduce their pain and associated limitations in activities of daily living, but also to improve the outcomes of underlying pain-causing conditions and reduce the risks of tobacco-related disorders. This statement aims to summarize the available evidence on the impact of smoking on pain and to inform medical professionals of the significance of smoking cessation in patients with pain.

A practical guide for perioperative smoking cessation.

The perioperative management of patients who are smokers presents anesthesiologists with various challenges related to respiratory, circulatory, and other clinical problems. Regarding 30-day postoperative outcomes, smokers have higher risks of mortality and complications than non-smokers, including death, pneumonia, unplanned tracheal intubation, mechanical ventilation, cardiac arrest, myocardial infarction, and stroke. Given the benefits of smoking cessation and the adverse effects of smoking on perioperative patient management, patients should quit smoking long before surgery. However, anesthesiologists cannot address these issues alone. The Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists established guidelines in 2015 (published in a medical journal in 2017) to enlighten surgical staff members and patients regarding perioperative tobacco cessation. The primary objective of perioperative smoking cessation is to reduce the risks of adverse cardiovascular and respiratory events, wound infection, and other perioperative complications. Perioperative preparations constitute a powerful teachable moment, a "golden opportunity" for smoking cessation to achieve improved primary disease outcomes and prevent the occurrence of tobacco-related conditions. This review updates the aforementioned guidelines as a practical guide to cover the nuts and bolts of perioperative smoking cessation. Its goal is to assist surgeons, anesthesiologists, and other medical professionals and to increase patients' awareness of smoking risks before elective surgery.

The association between arterial pulse waveform analysis device and in-hospital mortality in high-risk non-cardiac surgeries.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative goal-directed fluid therapy is used for haemodynamic optimization in high-risk surgeries. Cardiac output monitoring can be performed by a specialized pressure transducer for arterial pulse waveform analysis (S-APWA). No study has assessed whether real-world use of S-APWA is associated with post-operative outcomes; therefore, using a Japanese administrative claims database, we retrospectively investigated whether S-APWA use is associated with in-hospital mortality among patients undergoing high-risk surgery under general anaesthesia. METHODS: Adult patients who underwent high-risk surgery under general anaesthesia and arterial catheterization between 2014 and 2016 were divided into S-APWA and conventional arterial pressure transducer groups, then compared regarding baseline factors and outcomes. Logistic regression analysis was performed to compare in-hospital mortality. Subgroup analyses evaluated S-APWA efficacy and outcomes based on the type of surgery and patients' comorbidity. RESULTS: S-APWA was used in 6859 of 23 655 (29.0%) patients; the crude in-hospital mortality rate was 3.5%. Adjusted analysis showed no significant association between S-APWA use and in-hospital mortality rate (adjusted odds ratio [aOR] = 0.91; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.76-1.07; P = .25). S-APWA use was associated with significantly lower in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing vascular surgery (aOR = 0.67; 95% CI: 0.49-0.94), and significantly higher in-hospital mortality in patients undergoing lower limb amputation (aOR = 2.63; 95% CI: 1.32-5.22). S-APWA use and in-hospital mortality were not significantly associated with other subgroups. CONCLUSION: S-APWA use was not associated with in-hospital mortality in the entire study population. However, S-APWA was associated with decreased in-hospital mortality among vascular surgery and increased in-hospital mortality among lower limb amputation.

Correction to: Prophylactic sivelestat for esophagectomy and in-hospital mortality: a propensity score-matched analysis of claims database.

In the original version of the article, the Tables 2 and 3 was published incorrectly. The correct version of Tables 2 and 3 are given below.

Preoperative Echocardiography for Patients With Hip Fractures Undergoing Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study Using a Nationwide Database.

BACKGROUND: The effect of preoperative transthoracic echocardiography on the clinical outcomes of patients with hip fractures undergoing surgical treatment remains controversial. We hypothesized that preoperative echocardiography is associated with reduced postoperative morbidity and improved patient survival after surgical repair of hip fractures. METHODS: Drawing from a nationwide administrative database, patients undergoing hip fracture surgeries between April 1, 2008 and December 31, 2016 were included. We examined the association of preoperative echocardiography with the incidence of in-hospital mortality using propensity score matching. Secondary outcomes included postoperative complications, the incidence of postoperative intensive care unit admissions, and length of hospital stay. For sensitivity analyses, we restricted the overall cohort to include only hip fracture surgeries performed within 2 days from admission. RESULTS: Overall, 34,679 (52.1%) of 66,620 surgical patients underwent preoperative echocardiography screening. The screened patients (mean [SD] age, 84.3 years [7.7 years]; 79.0% female) were propensity score matched to 31,941 nonscreened patients (mean [SD] age, 82.1 years [8.7 years]; 78.2% female). The overall in-hospital mortality, before propensity matching, was 1.8% (1227 patients). Propensity score matching created a matched cohort of 25,205 pairs of patients. There were no in-hospital mortality differences between the 2 groups (screened versus nonscreened: 417 [1.65%] vs 439 [1.74%]; odds ratio, 0.95; 95% confidence interval, 0.83-1.09; P = .45). Preoperative echocardiography was not associated with reduced postoperative complications and intensive care unit admissions. In sensitivity analysis, we identified 25,637 patients from the overall cohort (38.5%) with hip fracture surgeries performed within 2 days of admission. There were no in-hospital mortality differences between the 2 groups (screened versus nonscreened: 1.67% vs 1.80%; odds ratio, 0.93; 95% confidence interval, 0.72-1.18; P = .53). Findings were also consistent with other sensitivity analyses and subgroup analyses. CONCLUSIONS: This large, retrospective, nationwide cohort study demonstrated that preoperative echocardiography was not associated with reduced in-hospital mortality or postoperative complications.

Utilization of arterial pulse waveform analysis during non-cardiac surgery in Japan: a retrospective observational study using a nationwide claims database.

Arterial pulse waveform analysis (APWA) is used for cardiac output monitoring. However, data on the frequency of and patient characteristics for specialized pressure transducer for APWA (S-APWA) use are lacking. We retrospectively identified 175,201 patients aged 18 years or older, who underwent non-cardiac surgery under general anesthesia with an arterial catheter from January 1, 2014, to December 31, 2016. We extracted data on patient demographics, comorbidities, surgical and anesthesia characteristics, and hospital characteristics. Among the full study cohort, 24,605 (14.0%) patients were monitored using S-APWA. Further, the use of S-APWA was higher in patients undergoing high-risk surgery than in those undergoing low-risk surgery [high vs low: adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.95; 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.76-2.15, moderate vs low: aOR 1.11; 95% CI 1.01-1.22] and those with more comorbidities than in those with less comorbidities (high vs low: aOR 1.49; 95% CI 1.42-1.56, moderate vs low: aOR 1.25; 95% CI 1.20-1.31). S-APWA use was significantly associated with both surgery risk and patients' comorbidities. In conclusion, our study may provide a benchmark for future studies related to the appropriate use of S-APWA.

Prophylactic sivelestat for esophagectomy and in-hospital mortality: a propensity score-matched analysis of claims database.

PURPOSE: Transthoracic esophagectomy is an invasive surgery, and the excessive surgical stress produces inflammatory cytokines, which provoke acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Sivelestat sodium hydrate-a selective neutrophil elastase inhibitor-is used to treat or prevent ARDS in patients undergoing esophagectomy, although clear evidence is lacking. We investigated the benefits and risk of prophylactic sivelestat. METHODS: This retrospective study used an administrative claims database in Japan. Adult patients who underwent transthoracic esophagectomy from 2010 to 2016 were identified and divided into a prophylactic sivelestat use group and a non-prophylactic use group that included both non-users and therapeutic users. The primary outcome was all-cause in-hospital mortality, and a secondary outcome included the proportion of ARDS. We used 1:1 propensity score matching. For sensitivity analyses, we conducted a 1:2 propensity score matching analysis and several analyses with various patient inclusion criteria. RESULTS: Of the 3391 patients with esophagectomy, 621 received prophylactic sivelestat. On unadjusted analysis, the sivelestat group had a higher proportion of in-hospital mortality (5.3% vs. 2.9%) compared with the control group. We created a matched cohort of 615 pairs, whose baseline characteristics were well balanced. On adjusted analysis using propensity score matching, prophylactic sivelestat administration was not associated with decreased in-hospital mortality [adjusted odds ratio (aOR) 1.65; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.95-2.88], ARDS rate (aOR 1.25; 95% CI 0.49-3.17). The findings were also consistent with other sensitivity analyses. CONCLUSION: Because mortality and postoperative complications were similar, our findings do not support prophylactic sivelestat administration for patients undergoing esophagectomy.

Preoperative Blood Tests Conducted Before Low-Risk Surgery in Japan: A Retrospective Observational Study Using a Nationwide Insurance Claims Database.

BACKGROUND: Routine preoperative testing is discouraged before low-risk surgery because testing does not provide any beneficial effect in terms of patient outcome. However, few studies have assessed the utilization of hospital health care resources in terms of preoperative tests in a real-world setting. Here, we aimed to assess the prevalence and factors associated with preoperative blood tests before low-risk surgery in Japan. METHODS: In this retrospective observational study, we used the nationwide insurance claims data of Japan. Patients who underwent low-risk surgeries between April 1, 2012 and March 31, 2016, were included. Our primary outcome was the receipt of any preoperative tests within 60 days before an index procedure: complete blood count, basic metabolic panel, coagulation tests, and liver function tests. We performed a descriptive analysis to estimate the proportions of preoperative blood tests, and examined the associations between patient-level and institutional-level factors and preoperative blood tests, using multilevel logistic regression analysis. Interinstitutional variation in the utilization of preoperative tests was summarized using the median odds ratio (OR). RESULTS: The study sample included 59,818 patients (mean [standard deviation] age, 44.0 [11.3] years; 33,574 [56.1%] women) from 9746 institutions. The overall proportion of each test was: complete blood count, 58.7%; metabolic panel, 47.8%; coagulation tests, 36.6%; and liver function tests, 48.5%. The proportion receiving any preoperative tests in the overall sample was 59.5%. Multilevel logistic regression analysis indicated that preoperative blood tests were associated with the Charlson comorbidity index score (score ≥3: adjusted OR, 4.21; 95% confidence interval [CI], 3.69-4.80), anticoagulant use (adjusted OR, 4.12; 95% CI, 2.35-7.22), type of anesthesia (general anesthesia: adjusted OR, 5.69; 95% CI, 4.85-6.68; regional anesthesia: adjusted OR, 3.76; 95% CI, 3.28-4.30), surgical setting (inpatient procedure: adjusted OR, 3.64; 95% CI, 3.30-4.00), and number of beds (≥100 beds: adjusted OR, 3.61; 95% CI, 3.19-4.08). The median institutional-specific proportion of preoperative tests was 40.0% (interquartile range, 0%-100%). The median OR for interinstitutional variation in ordering preoperative tests was 4.34. These findings were consistent across a sensitivity analysis. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative blood tests were performed before 59.5% of low-risk surgeries. Preoperative tests were associated with the type of anesthesia, patient characteristics, and medical facility status. There was a substantial interinstitutional variation in the utilization of preoperative tests.

Preoperative pulmonary function tests before low-risk surgery in Japan: a retrospective cohort study using a claims database.

PURPOSE: Routine preoperative pulmonary function tests (PFTs) are not recommended prior to low-risk surgery because their prognostic value is limited. However, only a few studies have assessed the utilization of healthcare resources regarding preoperative PFTs in a real-world setting. Here, we aimed to assess the prevalence and determinant factors of preoperative PFTs before low-risk surgery in Japan. METHODS: In this retrospective cohort study, we used the nationwide insurance claims databases. Patients who underwent low-risk surgeries under general anesthesia between April 1, 2012, and March 31, 2016, were included. The primary outcome was the receipt of PFTs within 60 days before an index surgery. We performed descriptive analyses to estimate the rates of preoperative PFTs annually starting in 2012, and examined the associations between patient- and institutional-level factors and preoperative PFTs using multilevel logistic regression analyses. RESULTS: The cohort included 9495 procedures (8866 patients) at 1487 institutions. Preoperative PFTs were conducted before 71.8% of the procedures. The temporal trend of preoperative PFTs remained constant from 72.4% in 2012 to 72.2% in 2015. Multilevel regression analysis revealed that preoperative PFTs were associated with older age, number of beds at a medical facility, and inpatient procedures. The median institutional-specific proportion of PFTs was 75.0% (interquartile range, 14.3-100%) with wide inter-institutional variation. CONCLUSIONS: Our analysis found that preoperative PFTs were performed before 72% of low-risk surgeries under general anesthesia. Apart from age, preoperative PFTs were determined primarily by non-medical factors. Additionally, we observed substantial institutional variation in the use of preoperative PFTs.

[Incidence, Risk Factors, and Effects on Outcome of Postoperative Delirium in Patients Undergoing Esophagectomy].

BACKGROUND: Postoperative delirium (POD) is a common but serious complication after major surgery. The aim of this study was to investigate the incidence and effects on outcome of POD in esophagectomy patients, and to identify risk factors for developing POD. METHODS: A retrospective medical record review was conducted for all patients who had received esophagectomy for esophageal cancer during a three-year period. RESULTS: In a total of 71 patients, the overall incidence of POD was 20%. Multivariable regression analysis identified two independent risk factors for POD: older age (70) and preoperative electrolyte abnormalities. Patients with delirium had a higher incidence of respiratory complications and longer hospital stays compared with the non-delirium patients. CONCLUSIONS: The incidence of POD in patients undergoing esophagectomy is 20%. The risk factors of POD are older age and preoperative electrolyte abnormalities. POD negatively impacts postoperative respiratory complications and hospital stay.

Safety of sugammadex for myasthaenia gravis patients undergoing general anaesthesia: a retrospective database study.

Background: Using neuromuscular blocking drugs (NMBDs) for patients with myasthaenia gravis remains a challenge in perioperative management. Sugammadex has enabled the safe use of NMBDs. We investigated whether the adverse outcomes, and the treatment used for myasthaenic crises and tracheotomy, are affected by NMBD use in patients with myasthaenia gravis under general anaesthesia. Methods: Patients with myasthaenia gravis who underwent general anaesthesia were retrieved from the Diagnostic Procedure Combination/Per-Diem Payment systems in Japan between 1 January 2010 and 30 November 2020. This database did not contain information on the severity of myasthaenia gravis (Osserman classification). Patients who received rocuronium and sugammadex were compared with those who did not receive NMBDs after propensity-score matching. We excluded patients who underwent emergency or cardiac surgery or tracheal intubation before anaesthesia. The primary outcome was receipt of postoperative treatment used for myasthaenic crises. Results: Among 2304 surgical patients with comorbid myasthaenia gravis, propensity-score matching identified 788 patients administered rocuronium and sugammadex and 449 not administered NMBDs. On comparing the treatment used for myasthaenic crises, we found no significant difference between the two groups (6.2% vs 5.3%; hazard ratio, 1.14; 95% confidence interval, 0.70-1.85). Conclusions: Use of rocuronium and sugammadex in patients with myasthaenia gravis did not significantly affect the receipt of postoperative treatment used for myasthaenic crises compared with no use of NMBDs. As well as the severity of myasthaenia gravis was not fully adjusted, it is unclear whether intraoperative administration of rocuronium with the use of sugammadex postoperatively is acceptable and further investigations are needed.