RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Illicit drug use (IDU) is often encountered in patients undergoing elective ambulatory surgical procedures such as endoscopy. Given the variety of systemic effects of these drugs, sedation and anesthetics are believed to increase the risk of cardiopulmonary complications during procedures. Procedural cancelations are common, regardless of the drug type, recency of use, and total dosage consumed. There is a lack of institutional and society recommendations regarding the optimal approach to performing outpatient endoscopy on patients with IDU. AIM: To review the literature for current recommendations regarding the optimal management of outpatient elective endoscopic procedures in patients with IDU. Secondary aim is to provide guidance for clinicians who encounter IDU in endoscopic practice. METHODS: Systematic review of PubMed, CINAHL, Embase, and Google Scholar for articles presenting data on outcomes of elective procedures in patients using illicit drugs. RESULTS: There are no clinically relevant differences in periprocedural complications or mortality in cannabis users compared to non-users. Endoscopy in patients with remote cocaine use was also found to have similar outcomes to recent use. CONCLUSIONS: Canceling endoscopic procedures in patients with recent IDU without consideration of the type of drug, dosage, and chronicity may lead to unnecessary delays in care and increased patient morbidity. Healthcare systems would benefit from additional guidelines for evaluating the patient with recent illicit drug use for acute intoxication and consider proceeding with procedures in the non-toxic population.
Asunto(s)
Drogas Ilícitas , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias , Humanos , Endoscopía/métodos , Endoscopía Gastrointestinal/efectos adversos , Drogas Ilícitas/efectos adversos , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/complicaciones , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/diagnóstico , Trastornos Relacionados con Sustancias/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
PURPOSE: Numerous guideline recommendations for airway and perioperative management during the COVID-19 pandemic have been published. We identified, synthesized, and compared guidelines intended for anesthesiologists. SOURCE: Member society websites of the World Federation of Societies of Anesthesiologists and the European Society of Anesthesiologists were searched. Recommendations that focused on perioperative airway management of patients with proven or potential COVID-19 were included. Accelerated screening was used; data were extracted by one reviewer and verified by a second. Data were organized into themes based on perioperative phase of care. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: Thirty unique sets of recommendations were identified. None reported methods for systematically searching or selecting evidence to be included. Four were updated following initial publication. For induction and airway management, most recommended minimizing personnel and having the most experienced anesthesiologist perform tracheal intubation. Significant congruence was observed among recommendations that discussed personal protective equipment. Of those that discussed tracheal intubation methods, most (96%) recommended videolaryngoscopy, while discordance existed regarding use of flexible bronchoscopy. Intraoperatively, 23% suggested specific anesthesia techniques and most (63%) recommended a specific operating room for patients with COVID-19. Postoperatively, a minority discussed extubation procedures (33%), or care in the recovery room (40%). Non-technical considerations were discussed in 27% and psychological support for healthcare providers in 10%. CONCLUSION: Recommendations for perioperative airway management of patients with COVID-19 overlap to a large extent but also show significant differences. Given the paucity of data early in the pandemic, it is not surprising that identified publications largely reflected expert opinion rather than empirical evidence. We suggest future efforts should promote coordinated responses and provide suggestions for studying and establishing best practices in perioperative patients. STUDY REGISTRATION: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/a2k4u/ ); date created, 26 March 2020.
RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: De nombreuses recommandations ont été publiées pour la prise en charge des voies aériennes et périopératoires pendant la pandémie de COVID-19. Nous avons identifié, synthétisé et comparé les lignes directrices destinées aux anesthésiologistes. SOURCES: Les sites internet des sociétés membres de la Fédération mondiale des sociétés d'anesthésiologistes et de la Société européenne d'anesthésiologie ont été consultés. Les recommandations axées sur la prise en charge périopératoire des voies aériennes des patients atteints de COVID-19 prouvée ou potentielle ont été incluses. Une sélection accélérée a été utilisée; les données ont été extraites par un examinateur et vérifiées par un second. Les données ont été thématiquement organisées en fonction de la phase périopératoire des soins. CONSTATATIONS PRINCIPALES: Trente ensembles uniques de recommandations ont été identifiés. Aucun de ces ensemble n'a fait état de méthodes de recherche ou de sélection systématiques des données probantes à inclure. Quatre ont été mis à jour après leur publication initiale. Pour l'induction et la prise en charge des voies aériennes, la plupart ont recommandé de minimiser le personnel et de demander à l'anesthésiologiste le plus expérimenté de réaliser l'intubation trachéale. Une congruence significative a été observée parmi les recommandations qui portaient sur les équipements de protection individuelle. Parmi les lignes directrices évoquant les méthodes d'intubation trachéale, la plupart (96 %) ont recommandé la vidéolaryngoscopie, alors qu'il existait une discordance concernant l'utilisation de bronchoscopes flexibles. En peropératoire, 23 % ont suggéré des techniques d'anesthésie spécifiques et la plupart (63 %) ont recommandé une salle d'opération spécifique pour les patients atteints de COVID-19. En postopératoire, une minorité a abordé le sujet des procédures d'extubation (33 %) ou des soins en salle de réveil (40 %). Les considérations non techniques ont été traitées dans 27 % des cas et le soutien psychologique aux fournisseurs de soins de santé dans 10 %. CONCLUSION: Les recommandations pour la prise en charge périopératoire des voies aériennes des patients atteints de COVID-19 se chevauchent dans une large mesure, mais montrent également des différences significatives. Compte tenu de la rareté des données au début de la pandémie, il n'est pas surprenant que les publications identifiées reflètent en grande partie l'opinion d'experts plutôt que de se fonder sur des données probantes empiriques. Nous suggérons que les efforts futurs soient déployés de manière à promouvoir des réponses coordonnées et proposer des suggestions pour étudier et établir les meilleures pratiques chez les patients en période périopératoire. ENREGISTREMENT DE L'éTUDE: Open Science Framework ( https://osf.io/a2k4u/ ); date de création, 26 mars 2020.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19 , Manejo de la Vía Aérea/métodos , Anestesiólogos , Humanos , Pandemias/prevención & control , Equipo de Protección PersonalRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: While the operating room (OR) has significantly benefited from aviation strategies to improve safety, the rate of avoidable human errors remains relatively high. One key aviation strategy that has yet to be formally established in the OR is the "sterile cockpit" rule, which prohibits all non-essential behaviours during critical moments of a flight. Applying this rule to the OR may enhance patient safety, but the critical moments of surgery need to be defined first. METHODS: This study used a modified Delphi methodology to determine critical moments during surgery according to OR team members across institutions, professions, and specialties. Analysis occurred after each round. The stopping criterion was consensus on 80% of survey items or no change in the mean score for any individual item between two consecutive rounds. RESULTS: The first round included 304 respondents. Of these, 115 completed the second-round survey, and 75 completed all three rounds (27 nurses, 29 anesthesiologists, 19 surgeons). Critical moments obtained by consensus were: induction of anesthesia; emergence from anesthesia; preoperative briefing; final counts at the end of the procedure; anesthesiologist- or surgeon-relevant intraoperative event; handovers; procedure-specific high-risk surgical moments; crisis resource management situations; medication and equipment preparation; and key medication administration. CONCLUSIONS: By defining the most critical moments of surgery, future research can determine the relative importance of behaviour and actions at each stage and target interventions to these stages.
RéSUMé: CONTEXTE: Alors que la salle d'opération (SOP) bénéficie considérablement des stratégies de l'aviation pour améliorer la sécurité, le taux d'erreurs humaines évitables y demeure relativement élevé. L'une des stratégies clés de l'aviation qui doit encore être mise en place de manière formelle en SOP est la règle de la « cabine de pilotage stérile ¼, qui interdit tout comportement non essentiel pendant les moments critiques d'un vol. L'application de cette règle à la SOP pourrait améliorer la sécurité des patients, mais les moments critiques d'une chirurgie doivent d'abord être définis. MéTHODE: Cette étude a utilisé une méthodologie Delphi modifiée afin de déterminer les moments critiques pendant une chirurgie selon les membres des équipes de SOP en provenance de différentes institutions, professions et spécialités. Une analyse a eu lieu après chaque itération. Le critère d'arrêt était un consensus sur 80 % des items du sondage ou aucun changement dans la note moyenne obtenue pour n'importe quel item individuel entre deux itérations consécutives. RéSULTATS: La première série a inclus 304 répondants. Parmi ceux-ci, 115 ont complété le deuxième sondage, et 75 ont complété les trois séries de questions (27 infirmiers/infirmières, 29 anesthésiologistes, 19 chirurgiens/chirurgiennes). Les moments critiques retenus par consensus étaient : l'induction de l'anesthésie; l'émergence de l'anesthésie; le temps d'arrêt préopératoire; les décomptes finaux à la fin de l'intervention; les événements peropératoires importants pour l'anesthésiologiste ou le chirurgien; les transferts; les moments chirurgicaux à risque élevé spécifiques à l'intervention; les situations de gestion de crise des ressources; la préparation des médicaments et du matériel; et l'administration de médicaments clés. CONCLUSION: En définissant les moments les plus critiques de la chirurgie, les recherches futures pourront déterminer l'importance relative des comportements et des actes à chaque étape et cibler les interventions en fonction de ces étapes.
Asunto(s)
Consenso , Anestesiología , Técnica Delphi , Humanos , Quirófanos , Encuestas y CuestionariosRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Surgical resection remains a critical component of esophageal cancer treatment with curative-intent. The aim of this study was to compare open (OE) to minimally invasive Ivor Lewis esophagectomy (MIE) with respect to perioperative and oncologic outcomes. METHODS: Retrospective single-institution review of MIE and OE patients operated between 2001 and 2015 was conducted. Univariable and multivariable models were created using Cox regression. The Kaplan-Meier method was used to compare oncologic outcomes. Propensity score matching was used to compare oncological outcomes in MIE and OE patients. RESULTS: Of 210 esophageal resection patients, 47% had OE (137/291) and 25% had MIE (73/291). The MIE and OE groups were comparable with respect to patient factors and operative details. Fewer OE patients received neoadjuvant chemoradiation. MIE was associated with improved lymph node yield, (MIE = 30 [IQR:22-39]; OE = 14 [IQR:7-19], p < 0.001), less intraoperative blood loss (MIE = 312 mL [100-400]; OE = 657 mL [350-700], p < 0.001), and shorter median length of stay (MIE = 10 days [IQR = 8-14]; OE = 14 days [IQR = 11-22] p < 0.01). The OE group had significantly more adverse events resulting in reoperation or intensive care unit admission (MIE = 21%; OE = 34%; p < 0.01). On multivariable analysis, age and positive resection margins were associated with decreased odds of survival. The number of lymph nodes retrieved, positive resection margins, and pathologic stage were significant predictors of disease-free survival. Analysis of 69 matched pairs showed equivalent median overall survival (MIE = 49 months [18-67]; OE = 29 months [17-69]; p = 0.26) and disease-free survival (MIE = 9 [6-22]; OE = 13 [6-22]; p = 0.45) between the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Although long-term oncologic outcomes appear to be similar, MIE is associated with significantly less intraoperative blood loss, improved lymph node yield, less risk of severe postoperative adverse events, and shorter length of stay.
Asunto(s)
Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/cirugía , Neoplasias Esofágicas/cirugía , Esofagectomía/métodos , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Mínimamente Invasivos/métodos , Estadificación de Neoplasias , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Puntaje de Propensión , Anciano , Canadá/epidemiología , Carcinoma de Células Escamosas/diagnóstico , Supervivencia sin Enfermedad , Neoplasias Esofágicas/diagnóstico , Femenino , Estudios de Seguimiento , Humanos , Incidencia , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios Retrospectivos , Tasa de Supervivencia/tendencias , Factores de Tiempo , Resultado del TratamientoRESUMEN
Background: Teamwork is a critical competency in high-risk settings like the operating room (OR). While conventional approaches focus on describing and learning from negative performance, there may be value in learning from high-performing behaviour, particularly in specialties where serious safety events are relatively rare. This study aimed to explore both the positive and negative use of non-technical skills by anesthesia practitioners in the OR and situate them within the clinical OR context. Methods: This study employed a prospective observational design. Following research ethics approval, a sample of surgical cases in a tertiary hospital were recorded using the OR Black Box®. Data related to surgical phase timing, non-technical skills, team factors, and environmental factors were identified by analysts according to a modified Systems Engineering Initiative for Patient Safety model. We performed descriptive statistics and qualitative description of these observations. Results: We observed 25 surgical cases capturing 242 instances of positive non-technical skills among anesthesiologists in the operating room and 9 instances of negative demonstrations. Situational awareness was most frequently (n = 160) observed, followed by communication and teamwork skills (n = 82), and were most often demonstrated in the context of potential environmental distractions (e.g., doors opening, unnecessary interruptions). The least common category of positive non-technical skills observed was leadership (n = 3). Conclusions: Our findings show anesthesiologists are doing a lot "right" and there may be many opportunities for learning from positive practice in the clinical setting. These findings can inform future work to better understand and standardize best practices for non-technical performance in anesthesia.
RESUMEN
Introduction: Booster sessions can improve cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) skill retention among healthcare providers; however, the optimal timing of these sessions is unknown. This study aimed to explore differences in skill retention based on booster session timing. Methods: After ethics approval, healthcare providers who completed an initial CPR training course were randomly assigned to either an early booster, late booster, or no booster group. Participants' mean resuscitation scores, time to initiate compressions, and time to successfully provide defibrillation were assessed immediately post-course and four months later using linear mixed models. Results: Seventy-three healthcare professionals were included in the analysis. There were no significant differences by randomization in the immediate post-test (9.7, 9.2, 8.9) or retention test (10.2, 9.8, and 9.5) resuscitation scores. No significant effects were observed for time to compression. Post-test time to defibrillation (mean ± SE: 112.8 ± 3.0 sec) was significantly faster compared to retention (mean ± SE: 120.4 ± 2.7 sec) (p = 0.04); however, the effect did not vary by randomization. Conclusion: No difference was observed in resuscitation skill retention between the early, late, and no booster groups. More research is needed to determine the aspects of a booster session beyond timing that contribute to skill retention.
Introduction: Des séances de rappel peuvent favoriser le maintien des compétences en réanimation cardio-pulmonaire (RCP) chez les professionnels de la santé; toutefois, le moment optimal pour offrir ces séances est inconnu. Cette étude visait à explorer les différences dans le maintien des compétences en fonction du moment où intervient la séance de rappel. Méthodes: Après avoir obtenu une approbation éthique, nous avons réparti au hasard des professionnels de la santé ayant suivi une formation initiale en RCP entre un groupe qui a reçu un rappel précoce, un groupe qui a eu un rappel tardif et un groupe qui n'a pas reçu de séance de rappel. Les scores moyens de réussite de la réanimation, le temps moyen pris avant de commencer les compressions et le temps moyen pris pour effectuer avec succès une défibrillation ont été évalués immédiatement après la séance et quatre mois plus tard, à l'aide de modèles mixtes linéaires. Résultats: Les données de 73 professionnels de la santé ont été analysées. Il n'y a pas eu de différences significatives à la suite de la randomisation dans les scores de réanimation au post-test immédiat (9,7; 9,2; 8,9) et au test sur le maintien des compétences (10,2; 9,8 et 9,5). Aucun effet significatif n'a été observé en lien avec le délai avant d'entamer les compressions. Le délai de défibrillation était significativement plus court après la séance (moyenne ± SE : 112,8 ± 3,0 sec) que lors du test de maintien des compétences (moyenne ± SE : 120,4 ± 2,7 sec) (p=0,04); cependant, l'effet n'a pas été différent d'un groupe à un autre. Conclusion: Aucune différence n'a été observée sur le plan du maintien des compétences en réanimation entre les groupes avec rappel précoce, avec rappel tardif et sans rappel. De plus amples travaux sont nécessaires pour déterminer les caractéristiques d'une séance de rappel, autres que le moment où elle intervient, qui contribueraient au maintien des compétences.
Asunto(s)
Reanimación Cardiopulmonar , Humanos , Reanimación Cardiopulmonar/educación , Competencia Clínica , Estudios Prospectivos , Factores de Tiempo , PresiónRESUMEN
BACKGROUND AND PURPOSE: There is conflicting evidence with respect to the correlation between neoadjuvant chemoradiation and anastomotic complications following trimodality therapy in patients with esophageal cancer. We aimed to analyze the relationship between their dosimetry and any resulting anastomotic complications. MATERIALS AND METHODS: The medical records of 51 consecutive patients who underwent trimodality therapy between 2007 and 2014 were retrospectively reviewed. We analyzed the differences in the mean dose received by regions of the esophagus relative to the landmark of the azygous vein and the stomach to correlate the development of an anastomotic complication using nonparametric rank-sum tests. RESULTS: Anastomotic leakage and stricture rates were 12% and 22%, respectively. Patients with anastomotic complications received a statistically significant higher mean dose to the esophagus at the level of the azygous vein (0.0â¯cm) and lower (up to -2.7â¯cm) (28.4-42.2â¯Gy vs. 10.3-27.6â¯Gy, pâ¯<â¯0.04). There were no differences noted in mean gastric doses. Median follow up time was 30.9â¯months. Median overall survival and disease free survival of our patient cohort was 34.4â¯months and 22.5â¯months, respectively. The development of an anastomotic complication did not affect survival outcomes. CONCLUSION: Patients who experienced anastomotic complication after trimodality therapy for esophageal cancer were more likely to have received a higher mean esophageal dose around the proximity of the azygous vein, where intrathoracic anastomoses most commonly occur. Communication between surgical and radiation oncologists regarding the anastomotic location may be an important consideration in planning for trimodality therapy in reducing potential anastomotic complications.
RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Chronic periprosthetic joint infection (PJI) is a devastating complication that can occur following total joint replacement. Patients with chronic PJI report a substantially lower quality of life and face a higher risk of short-term mortality. Establishing a diagnosis of chronic PJI is challenging because of conflicting guidelines, numerous tests, and limited evidence. Delays in diagnosing PJI are associated with poorer outcomes and morbid revision surgery. The purpose of this systematic review was to compare the diagnostic accuracy of serum, synovial, and tissue-based tests for chronic PJI. METHODS: This review adheres to the Cochrane Collaboration's diagnostic test accuracy methods for evidence searching and syntheses. A detailed search of MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Library, and the grey literature was performed to identify studies involving the diagnosis of chronic PJI in patients with hip or knee replacement. Eligible studies were assessed for quality and bias using the Quality Assessment of Diagnostic Accuracy Studies-2 (QUADAS-2) tool. Meta-analyses were performed on tests with sufficient data points. Summary estimates and hierarchical summary receiver operating characteristic (HSROC) curves were obtained using a bivariate model. RESULTS: A total of 12,616 citations were identified, and 203 studies met the inclusion criteria. Of these 203 studies, 170 had a high risk of bias. Eighty-three unique PJI diagnostic tests were identified, and 17 underwent meta-analyses. Laboratory-based synovial alpha-defensin tests and leukocyte esterase reagent (LER) strips (2+) had the best performance, followed by white blood-cell (WBC) count, measurement of synovial C-reactive protein (CRP) level, measurement of the polymorphonuclear neutrophil percentage (PMN%), and the alpha-defensin lateral flow test kit (Youden index ranging from 0.78 to 0.94). Tissue-based tests and 3 serum tests (measurement of interleukin-6 [IL-6] level, CRP level, and erythrocyte sedimentation rate [ESR]) had a Youden index between 0.61 to 0.75 but exhibited poorer performance compared with the synovial tests mentioned above. CONCLUSIONS: The quality of the literature pertaining to chronic PJI diagnostic tests is heterogeneous, and the studies are at a high risk for bias. We believe that greater transparency and more complete reporting in studies of diagnostic test results should be mandated by peer-reviewed journals. The available literature suggests that several synovial fluid-based tests perform well for diagnosing chronic PJI and their use is recommended in the work-up of any suspected case of chronic PJI. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Diagnostic Level III. See Instructions for Authors for a complete description of levels of evidence.
Asunto(s)
Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Cadera/efectos adversos , Artroplastia de Reemplazo de Rodilla/efectos adversos , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/diagnóstico , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/metabolismo , Enfermedad Crónica , Pruebas Hematológicas , Técnicas Histológicas , Humanos , Infecciones Relacionadas con Prótesis/etiología , Líquido Sinovial/metabolismoRESUMEN
Vilazodone has high affinity for the human 5-hydroxytryptamine1A (h5-HT1A) receptor and for the serotonin transporter (5-HTT). A previous in vivo microdialysis experiment showed that a single administration of vilazodone, dose-dependently increases extracellular 5-HT but not norepinephrine (NE) or dopamine (DA) levels in rat medial prefrontal cortex and ventral hippocampus. The effects of vilazodone on monoaminergic systems were assessed using single-unit extracellular recordings and microiontophoresis in the rat brain. Following depletion of 5-HT with para-chlorophenylalanine methyl-ester hydrochloride (PCPA), vilazodone still suppressed neuronal firing of dorsal raphe nucleus (DRN) 5-HT neurons to a similar extent than controls, indicating that this inhibition is via 5-HT1A receptors activation. Following 2-day intraperitoneal administration of vilazodone (5 mg/kg/day), there was a significant decrease in 5-HT neuronal firing which recovered to baseline levels by day 14 of administration, likely due to 5-HT1A autoreceptor desensitization. Two- and 14-day administration of vilazodone decreased the mean firing and bursting activities of ventral tegmental area (VTA) DA neurons, while only its repeated administration significantly dampened the mean firing rate of locus coeruleus (LC) NE neurons. Vilazodone acted as an agonist at 5-HT1A receptors, while showing a 5-HTT blocking capacity when injected acutely. After repeated vilazodone regimen, while there was no change in sensitivity of 5-HT1A receptors, the enhancement in 5-HT transmission yielded an increase in the tonic activation of these receptors located in the hippocampus.