Survey of Anesthesiologists on Topical Vasoconstrictors and Intravenous Tranexamic Acid for Endoscopic Sinus Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: Topical vasoconstrictors and intravenous tranexamic acid (IV TXA) are safe and efficacious to decrease bleeding and improve the surgical field during endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS). The purpose of this study was to investigate practice patterns, awareness of clinical evidence, and comfort levels among anesthesia providers regarding these hemostatic agents for ESS. METHODS: A total of 767 attending anesthesiologists, residents, and certified registered nurse anesthetists (CRNAs) at 5 United States academic centers were invited to participate in a survey regarding their experience with IV TXA and 3 topical vasoconstrictor medications (oxymetazoline, epinephrine, and cocaine) during ESS. RESULTS: 330 (47%) anesthesia providers responded to the electronic survey. 113 (97%) residents, 92 (83%) CRNAs, and 52 (68%) attendings managed 5 or fewer ESS cases per month. Two-thirds of providers had not reviewed efficacy or safety literature for these hemostatic agents. Oxymetazoline was perceived safest, followed by epinephrine, IV TXA, and cocaine. Respondents considered potential side effects over surgical field visibility when selecting agents. The majority of providers had no formal training on these agents for ESS, but indicated interest in educational opportunities. CONCLUSION: Many anesthesia providers are unfamiliar with safety and efficacy literature regarding agents used to improve hemostasis for ESS, highlighting a need for development of relevant educational resources. Rhinologic surgeons have an opportunity to communicate with anesthesia colleagues on the use of hemostatic agents to improve the surgical field during ESS.

Does assisted hatching affect live birth in fresh, first cycle in vitro fertilization in good and poor prognosis patients?

PURPOSE: To assess the effect of assisted hatching (AH) on live birth rate (LBR) in first cycle, fresh in vitro fertilization (IVF) in good and poor prognosis patients. METHODS: Retrospective cohort using cycles reported to the Society for Assisted Reproductive Technology Clinic Outcomes Reporting System. Live birth rate was compared in women who underwent first cycle, autologous, fresh IVF cycles with (n = 48,858) and without (n = 103,413) AH from 2007 to 2015. RESULTS: The propensity-weighted LBR was 39.2% with AH versus 43.9% without AH in all patients. The rate difference (RD) with AH was - 4.7% ([CI - 0.053, - 0.040], P < 0.001) with the calculated number needed to harm being 22. AH affected live birth in both good prognosis and poor prognosis patients. The propensity-weighted monozygotic twinning (MZT) rate was 2.3% in patients treated with AH as compared to 1.2% patients that did not receive AH. The RD with AH on MZT in fresh, first IVF cycles was 1.1% ([0.008, 0.014], P < 0.001). CONCLUSION: AH may affect LBR across all patients and in poor prognosis patients in fresh IVF cycles. Caution should be exercised when applying this technology. More prospective research is needed.