Anesthetic Management of a Jehovah's Witness Patient for Coronary Artery Bypass Grafting With Antiphospholipid Antibody Syndrome and Renal Transplant.

Anesthesia for cardiac surgical patients with antiphospholipid antibody syndrome (APLS) presents challenges with monitoring anticoagulation during cardiopulmonary bypass. Additionally, this condition is associated with other autoimmune diseases and comorbidities that need to be considered in caring for these patients, and there is minimal evidence for specific strategies during cardiac surgery. Separately, Jehovah's Witness (JW) patients typically do not consent to receiving blood products, presenting an additional challenge for resuscitation during cardiac surgery and especially in the context of APLS. We present our approach to the anesthetic management of a JW patient with systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE) complicated by APLS, thrombocytopenia, and renal failure with history of renal transplant who presented for coronary artery bypass surgery. Management strategies we recommend include administration of antifibrinolytics after heparinization to mitigate bleeding risk and interdisciplinary management with the perfusion, intensive care, surgical, and nephrology teams.

Dexmedetomidine improves pulmonary outcomes in thoracic surgery under one-lung ventilation: A meta-analysis.

INTRODUCTION: Dexmedetomidine improves intrapulmonary shunt in thoracic surgery and minimizes inflammatory response during one-lung ventilation (OLV). However, it is unclear whether such benefits translate into less postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs). Our objective was to determine the impact of dexmedetomidine on the incidence of PPCs after thoracic surgery. METHODS: Major databases were used to identify randomized trials that compared dexmedetomidine versus placebo during thoracic surgery in terms of PPCs. Our primary outcome was atelectasis within 7 days after surgery. Other specific PPCs included hypoxemia, pneumonia, and acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS). Secondary outcome included intraoperative respiratory mechanics (respiratory compliance [Cdyn]) and postoperative lung function (forced expiratory volume [FEV1]). Random effects models were used to estimate odds ratios (OR). RESULTS: Twelve randomized trials, including 365 patients in the dexmedetomidine group and 359 in the placebo group, were analyzed in this meta-analysis. Patients in the dexmedetomidine group were less likely to develop postoperative atelectasis (2.3% vs 6.8%, OR 0.42, 95%CI 0.18-0.95, P = 0.04; low certainty) and hypoxemia (3.4% vs 11.7%, OR 0.26, 95%CI 0.10-0.68, P = 0.01; moderate certainty) compared to the placebo group. The incidence of postoperative pneumonia (3.2% vs 5.8%, OR 0.57, 95%CI 0.25-1.26, P = 0.17; moderate certainty) or ARDS (0.9% vs 3.5%, OR 0.39, 95%CI 0.07-2.08, P = 0.27; moderate certainty) was comparable between groups. Both intraoperative Cdyn and postoperative FEV1 were higher among patients that received dexmedetomidine with a mean difference of 4.42 mL/cmH2O (95%CI 3.13-5.72) and 0.27 L (95%CI 0.12-0.41), respectively. CONCLUSION: Dexmedetomidine administration during thoracic surgery may potentially reduce the risk of postoperative atelectasis and hypoxemia. However, current evidence is insufficient to demonstrate an effect on pneumonia or ARDS.

State of the art: Proceedings of the American Association for Thoracic Surgery Enhanced Recovery After Cardiac Surgery Summit.

Despite the benefits established for multiple surgical specialties, enhanced recovery after surgery has been underused in cardiac surgery. A cardiac enhanced recovery after surgery summit was convened at the 102nd American Association for Thoracic Surgery annual meeting in May 2022 for experts to convey key enhanced recovery after surgery concepts, best practices, and applicable results for cardiac surgery. Topics included implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery, prehabilitation and nutrition, rigid sternal fixation, goal-directed therapy, and multimodal pain management.

Performance Comparison of Pulmonary Risk Scoring Systems in Lung Resection.

OBJECTIVE: To validate and compare the performance of different pulmonary risk scoring systems to predict postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in lung resection surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study SETTING: A historic single-center cohort of lung resection surgeries PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients undergoing lung resection surgery under 1-lung ventilation. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The accuracy of the following pulmonary risk scoring systems were used to predict pulmonary complications: the ARISCAT (Assess respiratory RIsk in Surgical patients in CATalonia), the LAS VEGAS (Local Assessment of VEntilatory management during General Anesthesia for Surgery), the SPORC (Score for Prediction of Postoperative Respiratory Complications), and a recent thoracic-specific risk score, named CARDOT. Discrimination and calibration were assessed using the concordance (c) index and the intercept of LOESS (locally estimated scatterplot)-smoothed curves, respectively. Additional models were constructed that incorporated predicted postoperative forced expiratory volume (ppoFEV1) into each scoring system. Of the 2,104 patients undergoing lung surgery, 123 developed postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs; 5.9%). All scoring systems had poor discriminatory power to predict PPCs (ARISCAT c-index 0.60, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.55-0.65; LAS VEGAS c-index 0.68, 95% CI 0.63-0.73; SPORC c-index 0.63, 95% CI 0.59-0.68; CARDOT c-index 0.64, 95% CI 0.58-0.70), but the inclusion of ppoFEV1 slightly improved the performance of LAS VEGAS (c-index 0.70, 95% CI 0.66-0.75) and CARDOT (c-index 0.68, 95% CI 0.62-0.73). Analysis of calibration showed a slight overestimation when using ARISCAT (intercept -0.28) and LAS VEGAS (intercept -0.27). CONCLUSIONS: None of the scoring systems appeared to have adequate discriminatory power to predict PPCs among patients undergoing lung resection. An alternative risk score is necessary to better predict patients at risk of PPCs after thoracic surgery.

Efficacy of opioid-sparing analgesia after median sternotomy with continuous bilateral parasternal subpectoral plane blocks.

OBJECTIVES: Regional anesthetic techniques, traditionally underutilized in cardiac surgery, may play a role in multimodal analgesia, effectively improving pain control and reducing opioid consumption. We investigated the efficacy of continuous bilateral ultrasound-guided parasternal subpectoral plane blocks following sternotomy. METHODS: We reviewed all opioid-naïve patients who underwent cardiac surgery via median sternotomy under our enhanced recovery after surgery protocol between May 2018 and March 2020. Patients were grouped based on postoperative pain management strategy-those who received standard Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) multimodal analgesia alone (no nerve block group) versus those receiving ERAS multimodal analgesia plus continuous bilateral parasternal subpectoral plane blocks (block group). In the block group, parasternal subpectoral plane catheters were placed under ultrasound-guidance on each side of the sternum with initial 0.25% ropivacaine bolus, followed by continuous 0.125% bupivacaine infusions. Postoperative patient-reported numerical rating scale pain scores and opioid consumption in morphine milligram equivalents were compared through postoperative day 4. RESULTS: Of 281 patients included in the study, the block group comprised 125 (44%) patients. Although baseline characteristics, type of surgery, and length of stay were similar between groups, average numerical rating scale pain scores and opioid consumption were significantly lower in the block group through postoperative day 4 (all P values < .05). We also observed a 44% reduction in total opioid consumption after surgery in the block group (75.1 vs 133.1 MME; P = .001) and 1 less hospital day requiring opioids (4.2 vs 3 days; P = .001). CONCLUSIONS: Continuous bilateral parasternal subpectoral plane blocks may further reduce poststernotomy pain and opioid consumption within the context ERAS multimodal analgesia.

Postoperative Hypoxemia After Dual-Controlled vs Volume-Controlled Ventilation in Lung Surgery.

BACKGROUND: One-lung ventilation for thoracic surgery represents a challenge due to the risk for hypoxemia and barotrauma. Dual-controlled ventilation (ie, pressure-regulated volume control [PRVC]) may confer improved lung mechanics compared with conventional ventilation (volume-controlled ventilation [VCV]). Our objective was to determine the association between ventilatory mode and pulmonary outcomes after lung resection surgery. METHODS: A historical cohort (2016-2021) of patients undergoing lung resection surgery was used to identify cases performed with PRVC ventilation (intervention) vs VCV (conventional). Both groups were matched in a 1:1 fashion using propensity scoring based on preoperative oxygen saturation, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, intraoperative ventilator settings, and surgical approach. Our primary outcome was postoperative hypoxemia (oxygen saturation <92% requiring supplemental oxygen longer than 2 hours). Secondary outcomes included respiratory failure, pneumonia, atelectasis, acute respiratory distress syndrome, pleural effusion, and reintubation. Associations were reported using adjusted odds ratios (aOR). RESULTS: Of 2107 eligible patients (PRVC = 1587 vs VCV = 520), a total of 774 matched pairs were analyzed (PRVC = 387 vs VCV = 387). The overall incidence of postoperative hypoxemia was 35.5% (95% CI 32.2%-39.0%). Hypoxemia was less likely among patients managed with low tidal volumes (≤6 mL/kg per ideal body weight, aOR 0.73, 95% CI 0.57-0.92, P = .008). No significant association was observed between ventilator mode and postoperative hypoxemia (33.3% in PRVC vs 37.7% in VCV; aOR 0.93, 95% CI 0.71-1.23, P = .627) or secondary pulmonary complications (3.9% in PRVC vs 3.4% in VCV; aOR 0.96, 95% CI 0.47-1.97, P = .909). CONCLUSIONS: Dual-controlled ventilation was not associated with improved pulmonary outcomes compared with conventional ventilation in lung resection surgery.

Risk assessment for acute kidney injury and death among new COVID-19 positive adult patients without chronic kidney disease: retrospective cohort study among three US hospitals.

OBJECTIVE: To develop simple but clinically informative risk stratification tools using a few top demographic factors and biomarkers at COVID-19 diagnosis to predict acute kidney injury (AKI) and death. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort analysis, follow-up from 1 February through 28 May 2020. SETTING: 3 teaching hospitals, 2 urban and 1 community-based in the Boston area. PARTICIPANTS: Eligible patients were at least 18 years old, tested COVID-19 positive from 1 February through 28 May 2020, and had at least two serum creatinine measurements within 30 days of a new COVID-19 diagnosis. Exclusion criteria were having chronic kidney disease or having a previous AKI within 3 months of a new COVID-19 diagnosis. MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: Time from new COVID-19 diagnosis until AKI event, time until death event. RESULTS: Among 3716 patients, there were 1855 (49.9%) males and the average age was 58.6 years (SD 19.2 years). Age, sex, white blood cell, haemoglobin, platelet, C reactive protein (CRP) and D-dimer levels were most strongly associated with AKI and/or death. We created risk scores using these variables predicting AKI within 3 days and death within 30 days of a new COVID-19 diagnosis. Area under the curve (AUC) for predicting AKI within 3 days was 0.785 (95% CI 0.758 to 0.813) and AUC for death within 30 days was 0.861 (95% CI 0.843 to 0.878). Haemoglobin was the most predictive component for AKI, and age the most predictive for death. Predictive accuracies using all study variables were similar to using the simplified scores. CONCLUSION: Simple risk scores using age, sex, a complete blood cell count, CRP and D-dimer were highly predictive of AKI and death and can help simplify and better inform clinical decision making.

Enhanced Recovery After Cardiac Surgery: A Propensity-Matched Analysis.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways have improved clinical outcomes, cost-effectiveness, and patient satisfaction across multiple non-cardiac surgical specialties. Since the adaptation of ERAS in cardiac surgery is rapidly increasing yet still evolving, herein, we demonstrate early results of our implementation of ERAS cardiac guidelines. We retrospectively reviewed all patients who were managed with our institutional ERAS Cardiac Surgery guidelines between 5/2018 and 6/2019(N = 102). Postoperative primary outcomes (total ventilation times(hours), intensive-care unit(ICU) stay, and postoperative hospital length of stay (LOS)) were compared to 1:1 propensity matched controls from the pre ERAS era between January 2017 and March 2019. A total of 76 propensity-matched pairs were identified. Compared to the matched controls, ERAS patients had significantly shorter median ventilation times(3.5 vs. 5.3 hours, p = .01), ICU stays(median 28 vs 48 hours, p=.005) and postoperative hospital LOS (median 5 vs. 6 days, p = .03). There were no operative mortalities and no significant differences in 30-day readmission rates. There were also no significant differences in post-operative stroke, acute kidney injury, atrial fibrillation, and reoperation rates for bleeding. Two-year survival was also not statistically different between the two cohorts (p = .22). Our initial experience with implementation of ERAS protocols in cardiac surgery appear to demonstrate that these protocols are associated with shorter ventilation times, ICU stay, and hospital LOS without compromising patient outcomes. While these results are promising yet preliminary, further studies are warranted to demonstrate whether ERAS algorithms in cardiac surgery can consistently expedite postoperative recovery and improve outcomes.

MIT Emergency-Vent: An Automated Resuscitator Bag for the COVID-19 Crisis.

MIT's Emergency-Vent Project was launched in March 2020 to develop safe guidance and a reference design for a bridge ventilator that could be rapidly produced in a distributed manner worldwide. The system uses a novel servo-based robotic gripper to automate the squeezing of a manual resuscitator bag evenly from both sides to provide ventilation according to clinically specified parameters. In just one month, the team designed and built prototype ventilators, tested them in a series of porcine trials, and collaborated with industry partners to enable mass production. We released the design, including mechanical drawings, design spreadsheets, circuit diagrams, and control code into an open source format and assisted production efforts worldwide.Clinical relevance- This work demonstrated the viability of automating the compression of a manual resuscitator bag, with pressure feedback, to provide bridge ventilation support.

Personalized prescription of ACEI/ARBs for hypertensive COVID-19 patients.

The COVID-19 pandemic has prompted an international effort to develop and repurpose medications and procedures to effectively combat the disease. Several groups have focused on the potential treatment utility of angiotensin-converting-enzyme inhibitors (ACEIs) and angiotensin-receptor blockers (ARBs) for hypertensive COVID-19 patients, with inconclusive evidence thus far. We couple electronic medical record (EMR) and registry data of 3,643 patients from Spain, Italy, Germany, Ecuador, and the US with a machine learning framework to personalize the prescription of ACEIs and ARBs to hypertensive COVID-19 patients. Our approach leverages clinical and demographic information to identify hospitalized individuals whose probability of mortality or morbidity can decrease by prescribing this class of drugs. In particular, the algorithm proposes increasing ACEI/ARBs prescriptions for patients with cardiovascular disease and decreasing prescriptions for those with low oxygen saturation at admission. We show that personalized recommendations can improve patient outcomes by 1.0% compared to the standard of care when applied to external populations. We develop an interactive interface for our algorithm, providing physicians with an actionable tool to easily assess treatment alternatives and inform clinical decisions. This work offers the first personalized recommendation system to accurately evaluate the efficacy and risks of prescribing ACEIs and ARBs to hypertensive COVID-19 patients.

Noteworthy Literature published in 2017 for Cardiothoracic Anesthesiologists.

The year 2017 was a year dominated by large-scale clinical studies reporting the outcome of various interventions in cardiac surgery and heart failure (HF) patients, relevant to all cardiothoracic anesthesiologists. Among them were studies investigating the addition of levosimendan, an alternative inotropic agent, to standard management of patients with HF undergoing cardiac surgery. Also, corticosteroids have been used for various purposes in cardiac patients. Here, a new study reports the effect of high-dose methylprednisolone on recovery and delirium. Furthermore, with increasing evidence that transfusions increase morbidity and mortality, a publication reports the use of rotational thromboelastometry to reduce transfusion requirements. In addition, several randomized controlled multicenter studies report the outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac procedures: surgical versus transcatheter aortic valve replacement in intermediate-risk patients and the use of centrifugal-flow versus axial-flow left-ventricular devices in patients with HF. These studies demonstrate the dynamic and ever-evolving state of perioperative cardiovascular medicine and show us the direction of future developments.

Noteworthy Literature Published in 2016 for the Cardiothoracic Anesthesiologist.

Clinical research and outcome studies dominated the publication spectrum for the cardiothoracic anesthesiologist in 2016. Echocardiography is an important tool in the armamentarium of the cardiothoracic anesthesiologist. Technology is advancing at a fast pace: A new method to quantify the regurgitant volume in mitral regurgitation has been described in an experimental model and been validated in humans. Interesting studies on key elements of our daily practice have been published: Does tranexamic acid decrease the transfusion requirements after cardiac surgery? Are patients with a postoperative cognitive deficit at risk for dementia 7.5 years after surgery? What is the best strategy for post-cardiac surgery atrial fibrillation? What is the mechanism of preconditioning with remifentanil? Large multicenter looked at the treatment strategies for moderate and severe ischemic mitral regurgitation and benefits of transcatheter aortic valve replacement versus the surgical approach. These studies may give us ideas on how to tailor treatment to optimize the patients' outcome and to minimize the associated risks.

Respiratory Considerations Including Airway and Ventilation Issues in Critical Care Obstetric Patients.

Critical care management of the obstetric patient can present unique challenges. Parturients who present with respiratory distress can suffer from a multitude of etiologies, and each diagnosis must be pursued as appropriate to the clinical picture. Normal physiologic changes of pregnancy may obscure the presentation and diagnosis, and irrelevant of the cause, pregnancy may complicate the management of hypoxic and hypercarbic respiratory failure in this patient population. In addition to these concerns, both anticipated and unanticipated difficult airway management, including difficulty ventilating and intubating, are more common during pregnancy and may be encountered during endotracheal tube placement.

A Comparison of Web-Based with Traditional Classroom-Based Training of Lung Ultrasound for the Exclusion of Pneumothorax.

BACKGROUND: Lung ultrasound (LUS) is a well-established method that can exclude pneumothorax by demonstration of pleural sliding and the associated ultrasound artifacts. The positive diagnosis of pneumothorax is more difficult to obtain and relies on detection of the edge of a pneumothorax, called the "lung point." Yet, anesthesiologists are not widely taught these techniques, even though their patients are susceptible to pneumothorax either through trauma or as a result of central line placement or regional anesthesia techniques performed near the thorax. In anticipation of an increased training demand for LUS, efficient and scalable teaching methods should be developed. In this study, we compared the improvement in LUS skills after either Web-based or classroom-based training. We hypothesized that Web-based training would not be inferior to "traditional" classroom-based training beyond a noninferiority limit of 10% and that both would be superior to no training. Furthermore, we hypothesized that this short training session would lead to LUS skills that are similar to those of ultrasound-trained emergency medicine (EM) physicians. METHODS: After a pretest, anesthesiologists from 4 academic teaching hospitals were randomized to Web-based (group Web), classroom-based (group class), or no training (group control) and then completed a posttest. Groups Web and class returned for a retention test 4 weeks later. All 3 tests were similar, testing both practical and theoretical knowledge. EM physicians (group EM) performed the pretest only. Teaching for group class consisted of a standardized PowerPoint lecture conforming to the Consensus Conference on LUS followed by hands-on training. Group Web received a narrated video of the same PowerPoint presentation, followed by an online demonstration of LUS that also instructs the viewer to perform an LUS on himself using a clinically available ultrasound machine and submit smartphone snapshots of the resulting images as part of a portfolio system. Group Web received no other hands-on training. RESULTS: Groups Web, class, control, and EM contained 59, 59, 20, and 42 subjects. After training, overall test results of groups Web and class improved by a mean of 42.9% (±18.1% SD) and 39.2% (±19.2% SD), whereas the score of group control did not improve significantly. The test improvement of group Web was not inferior to group class. The posttest scores of groups Web and class were not significantly different from group EM. In comparison with the posttests, the retention test scores did not change significantly in either group. CONCLUSIONS: When training anesthesiologists to perform LUS for the exclusion of pneumothorax, we found that Web-based training was not inferior to traditional classroom-based training and was effective, leading to test scores that were similar to a group of clinicians experienced in LUS.