Effect of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adults: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sedation of critically ill patients with inhaled anaesthetics may reduce lung inflammation, time to extubation, and ICU length of stay compared with intravenous (i.v.) sedatives. However, the impact of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in this population is unclear. In this systematic review, we aimed to summarise the effect of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adults. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO for case series, retrospective, and prospective studies in critically ill adults sedated with inhaled anaesthetics. Outcomes included delirium, psychomotor and neurological recovery, long-term cognitive dysfunction, ICU memories, anxiety, depression, post-traumatic stress disorder (PTSD), and instruments used for assessment. RESULTS: Thirteen studies were included in distinct populations of post-cardiac arrest survivors (n=4), postoperative noncardiac patients (n=3), postoperative cardiac patients (n=2), and mixed medical-surgical patients (n=4). Eight studies reported delirium incidence, two neurological recovery, and two ICU memories. One study reported on psychomotor recovery, long-term cognitive dysfunction, anxiety, depression, and PTSD. A meta-analysis of five trials found no difference in delirium incidence between inhaled and i.v. sedatives (relative risk 0.95 [95% confidence interval: 0.59-1.54]). Compared with i.v. sedatives, inhaled anaesthetics were associated with fewer hallucinations and faster psychomotor recovery but no differences in other outcomes. There was heterogeneity in the instruments used and timing of these assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Based on the limited evidence available, there is no difference in cognitive and psychiatric outcomes between adults exposed to volatile sedation or intravenous sedation in the ICU. Future studies should incorporate outcome assessment with validated tools during and after hospital stay. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42021236455.

Inhaled Volatiles for Status Asthmaticus, Epilepsy, and Difficult Sedation in Adult ICU and PICU: A Systematic Review.

OBJECTIVES: Inhaled volatile anesthetics support management of status asthmaticus (SA), status epilepticus (SE), and difficult sedation (DS). This study aimed to evaluate the effectiveness, safety, and feasibility of using inhaled anesthetics for SA, SE, and DS in adult ICU and PICU patients. DATA SOURCES: MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Embase. STUDY SELECTION: Primary literature search that reported the use of inhaled anesthetics in ventilated patients with SA, SE, and DS from 1970 to 2021. DATA EXTRACTION: Study data points were extracted by two authors independently. Quality assessment was performed using the Joanna Briggs Institute appraisal tool for case studies/series, Newcastle criteria for cohort/case-control studies, and risk-of-bias framework for clinical trials. DATA SYNTHESIS: Primary outcome was volatile efficacy in improving predefined clinical or physiologic endpoints. Secondary outcomes were adverse events and delivery logistics. From 4281 screened studies, the number of included studies/patients across diagnoses and patient groups were: SA (adult: 38/121, pediatric: 28/142), SE (adult: 18/37, pediatric: 5/10), and DS (adult: 21/355, pediatric: 10/90). Quality of evidence was low, consisting mainly of case reports and series. Clinical and physiologic improvement was seen within 1-2 hours of initiating volatiles, with variable efficacy across diagnoses and patient groups: SA (adult: 89-95%, pediatric: 80-97%), SE (adults: 54-100%, pediatric: 60-100%), and DS (adults: 60-90%, pediatric: 62-90%). Most common adverse events were cardiovascular, that is, hypotension and arrhythmias. Inhaled sedatives were commonly delivered using anesthesia machines for SA/SE and miniature vaporizers for DS. Few (10%) of studies reported required non-ICU personnel, and only 16% had ICU volatile delivery protocol. CONCLUSIONS: Volatile anesthetics may provide effective treatment in patients with SA, SE, and DS scenarios but the quality of evidence is low. Higher-quality powered prospective studies of the efficacy and safety of using volatile anesthetics to manage SA, SE, and DS patients are required. Education regarding inhaled anesthetics and the protocolization of their use is needed.

Effect of sedation with inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adults: a systematic review protocol.

INTRODUCTION: The COVID-19 pandemic has renewed interest in the use of inhaled anaesthetics for sedation of ventilated critically ill patients. Preliminary data show that inhaled anaesthetics reduce lung inflammation, time to extubation and intensive care unit length of stay compared with intravenous sedatives. However, the impact of inhaled anaesthetics on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes is not well described in this setting. Randomised controlled trials are underway to establish if inhaled anaesthetics affect these and other patient and health system outcomes. Our aim is to summarise the known effects of inhaled sedatives on cognitive and psychiatric outcomes. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: In this systematic review, we will use MEDLINE, EMBASE, and PsycINFO to identify studies from 1970 to 2021 that assessed cognitive and psychiatric outcomes in critically ill adult patients sedated with inhaled anaesthetics. We will include case series, observational and cohort studies and randomised controlled trials. We will exclude case studies due to the heterogeneity of reporting in these studies. For randomised controlled trials comparing inhaled to intravenous sedation, we will report cognitive and psychiatric outcomes for both study arms. Studies will be selected based on the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses checklist. Data will be extracted using a standardised data extraction tool by two independent reviewers. Studies will be assessed for bias using the Cochrane risk of bias tool for randomised controlled trials, or the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale for cohort and case-control studies. Findings will be reported according to outcome and descriptive statistics will be used to illustrate findings in a narrative fashion. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: The systematic review uses published data and therefore does not require ethics approval. Results will be disseminated via publication in peer-reviewed journals and presentation at conferences related to the field. PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER: CRD42021236455.

Psychological interventions to reduce postoperative pain and opioid consumption: a narrative review of literature.

BACKGROUND: Evidence suggests that over half of patients undergoing surgical procedures suffer from poorly controlled postoperative pain. In the context of an opioid epidemic, novel strategies for ameliorating postoperative pain and reducing opioid consumption are essential. Psychological interventions defined as strategies targeted towards reducing stress, anxiety, negative emotions and depression via education, therapy, behavioral modification and relaxation techniques are an emerging approach towards these endpoints. OBJECTIVE: This review explores the efficacy of psychological interventions for reducing postoperative pain and opioid use in the acute postoperative period. EVIDENCE REVIEW: An extensive literature search was conducted in MEDLINE, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Medline In-Process/ePubs, Embase, Ovid Emcare Nursing, and PsycINFO, Web of Science (Clarivate), PubMed-NOT-Medline (NLM), CINAHL and ERIC, and two trials registries, ClinicalTrials.Gov (NIH) and WHO ICTRP. Included studies were limited to those investigating adult human subjects, and those published in English. FINDINGS: Three distinct forms of psychological interventions were identified: relaxation, psychoeducation and behavioral modification therapy. Study results showed a reduction in both postoperative opioid use and pain scores (n=5), reduction in postoperative opioid use (n=3), reduction in postoperative pain (n=5), no significant reduction in pain or opioid use (n=7), increase in postoperative opioid use (n=1) and an increase in postoperative pain (n=1). CONCLUSION: Some preoperative psychological interventions can reduce pain scores and opioid consumption in the acute postoperative period; however, there is a clear need to strengthen the evidence for these interventions. The optimal technique, strategies, timing and interface requires further investigation.

Use of inhalational anaesthetic agents in paediatric and adult patients for status asthmaticus, status epilepticus and difficult sedation scenarios: a protocol for a systematic review.

INTRODUCTION: Inhaled volatile anaesthetics have a long tradition of use as hypnotic agents in operating rooms and are gaining traction as sedatives in intensive care units (ICUs). However, uptake is impeded by low familiarity with volatiles, unique equipment and education needs. Inhaled anaesthetics are often reserved in ICUs as therapies for refractory and life threatening status asthmaticus, status epilepticus, high and difficult sedation need scenarios given they possess unique pharmacological properties to manage these medical conditions while providing sedation to acutely ill patients. The objective of this systematic review is to collate evidence regarding the efficacy, safety and feasibility of volatile anaesthetics in adult and paediatric ICU patients for these three emergency conditions. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: We will conduct a systematic review of the primary studies in adult and paediatric ICU patients with status asthmaticus, status epilepticus and high/difficult sedation needs. We will include observational and interventional studies published from 1970 to 2021 in English or French investigating patients who have received a volatile inhalational agent for the above indications. We will evaluate the efficacy, safety, feasibility and implementation barriers for the volatile anaesthetics for each of three specified indications. Included studies will not be limited by necessity of a comparator arm. We will also evaluate clinical characteristics, patient demographics and provider attitudes towards volatile anaesthetic administration in defined critical care scenarios. Data will be extracted and analysed across these domains. The databases MEDLINE, EMBASE, the Science Citation Index as well as the Cochrane Central Controlled Trials Register will be queried with our search strategy.Descriptive and statistical analysis will be employed where appropriate. Data extraction and quality assessment will be performed in duplicate using a standardised tool. A narrative approach and statistical analyses will be used to describe patient characteristics, volatile efficacy, safety concerns, technical administration, attitudes towards administration and other implementation barriers. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: No ethics board approval will be necessary for this systematic review. This research is independently funded. Results will be disseminated in a peer-reviewed journal and conference presentation. PROSPERO NUMBER: CRD42021233083.

An Evolution of Suffering: Anesthesiology's Contribution to Pain Management.

The modern human, and all progenitor species before it, evolved in a milieu of pain and suffering. Recent innovations in medicine have permitted the development of tools to mitigate these powerful experiences. Anesthesiologists have been on the vanguard of developing treatments and systems to face this challenge. Pain is a heterogeneous entity that requires precise categorization, and targeted, multimodal treatment to optimally manage. Anesthesiologists have developed a system whereby analgesia permits a myriad of life-saving surgeries, and have expanded their role beyond the perioperative setting. This includes unique contributions to how the concept of pain is experienced by infants, and appropriate interventions in this population. Contemporary anesthesiologists have extended their responsibilities to include harnessing robust technologies to manage pain in outpatient clinics, and serving as pain experts within hospital systems. This article serves as a primer to the history of anesthesiologists' contributions to pain management.

Use of Decision Analysis and Economic Evaluation in Upper Extremity Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Decision analysis allows clinicians to apply evidence-based medicine to guide objective decisions in uncertain scenarios. There is no comprehensive review summarizing the various decision analysis tools used. The authors aimed to appraise and review the decision analytic models used in hand surgery. METHODS: A search of English articles on the PubMed, Ovid, and Embase databases was performed. All articles, regardless of date of publishing, were considered. Two reviewers, based on strict inclusion criteria, independently assessed each article. RESULTS: The search resulted in 5525 abstracts, which yielded 30 studies that met inclusion criteria. Included studies were grouped according to medical indications, with scaphoid fractures (n = 6) and carpal tunnel syndrome (n = 5) being the most commonly reported. Included articles used decision analysis (n = 15) and/or economic analyses (n = 23) to discuss diagnostic strategies or compare treatments. The three most common outcomes reported were utility (n = 12), cost per quality-adjusted life-year (n = 16), and quality-adjusted life-years (n = 16). The decision analysis models compared diagnostic strategies, management options, and novel treatments. CONCLUSIONS: Decision analysis is increasingly popular in hand surgery. It is useful for comparing surgical strategies through evaluation of quality-of-life outcomes and costing data. The most common model was a simple decision tree. The quality of decision analysis models can be improved with the addition of sensitivity analysis. Surgeons should be familiar with the principles of decision analysis, so that complex decisions can be evaluated using rigorous probabilistic models that combine risks and benefits of multiple strategies.

The role of ultrasound technology in plastic surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The modern medical era is in part characterized by the increased availability of portable imaging devices. Ultrasound devices are used for either high-resolution non-invasive imaging or as a focused acoustic energy source capable of sculpting and shaping tissue. Given the broad scope of the field, plastic and reconstructive surgeons have the unique ability to implement and tailor the use of ultrasound in a variety of clinical situations. This article will review novel uses for ultrasound in the field of plastic surgery. METHODS: A systematic electronic search was performed using the PubMed database. Search terms used were "ultrasonography" or "ultrasound" and "plastic surgery". Two independent reviewers subsequently reviewed the resultant articles based on strict inclusion and exclusion criteria. Selected manuscripts were analyzed and grouped by procedure categories. RESULTS: 303 articles were included in the study, spanning six procedure categories. The categories included breast, head and neck, microsurgery and reconstruction, skin, aesthetic, and other innovative applications. Ultrasound imaging was shown useful in vascular mapping, dermal and adipose volumetric evaluation, and postoperative flap monitoring. As an energy source, ultrasound has been described for skin tightening, adipose tissue removal, facial rejuvenation, increased neocollagenesis, and bone healing. Reported benefits of incorporating ultrasound into routine clinical practice included promising procedural outcomes, minimal complications, comprehensive patient follow-up and quantitative anatomic evaluation of results. CONCLUSION: Ultrasound offers a portable and non-invasive bedside means to obtain real-time visualization of patients' anatomy, while also providing an effective, focused and safe energy source for procedures. This review highlights novel applications of ultrasonography in the hands of a modern plastic surgeon, across the entire breadth of the specialty.