Pericapsular nerve group block and lateral femoral cutaneous nerve block versus fascia iliaca block for multimodal analgesia after total hip replacement surgery: A retrospective analysis.

Background: Optimal pain control with limited muscle weakness is paramount for a swift initiation of physical therapy and early discharge. Fascia iliaca compartment block (FICB) has been recommended since it offers good pain control with a low risk of motor block. Pericapsular nerve group (PENG) block with lateral femoral cutaneous block (LFCN) has been proposed as an effective alternative to FICB that offers better pain control with a considerably lower risk of motor block. We aimed to compare the aforementioned blocks and determine which one yielded the lowest numeric rating scale (NRS) score. Methods: We designed a retrospective analysis of patients undergoing elective total hip arthroplasty. The primary outcome was the NRS score at 6, 12, and 24 hours. The secondary outcomes were total opioid consumption, time to first PRN opioid, and time to first postoperative ambulation. Results: 52 patients were recruited, (13 PENG plus LFCN, 39 FICB). PENG plus LCFN resulted in a lower NRS at all three-time points (mean difference and 95%CI at 6 h 0.378 [-0.483; 1.240], at 12 h 0.336 [-0.378; 1.050], and at 24 h 0.464 [0.013; 0.914] P = 0.02). Moreover, less PRN opioids were requested in the PENG plus LCFN vs. FICB group (0 [0;7.5] vs 60 [15;80] milligrams of morphine equivalents, P = 0.001). No delay in the first ambulation or initiation of physical rehabilitation was reported in either group. Conclusions: PENG plus LCFN seems to offer better pain control and lead to less PRN opioids. Neither block hindered physical therapy nor ambulation. These results need to be confirmed with a larger prospective and randomized study.

Three Logistic Predictive Models for the Prediction of Mortality and Major Pulmonary Complications after Cardiac Surgery.

Background and Objectives: Pulmonary complications are a leading cause of morbidity after cardiac surgery. The aim of this study was to develop models to predict postoperative lung dysfunction and mortality. Materials and Methods: This was a single-center, observational, retrospective study. We retrospectively analyzed the data of 11,285 adult patients who underwent all types of cardiac surgery from 2003 to 2015. We developed logistic predictive models for in-hospital mortality, postoperative pulmonary complications occurring in the intensive care unit, and postoperative non-invasive mechanical ventilation when clinically indicated. Results: In the "preoperative model" predictors for mortality were advanced age (p < 0.001), New York Heart Association (NYHA) class (p < 0.001) and emergent surgery (p = 0.036); predictors for non-invasive mechanical ventilation were advanced age (p < 0.001), low ejection fraction (p = 0.023), higher body mass index (p < 0.001) and preoperative renal failure (p = 0.043); predictors for postoperative pulmonary complications were preoperative chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (p = 0.007), preoperative kidney injury (p < 0.001) and NYHA class (p = 0.033). In the "surgery model" predictors for mortality were intraoperative inotropes (p = 0.003) and intraoperative intra-aortic balloon pump (p < 0.001), which also predicted the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications. There were no specific variables in the surgery model predicting the use of non-invasive mechanical ventilation. In the "intensive care unit model", predictors for mortality were postoperative kidney injury (p < 0.001), tracheostomy (p < 0.001), inotropes (p = 0.029) and PaO2/FiO2 ratio at discharge (p = 0.028); predictors for non-invasive mechanical ventilation were kidney injury (p < 0.001), inotropes (p < 0.001), blood transfusions (p < 0.001) and PaO2/FiO2 ratio at the discharge (p < 0.001). Conclusions: In this retrospective study, we identified the preoperative, intraoperative and postoperative characteristics associated with mortality and complications following cardiac surgery.

Associations Between Expiratory Flow Limitation and Postoperative Pulmonary Complications in Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery.

OBJECTIVES: To determine whether driving pressure and expiratory flow limitation are associated with the development of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) in cardiac surgery patients. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: University Hospital San Raffaele, Milan, Italy. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary endpoint was the occurrence of a predefined composite of PPCs. The authors determined the association among PPCs and intraoperative ventilation parameters, mechanical power and energy load, and occurrence of expiratory flow limitation (EFL) assessed with the positive end-expiratory pressure test. Two hundred patients were enrolled, of whom 78 (39%) developed one or more PPCs. Patients with PPCs, compared with those without PPCs, had similar driving pressure (mean difference [MD] -0.1 [95% confidence interval (CI), -1.0 to 0.7] cmH2O, p = 0.561), mechanical power (MD 0.5 [95% CI, -0.3 to 1.1] J/m, p = 0.364), and total energy load (MD 95 [95% CI, -78 to 263] J, p = 0.293), but they had a higher incidence of EFL (51% v 38%, p = 0.005). Only EFL was associated independently with the development of PPCs (odds ratio 2.46 [95% CI, 1.28-4.80], p = 0.007). CONCLUSIONS: PPCs occurred frequently in this patient population undergoing cardiac surgery. PPCs were associated independently with the presence of EFL but not with driving pressure, total energy load, or mechanical power.

Routine practice in mechanical ventilation in cardiac surgery in Italy.

BACKGROUND: Management of mechanical ventilation is a key issue in the prevention of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) and the improvement of surgical outcome. This is especially true in cardiac surgery where the use of the cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) increases the risk of lung injury. In the last years a growing number of studies have shown that protective ventilation has led to excellent results. However, the literature in this regard is lacking in cardiac surgery and there are no univocal guidelines in this sense. The aim of this survey was to investigate the actual clinical practice about ventilation techniques used in the Italian cardiac surgery centers. METHODS: A questionnaire of 32-item was sent to 69 Italian cardiac surgery centers, 56 of which return a completed form (81.2%). The questionnaire was assembled by three independent researchers and the final version was e-mailed to all members of the SIAARTI (Italian society of anesthesia resuscitation and intensive care medicine) Study Group on Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The answers were collected using a Google Forms sheet. In case of multiple questionnaires returned from the same center (i.e., different physicians from the same center responded) the head of department was asked to give a definite answer. Furthermore, for the 17 centers who reported multiple questionnaires, no large differences were found between the responses of different doctors belonging to the same center (12.3%±4.2% of discordant answers). RESULTS: Intraoperatively, patients were ventilated with a tidal volume (TV) of 6-8 mL/kg (91.1% of centers), a positive end-expiration pressure of 3-5 cmH2O (76.8% of centers) and a fraction of inspired oxygen (FiO2) of 50-80% (60.7% of centers). During the CPB, the "stop ventilation" technique was frequently adopted (73.2%). Before the discharge from the intensive care unit (ICU) non-invasive ventilation (NIV) was never applied in 32.1% of the centers, but it was used in 46.4% of patients with postoperative complications. CONCLUSIONS: This study shows a significant heterogeneity in ventilatory techniques among the Italian centers during CPB, whereas in the other surgical time the majority of the responding centers adopted a protective mechanical ventilation strategy.

Preoxygenation during induction of anesthesia in non-critically ill patients: A systematic review.

We conducted a systematic review of the literature to better understand whether preoxygenation in non-critically ill patients (i.e. elective surgery patients) should be recommended, as it lengthens safe apnea time (the time required to reach oxygen saturation < 90% in an apneic patient). Furthermore, we looked for the most efficient technique amongst those currently employed in clinical practice. We searched Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, PubMed and MeSH using various combinations of the words "preoxygenation", "general anesthesia", "induction", "operating room" and "oxygen". RCTs conducted on adult (>18 years) and non-emergent patients between 2008 and 2017 were deemed eligible. A total of 11 papers were included. Our review suggests that preoxygenation is a safe and efficient technique that allows for longer safe apneic periods in obese (BMI > 30) non-critically ill patients. Non-obese (<30 BMI) patients do not seem to benefit as much from this procedure. However, there is insufficient evidence in the literature to provide a clear recommendation. For all patients, the procedure was safe and well tolerated with no harm reported. The best technique for preoxygenation appears to be pressure support ventilation plus positive end-expiratory pressure. In conclusion, preoxygenation should be employed during the induction of general anesthesia in obese patients as it allows for a longer safe apnea time and causes no harm. Although data regarding efficacy is limited for the non-obese population, the procedure was still harmless and should continue to be performed pending more robust RCTs. We believe there is sufficient evidence to support a RCT that could offer better evidence for this subset of patients undergoing non-emergent procedures.

Mechanical ventilation management during cardiothoracic surgery: an open challenge.

Mechanical ventilation during surgery is a highly complex procedure, particularly in cardiothoracic surgery, where patients need to undergo substantial hemodynamic management, involving large fluid exchanges and pharmacological manipulation of vascular resistance, as well as direct manipulation of the lungs themselves. Cardiothoracic surgery is burdened by a high rate of postoperative pulmonary complication (PPC), comorbidity, and mortality. Recent trials have examined various techniques to preserve lung function, although consensus on best practice has yet to be reached. This might be due to the close relationship between the circulatory and pulmonary systems. The use of a technique designed to prevent pulmonary complication might negatively impact the hemodynamics of an already critical patient. Stress-induced lung injury can occur during surgery for various reasons, some of which have yet to be fully investigated. In cardiac surgery, this damage is mainly ascribed to two events: cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) and sternotomy. In thoracic surgery, on the other hand, overdistention and permissive hyperoxia, both routinely used on one lung to compensate for the collapse of the other, are generally to blame for lung injury. In recent years "protective" ventilation strategies have been proposed to spare lung parenchyma from stress-induced damage. Despite the growing interest in protective ventilation techniques, there are still no clear international guidelines for mechanical ventilation in cardiothoracic surgery. However, some recent progress has been made, with positive clinical outcomes.

Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) level to prevent expiratory flow limitation during cardiac surgery: study protocol for a randomized clinical trial (EFLcore study).

BACKGROUND: Lung dysfunction commonly occurs after cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). Randomized evidence suggests that the presence of expiratory flow limitation (EFL) in major abdominal surgery is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Appropriate lung recruitment and a correctly set positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) level may prevent EFL. According to the available data in the literature, an adequate ventilation strategy during cardiac surgery is not provided. The aim of this study is to assess whether a mechanical ventilation strategy based on optimal lung recruitment with a best PEEP before and after CPB and with a continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) during CPB would reduce the incidence of respiratory complications after cardiac surgery. METHODS/DESIGN: This will be a single-center, single-blind, parallel-group, randomized controlled trial. Using a 2-by-2 factorial design, high-risk adult patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery will be randomly assigned to receive either a best PEEP (calculated with a PEEP test) or zero PEEP before and after CPB and CPAP (equal to the best PEEP) or no ventilation (patient disconnected from the circuit) during CPB. The primary endpoint will be a composite endpoint of the incidence of EFL after the weaning from CPB and postoperative pulmonary complications. DISCUSSION: This study will help to establish a correct ventilatory strategy before, after, and during CPB. The main purpose is to establish if a ventilation based on a simple and feasible respiratory test may preserve lung function in cardiac surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02633423 . Registered on 6 December 2017.

Perioperative pain management in cardiac surgery: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Every year, more than 1.5 million patients, who undergo cardiac surgery worldwide, are exposed to a series of factors that can trigger acute postoperative pain associated with hemodynamic instability, respiratory complications, and psychological disorders. Through an evaluation of literature data about postoperative pain in cardiac surgery we define unmet needs and potential objectives for future research on this often-underestimated problem. METHODS: Following PRISMA Guidelines, a systematic literature search was carried out by two independent researchers on Scopus, CINAHL, the Cochrane Library, and PubMed using the key words: (perioperative OR postoperative) analgesia AND "cardiac surgery." Papers concerning children, or published prior to 2000, were considered ineligible, as well as abstracts, animal studies, and studies written in languages other than English. RESULTS: Fifty-four papers were selected and subsequently divided into two main categories: systemic analgesic drugs and regional anesthesia techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Over the past 17 years, opioids are still the most extensively used therapy, whereas we found only few trials investigating other drugs (e.g. paracetamol). Regional anesthesia techniques, especially thoracic epidural analgesia and intrathecal morphine administration, can effectively treat pain, but have not yet showed any significant impact on major clinical outcomes, with several concerns related to their potential complications. To date multimodal analgesia with implementation of regional analgesia seems to be the best choice. In the future, better-designed studies should consider other drugs stratifying groups according to comorbidities and risk factors, as well as using standardized units of measurement.

Different strategies for mechanical VENTilation during CardioPulmonary Bypass (CPBVENT 2014): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: There is no consensus on which lung-protective strategies should be used in cardiac surgery patients. Sparse and small randomized clinical and animal trials suggest that maintaining mechanical ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass is protective on the lungs. Unfortunately, such evidence is weak as it comes from surrogate and minor clinical endpoints mainly limited to elective coronary surgery. According to the available data in the academic literature, an unquestionable standardized strategy of lung protection during cardiopulmonary bypass cannot be recommended. The purpose of the CPBVENT study is to investigate the effectiveness of different strategies of mechanical ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass on postoperative pulmonary function and complications. METHODS/DESIGN: The CPBVENT study is a single-blind, multicenter, randomized controlled trial. We are going to enroll 870 patients undergoing elective cardiac surgery with planned use of cardiopulmonary bypass. Patients will be randomized into three groups: (1) no mechanical ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass, (2) continuous positive airway pressure of 5 cmH2O during cardiopulmonary bypass, (3) respiratory rate of 5 acts/min with a tidal volume of 2-3 ml/Kg of ideal body weight and positive end-expiratory pressure of 3-5 cmH2O during cardiopulmonary bypass. The primary endpoint will be the incidence of a PaO2/FiO2 ratio <200 until the time of discharge from the intensive care unit. The secondary endpoints will be the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications and 30-day mortality. Patients will be followed-up for 12 months after the date of randomization. DISCUSSION: The CPBVENT trial will establish whether, and how, different ventilator strategies during cardiopulmonary bypass will have an impact on postoperative pulmonary complications and outcomes of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, ID: NCT02090205 . Registered on 8 March 2014.

Feasibility of Anesthesia Maintenance With Sevoflurane During Cardiopulmonary Bypass: A Pilot Pharmacokinetics Study.

OBJECTIVE: Adequate maintenance of hypnosis during anesthesia throughout surgery using sevoflurane alone was investigated. In addition, sevoflurane pharmacokinetics during cardiopulmonary bypass were analyzed. DESIGN: This was a pilot pharmacokinetic study. SETTING: Tertiary care university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised 10 patients aged between 18 and 75 years who underwent elective mitral valve surgery. INTERVENTIONS: The end-tidal and sevoflurane plasma concentrations were measured throughout cardiac surgery procedures involving cardiopulmonary bypass. The sevoflurane plasma concentration was measured using gas chromatography. In addition, the ratio between sevoflurane alveolar concentration and inspired concentration over time (FA/FI) was analyzed to describe wash-in and wash-out curves. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Hypnosis was maintained adequately throughout surgery using sevoflurane alone. The bispectral index was maintained between 40 and 60 during cardiopulmonary bypass. The end-tidal sevoflurane was significantly different before and during cardiopulmonary bypass (1.86%±0.54% v 1.30%±0.58%, respectively; p<0.001). However, the sevoflurane plasma concentration was not significantly different before and after cardiopulmonary bypass start-up (40.55 µg/mL [76.62-125.33] before cardiopulmonary bypass and 36.24 µg/mL [56.49-81-42] during cardiopulmonary bypass). This mismatch possibly can be explained by changes that occured after cardiopulmonary bypass start-up, such as reductions of body temperature (36.33°C±0.46°C v 32.98°C±2.38°C, respectively; p<0.001) and hematocrit (35.62%±3.98% v 25.5%±3.08%, respectively; p<0.001). The sevoflurane alveolar concentration varied according to sevoflurane plasma concentration and bispectral index values. No adverse events regarding sevoflurane administration during cardiopulmonary bypass were observed. CONCLUSIONS: Sevoflurane end-tidal values were reliable indicators of adequate anesthesia during all cardiac surgery procedures involving cardiopulmonary bypass.