Association of sugammadex reversal of neuromuscular block and postoperative length of stay in the ambulatory care facility: a multicentre hospital registry study.

BACKGROUND: Encapsulation of rocuronium or vecuronium with sugammadex can reverse neuromuscular block faster than neostigmine reversal. This pharmacodynamic profile might facilitate patient discharge after ambulatory surgery. METHODS: We included patients who underwent ambulatory surgery with general anaesthesia and neuromuscular block between 2016 and 2021 from hospital registries at two large academic healthcare networks in the USA. The primary outcome was postoperative length of stay in the ambulatory care facility (PLOS-ACF). We examined post hoc whether the type of reversal affects postoperative nausea and vomiting and direct hospital costs. RESULTS: Among the 29 316 patients included, 8945 (30.5%) received sugammadex and 20 371 (69.5%) received neostigmine for reversal. PLOS-ACF and costs were lower in patients who received sugammadex vs neostigmine (adjusted difference in PLOS-ACF: -9.5 min; 95% confidence interval [95% CI], -10.5 to -8.5 min; adjusted difference in direct hospital costs: -US$77; 95% CI, -$88 to -$66; respectively; P<0.001). The association was magnified in patients over age 65 yr, with ASA physical status >2 undergoing short procedures (<2 h) (adjusted difference in PLOS-ACF: -18.2 min; 95% CI, -23.8 to -12.4 min; adjusted difference in direct hospital costs: -$176; 95% CI, -$220 to -$128; P<0.001). Sugammadex use was associated with reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting (17.2% vs 19.6%, P<0.001), which mediated its effects on length of stay. CONCLUSIONS: Reversal with sugammadex compared with neostigmine was associated with a small decrease in postoperative length of stay in the ambulatory care unit. The effect was magnified in older and high-risk patients, and can be explained by reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting. Sugammadex reversal in ambulatory surgery may also help reduce cost of care.

Adaptation and restructuring of an academic anesthesiology department during the COVID-19 pandemic in New York City: Challenges and lessons learned.

The novel SARS-CoV-2 pandemic starting in 2019 profoundly changed the world, and thousands of residents of New York City were affected, leading to one of the most acute surges in regional hospital capacity. As the largest academic medical center in the Bronx, Montefiore Medical Center was immediately impacted, and the entire hospital was mobilized to address the needs of its community. In this article, we describe our experiences as a large academic anesthesiology department during this pandemic. Our goals were to maximize our staff's expertise, maintain our commitment to wellness and safety, and preserve the quality of patient care. Lessons learned include the importance of critical care training presence and leadership, the challenges of converting an ambulatory surgery center to an intensive care unit (ICU), and the management of effective communication. Lastly, we provide suggestions for institutions facing an acute surge, or subsequent waves of COVID-19, based on a single center's experiences.

The Effect of Vibration on Pain During Intravenous Injection of Propofol: A Randomized Controlled Trial.

PURPOSE: Pain is a common side effect of intravenous injection of propofol. We conducted a randomized, prospective, single-blinded controlled trial to assess the efficacy of vibration analgesia on pain during propofol infusion in ambulatory surgery. METHODS: After institutional review board approval, 100 patients undergoing elective ambulatory surgery with general anesthesia were randomized into 2 groups. A control group (n = 50) consisted of patients who received infusion of propofol without vibration analgesia. A treatment group (n = 50) consisted of patients who received infusion of propofol with vibration analgesia using the Buzzy device. Pain was assessed using a 4-point pain manifestation scale scored by 2 independent, blinded observers. RESULTS: Participants in the treatment group with vibration analgesia were 0.47 times less likely (95% confidence interval, 0.24-0.94; P = 0.03) to experience any pain than the control group. The median summative pain score in the treatment group was significantly less than that of the control group [1 (interquartile range, 1-2) vs 2 (interquartile range, 2-4); P < 0.01] among participants who experienced any pain. Agreement between the 2 blinded observers regarding pain scores was excellent with κw = 0.82 (P < 0.001). Age, sex, body mass index, needle location or size, and medication doses did not differ significantly between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Vibration analgesia is an effective, low-risk modality that reduces the pain of intravenous propofol injection in general anesthesia.

Implementation of the telephone montreal cognitive assessment in a telemedicine based pre-admission testing clinic during COVID-19.

Introduction: Postoperative delirium (POD) affects 10-70% of patients 60 years or older and has been linked to increasing length of hospitalization, mortality, and morbidity. Pre-existing cognitive impairment is a predictor of POD. COVID-19 restricted use of in-person cognitive screens. The Telephone Montreal Cognitive Assessment (T-MoCA) can screen for cognitive dysfunction remotely. We evaluated the feasibility of administering T-MoCA in a multiethnic population during pre-operative testing televisits. Methods: Patients scheduled for surgery between July 2020 and August 2020 were asked to participate in the T-MoCA at the end of their preadmission testing (PAT) televisit. A retrospective chart review was conducted to collect patient comorbidities and demographics. Patients were stratified by negative (T-MoCA≥19) or positive (T-MoCA<19) for mild cognitive impairment (MCI) and compared using 2-tailed χ2-tests. Univariate logistic regression was used to identify associations between patient characteristics and positive T-MoCA result. Results: Fifty out of 65 (77%) patients who consented to the T-MoCA completed the test. The average time to complete the assessment was 10.5 mins. Twenty two (44%) had a negative score and 28 (56%) had a positive score. Patients who had a positive T-MoCA were older (70.04±7.61 yrs) compared to those with a negative T-MoCA (67.68±4.69 yrs, p=0.007), although the distribution of patients above and below age 65 was not different (p=0.243). The two groups did not vary by gender, race/ethnicity, obesity, surgery type, or medical co-morbidities. When we examined our population for predictors of a positive T-MoCA, we found a trend toward men being less likely to score positive on T-MoCA (OR=0.33, 95% CI: 0.10-1.10, p=0.07) compared to women; and that patients with Hispanic race/ethnicity were more likely to test positive on the T-MoCA (OR=4.13, 95% CI: 0.84-20.28, p=0.08) compared to Non-Hispanic Whites. Conclusions: Implementation of the T-MoCA in a telemedicine-based PAT setting is feasible. In our cohort, most people who consented to the assessment completed it, and more than half scored positively, which may have important implications on the surgical plan and post-operative recovery. There may be limitations in using T-MoCA in certain populations, such as non-English preferred language, hearing difficulties, lack of focus, and use of external aids, which would need to be explored in a larger sample size.

Evaluation of the safety of arteriovenous fistula creation surgery in ambulatory versus inpatient hospital setting.

Arteriovenous fistula (AVF) creation surgeries necessary for dialysis in patients with end-stage renal disease have traditionally been performed in inpatient settings under general anesthesia. Although more recent studies have demonstrated that these surgeries can be safely performed in outpatient centers with low postoperative complication rates, a direct comparison to surgeries performed in inpatient settings has not been investigated. This study sought to directly compare the rate of complications and postoperative mortality in AVF creation surgeries performed in outpatient and inpatient surgical centers. This multicenter retrospective study recorded emergency department (ED) visits, inpatient admissions, and mortality following 179 outpatient and 146 inpatient AVF surgeries in 2015 and 2016. Rates of mortality at 30 days and ED visits and inpatient admissions at 24-h and seven-day time points were compared in inpatient and outpatient groups. Following outpatient and inpatient surgeries, the rates of inpatient admissions in seven days were 0.685% and 4.47%, respectively, and the rates of ED visits in seven days were 1.37% and 3.91%. There were no mortalities in either group in 30 days. There was no difference between groups in the rate of ED visits within seven days or hospital visits within 24 h. There was a significantly lower rate of admissions (P = 0.0386) and total hospital visits (P = 0.0131) within seven days for outpatient surgeries. This study provides a direct comparison of postoperative complications in inpatient and outpatient AVF surgeries, further suggesting that providers can safely perform AVF surgeries in ambulatory centers.