Anaesthesiologists' clinical judgment accuracy regarding preoperative full stomach: Diagnostic study in urgent surgical adult patients.

BACKGROUND: In urgent situations, preoperative full stomach assessment mostly relies on clinical judgment. Our primary objective was to assess the diagnostic performance of clinical judgment for the preoperative assessment of full stomach in urgent patients compared to gastric point-of-care ultrasound (PoCUS). Our secondary objective was to identify risk factors associated with PoCUS full stomach in urgent patients. METHODS: We led a prospective observational study at our Hospital, between January and July 2016. Adult patients admitted for urgent surgery were eligible. Patients with altered gastric sonoanatomy, interventions reducing stomach content, impossible lateral decubitus were excluded. Clinical judgment and risk factors of full stomach were collected before gastric PoCUS measurements. Ultrasonographic full stomach was defined by solid contents or liquid volume ≥ 1.5 ml kg-1. Diagnostic performance was assessed through sensitivity, specificity, accuracy, positive and negative predictive value. RESULTS: The prevalence of clinical and PoCUS full stomach in 196 included patients was 29% and 27%, respectively. Positive and negative predictive values were 42% (95% CI: 32.3-52.6%) and 79% (95% CI: 74.9-83.4%), respectively. Patients with PoCUS full stomach were clinically misdiagnosed in 55% of cases. PoCUS full stomach was associated with abdominal or gynaecological-obstetrical surgery (OR 3.6, 95% CI: 1.5-8.8, P < 0.01) but not with fasting durations. Positive solid intake after illness onset with respect to 6-h solid fasting rule was associated with PoCUS low-risk gastric content (OR 0.4, 95% CI: 0.2-0.9, P = 0.03). CONCLUSIONS: Clinical judgment showed poor-to-moderate performance in urgent surgical patients for the diagnosis of full stomach. Gastric PoCUS should be used to assess risk of full stomach in this population.

Incidence and predicting factors of perioperative complications during monitored anesthesia care for awake craniotomy.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess incidence and predicting factors of awake craniotomy complications. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: Operating room and Post Anesthesia Care unit. PATIENTS: 162 patients who underwent 188 awake craniotomy procedures for brain tumor, ASA I to III, with monitored anesthesia care. MEASUREMENTS: We classified procedures in 3 groups: major event group, minor event group, and no event group. Major events were defined as respiratory failure requiring face mask or invasive ventilation; hemodynamic instability treated by vasoactive drugs, or bradycardia treated by atropine, bleeding >500 ml, transfusion, gaseous embolism, cardiac arrest; seizure, cerebral edema, or any events leading to stopping of the cerebral mapping. Minor event was defined as any complication not classified as major. Multivariate logistic regression was used to determine predicting factors of major complication, adjusted for age and ASA score. MAIN RESULTS: 45 procedures (24%) were classified in major event group, 126 (67%) in minor event group, and 17 (9%) in no event group. Seizure was the main complication (n = 13). Asthma (odds ratio: 10.85 [1.34; 235.6]), Remifentanil infusion (odds ratio: 2.97 [1.08; 9.85]) and length of the operation after the brain mapping (odds ratio per supplementary minute: 1.01 [1.01; 1.03]) were associated with major events. CONCLUSIONS: Previous medical history of asthma, remifentanil infusion and a long duration of neurosurgery after cortical mapping appear to be risk factors for major complications during AC.