Role of Crystalloids in the Perioperative Setting: From Basics to Clinical Applications and Enhanced Recovery Protocols.

Perioperative fluid management, a critical aspect of major surgeries, is characterized by pronounced stress responses, altered capillary permeability, and significant fluid shifts. Recognized as a cornerstone of enhanced recovery protocols, effective perioperative fluid management is crucial for optimizing patient recovery and preventing postoperative complications, especially in high-risk patients. The scientific literature has extensively investigated various fluid infusion regimens, but recent publications indicate that not only the volume but also the type of fluid infused significantly influences surgical outcomes. Adequate fluid therapy prescription requires a thorough understanding of the physiological and biochemical principles that govern the body's internal environment and the potential perioperative alterations that may arise. Recently published clinical trials have questioned the safety of synthetic colloids, widely used in the surgical field. A new clinical scenario has arisen in which crystalloids could play a pivotal role in perioperative fluid therapy. This review aims to offer evidence-based clinical principles for prescribing fluid therapy tailored to the patient's physiology during the perioperative period. The approach combines these principles with current recommendations for enhanced recovery programs for surgical patients, grounded in physiological and biochemical principles.

Observational study on fluid therapy management in surgical adult patients.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative fluid therapy management is changing due to the incorporation of different fluids, surgical techniques, and minimally invasive monitoring systems. The objective of this study was to explore fluid therapy management during the perioperative period in our country. METHODS: We designed the Fluid Day study as a cross-sectional, multicentre, observational study. The study was performed in 131 Spanish hospitals in February 2019. We included adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia for either elective or non-elective surgery. Demographic variables were recorded, as well as the type and total volume of fluid administered during the perioperative period and the monitorization used. To perform the analysis, patients were categorized by risk group. RESULTS: We recruited 7291 patients, 6314 of which were included in the analysis; 1541 (24.4%) patients underwent high-risk surgery, 1497 (23. 7%) were high risk patients, and 554 (8.7%) were high-risk patients and underwent high-risk surgery; 98% patients received crystalloids (80% balanced solutions); intraoperative colloids were used in 466 patients (7.51%). The hourly intraoperative volume in mL/kg/h and the median [Q1; Q3] administered volume (mL/kg) were, respectively, 6.67 [3.83; 8.17] ml/Kg/h and 13.9 [9.52;5.20] ml/Kg in low-risk patients undergoing low- or intermediate-risk surgery, 6 [4.04; 9.08] ml/Kg/h and 15.7 [10.4;24.5] ml/Kg in high- risk patients undergoing low or intermediate-risk surgery, 6.41 [4.36; 9.33] ml/Kg/h and 20.2 [13.3;32.4] ml/Kg in low-risk patients undergoing high-risk surgery, and 5.46 [3.83; 8.17] ml/Kg/h and 22.7[14.1;40.9] ml/Kg in high-risk patients undergoing high- risk surgery . We used advanced fluid monitoring strategies in 5% of patients in the intraoperative period and in 10% in the postoperative period. CONCLUSIONS: The most widely used fluid was balanced crystalloids. Colloids were used in a small number of patients. Hourly surgery volume tended to be more restrictive in high-risk patients but confirms a high degree of variation in the perioperatively administered volume. Scarce monitorization was observed in fluid therapy management. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinical Trials: NCT03630744.

Periprocedural Direct Oral Anticoagulant Management: The RA-ACOD Prospective, Multicenter Real-World Registry.

Introduction There is scarce real-world experience regarding direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) perioperative management. No study before has linked bridging therapy or DOAC-free time (pre-plus postoperative time without DOAC) with outcome. The aim of this study was to investigate real-world management and outcomes. Methods RA-ACOD is a prospective, observational, multicenter registry of adult patients on DOAC treatment requiring surgery. Primary outcomes were thrombotic and hemorrhagic complications. Follow-up was immediate postoperative (24-48 hours) and 30 days. Statistics were performed using a univariate and multivariate analysis. Data are presented as odds ratios (ORs [95% confidence interval]). Results From 26 Spanish hospitals, 901 patients were analyzed (53.5% major surgeries): 322 on apixaban, 304 on rivaroxaban, 267 on dabigatran, 8 on edoxaban. Fourteen (1.6%) patients suffered a thrombotic event, related to preoperative DOAC withdrawal (OR: 1.57 [1.03-2.4]) and DOAC-free time longer than 6 days (OR: 5.42 [1.18-26]). Minor bleeding events were described in 76 (8.4%) patients, with higher incidence for dabigatran (12.7%) versus other DOACs (6.6%). Major bleeding events occurred in 17 (1.9%) patients. Bridging therapy was used in 315 (35%) patients. It was associated with minor (OR: 2.57 [1.3-5.07]) and major (OR: 4.2 [1.4-12.3]) bleeding events, without decreasing thrombotic events. Conclusion This study offers real-world data on perioperative DOAC management and outcomes in a large prospective sample size to date with a high percentage of major surgery. Short-term preprocedural DOAC interruption depending on the drug, hemorrhagic risk, and renal function, without bridging therapy and a reduced DOAC-free time, seems the safest practice.

Rivaroxaban or Enoxaparin in Nonmajor Orthopedic Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Nonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs that results in transient reduced mobility places patients at risk for venous thromboembolism. Rivaroxaban may be noninferior to enoxaparin with regard to the prevention of major venous thromboembolism in these patients. METHODS: In this international, parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, noninferiority trial, we randomly assigned adult patients undergoing lower-limb nonmajor orthopedic surgery who were considered to be at risk for venous thromboembolism on the basis of the investigator's judgment to receive either rivaroxaban or enoxaparin. The primary efficacy outcome of major venous thromboembolism was a composite of symptomatic distal or proximal deep-vein thrombosis, pulmonary embolism, or venous thromboembolism-related death during the treatment period or asymptomatic proximal deep-vein thrombosis at the end of treatment. A test for superiority was planned if rivaroxaban proved to be noninferior to enoxaparin. For all outcomes, multiple imputation was used to account for missing data. Prespecified safety outcomes included major bleeding (fatal, critical, or clinically overt bleeding or bleeding at the surgical site leading to intervention) and nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding. RESULTS: A total of 3604 patients underwent randomization; 1809 patients were assigned to receive rivaroxaban, and 1795 to receive enoxaparin. Major venous thromboembolism occurred in 4 of 1661 patients (0.2%) in the rivaroxaban group and in 18 of 1640 patients (1.1%) in the enoxaparin group (risk ratio with multiple imputation, 0.25; 95% confidence interval, 0.09 to 0.75; P<0.001 for noninferiority; P = 0.01 for superiority). The incidence of bleeding did not differ significantly between the rivaroxaban group and the enoxaparin group (1.1% and 1.0%, respectively, for major bleeding or nonmajor clinically relevant bleeding; 0.6% and 0.7%, respectively, for major bleeding). CONCLUSIONS: Rivaroxaban was more effective than enoxaparin in the prevention of venous thromboembolic events during a period of immobilization after nonmajor orthopedic surgery of the lower limbs. (Funded by Centre Hospitalier Universitaire de Saint-Etienne and Bayer; PRONOMOS ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT02401594.).

Perioperative and Periprocedural Management of Antithrombotic Therapy: Consensus Document of SEC, SEDAR, SEACV, SECTCV, AEC, SECPRE, SEPD, SEGO, SEHH, SETH, SEMERGEN, SEMFYC, SEMG, SEMICYUC, SEMI, SEMES, SEPAR, SENEC, SEO, SEPA, SERVEI, SECOT and AEU.

During the last few years, the number of patients receiving anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy has increased worldwide. Since this is a chronic treatment, patients receiving it can be expected to need some kind of surgery or intervention during their lifetime that may require treatment discontinuation. The decision to withdraw antithrombotic therapy depends on the patient's thrombotic risk versus hemorrhagic risk. Assessment of both factors will show the precise management of anticoagulant and antiplatelet therapy in these scenarios. The aim of this consensus document, coordinated by the Cardiovascular Thrombosis Working Group of the Spanish Society of Cardiology, and endorsed by most of the Spanish scientific societies of clinical specialities that may play a role in the patient-health care process during the perioperative or periprocedural period, is to recommend some simple and practical guidelines with a view to homogenizing daily clinical practice.

European guidelines on perioperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: Day surgery and fast-track surgery.

: In recent years, day surgery and fast-track surgery have experienced a continuous increase in volume. Many procedures are now performed on an outpatient protocol, including general, orthopaedic, oncological, reconstructive or vascular surgery. The management of these patients is safe, but the incidence of venous thromboembolism in this population remains unknown. Several risk factors can be identified and stratified derived from studies of inpatient surgical management (e.g. Caprini score). Recommendations for thromboprophylaxis should be tailored from the assessment of both personal and procedure-related risk factors, although with a lack of evidence for application in outpatient management. For patients undergoing a low-risk procedure without additional risk factors, we recommend only general measures of thromboprophylaxis (early ambulation, optimal hydration) (Grade 1B). For patients undergoing a low-risk procedure with additional risk factors, or a high-risk procedure without additional risk factors, we recommend general measures of thromboprophylaxis (Grade 1B) and we suggest the administration of pharmacological prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparins (Grade 2B). For patients undergoing a high-risk procedure with additional risk factors we recommend general measures of thromboprophylaxis (Grade 1B) and pharmacological prophylaxis with low molecular weight heparins over other drugs (Grade 1B), or suggest specific mechanical measures in case of increased bleeding risk (Grade 2C). Pharmacological prophylaxis should last a minimum of 7 days (Grade 1B), although in selected cases of fast-track surgery, thromboprophylaxis could be limited to hospitalisation only (Grade 2C) and in specific cases of high-risk procedures, thromboprophylaxis could be extended for up to 4 weeks (Grade 2B).

European guidelines on perioperative venous thromboembolism prophylaxis: Chronic treatments with antiplatelet agents.

: Antiplatelet agents (APA) are considered first-line therapy in preventing cardiovascular thrombotic events, but they are of limited value in the prophylaxis of venous thromboembolism (VTE) during the perioperative period. Consequently, many patients should receive both an APA and an anticoagulant. This combination can increase the bleeding risk and it is necessary to make some recommendations to minimise that risk. In patients receiving APA chronically, if the risk of VTE outweighs the risk of bleeding, we suggest pharmacological prophylaxis (grade 2C). In patients treated with dual antiplatelet therapy undergoing a procedure associated with a high risk of VTE, resuming both APA shortly after the procedure must be prioritised over pharmacological VTE prevention (grade 2C). If the risk of bleeding from a combination of an APA and an anticoagulant outweighs the risk of VTE, we suggest mechanical thromboprophylaxis over anticoagulant prophylaxis, without discontinuing the APA (grade 2C). Patients in whom neuraxial anaesthesia is planned, a higher rate of complications could occur if pharmacological thromboprophylaxis is administered concurrently and postoperative thromboprophylaxis initiation should be suggested (grade 2C). After surgery, the first dose of aspirin should be given once haemostasis is guaranteed (grade 2B). In the case of clopidogrel, give the drug without a loading dose between 24 and 48 h after surgery (grade 2C).

Management of direct oral anticoagulants in patients undergoing elective surgeries and invasive procedures: Updated guidelines from the French Working Group on Perioperative Hemostasis (GIHP) - September 2015.

Since 2011, data on patients exposed to direct oral anticoagulants (DOAs) while undergoing invasive procedures have accumulated. At the same time, an increased hemorrhagic risk during perioperative bridging anticoagulation without thrombotic risk reduction has been demonstrated. This has led the GIHP to update their guidelines published in 2011. For scheduled procedures at low bleeding risk, it is suggested that patients interrupt DOAs the night before irrespective of type of drug and to resume therapy six hours or more after the end of the invasive procedure. For invasive procedures at high bleeding risk, it is suggested to interrupt rivaroxaban, apixaban and edoxaban three days before. Dabigatran should be interrupted according to the renal function, four days and five days if creatinine clearance is higher than 50mL/min and between 30 and 50mL/min, respectively. For invasive procedures at very high bleeding risk such as intracranial neurosurgery or neuraxial anesthesia, longer interruption times are suggested. Finally, bridging with parenteral anticoagulation and measurement of DOA concentrations can no longer routinely be used.

Management of major bleeding complications and emergency surgery in patients on long-term treatment with direct oral anticoagulants, thrombin or factor-Xa inhibitors: proposals of the working group on perioperative haemostasis (GIHP) - March 2013.

Direct new oral anticoagulants (NOACs) - inhibitors of thrombin or factor Xa - are intended to be used largely in the treatment of venous thromboembolic disease or the prevention of systematic embolism in atrial fibrillation, instead of vitamin K antagonists. Like any anticoagulant treatment, they are associated with spontaneous or provoked haemorrhagic risk. Furthermore, a significant proportion of treated patients are likely to be exposed to emergency surgery or invasive procedures. Given the absence of a specific antidote, the action to be taken in these situations must be defined. The lack of data means that it is only possible to issue proposals rather than recommendations, which will evolve according to accumulated experience. The proposals presented here apply to dabigatran (Pradaxa(®)) and rivaroxaban (Xarelto(®)); data for apixaban and edoxaban are still scarce. For urgent surgery with haemorrhagic risk, the drug plasma concentration should be less or equal to 30ng/mL for dabigatran and rivaroxaban should enable surgery associated with a high bleeding risk. Beyond that, if possible, the intervention should be postponed by monitoring the drug concentration. The course to follow is then defined according to the NOAC and its concentration. If the anticoagulant dosage is not immediately available, worse propositions, based on the usual tests (prothrombin time and activated partial thromboplastin time), are presented. However, these tests do not really assess drug concentration or the risk of bleeding that depends on it. In case of serious bleeding in a critical organ, the effect of anticoagulant therapy should be reduced using a non-specific procoagulant drug as a first-line approach: activated prothrombin complex concentrate (aPCC) (FEIBA(®) 30-50U/kg) or non-activated PCC (50U/kg). In addition, for any other type of severe haemorrhage, the administration of a procoagulant drug, which is potentially thrombogenic in these patients, is discussed according to the NOAC concentration and the possibilities of mechanical haemostasis.

Postoperative costs associated with outcomes after cardiac surgery with extracorporeal circulation: role of antithrombin levels.

OBJECTIVE: To study the impact on postoperative costs of a patient's antithrombin levels associated with outcomes after cardiac surgery with extracorporeal circulation. DESIGN: An analytic decision model was designed to estimate costs and clinical outcomes after cardiac surgery in a typical patient with low antithrombin levels (<63.7%) compared with a patient with normal antithrombin levels (≥63.7%). The data used in the model were obtained from a literature review and subsequently validated by a panel of experts in cardiothoracic anesthesiology. SETTING: Multi-institutional (14 Spanish hospitals). PARTICIPANTS: Consultant anesthesiologists. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A sensitivity analysis of extreme scenarios was carried out to assess the impact of the major variables in the model results. The average cost per patient was €18,772 for a typical patient with low antithrombin levels and €13,881 for a typical patient with normal antithrombin levels. The difference in cost was due mainly to the longer hospital stay of a patient with low antithrombin levels compared with a patient with normal levels (13 v 10 days, respectively, representing a €4,596 higher cost) rather than to costs related to the management of postoperative complications (€215, mostly owing to transfusions). Sensitivity analysis showed a high variability range of approximately ±55% of the base case cost between the minimum and maximum scenarios, with the hospital stay contributing more significantly to the variation. CONCLUSIONS: Based on this analytic decision model, there could be a marked increase in the postoperative costs of patients with low antithrombin activity levels at the end of cardiac surgery, mainly ascribed to a longer hospitalization.

Management consensus guidance for the use of rivaroxaban--an oral, direct factor Xa inhibitor.

A number of novel oral anticoagulants that directly target factor Xa or thrombin have been developed in recent years. Rivaroxaban and apixaban (direct factor Xa inhibitors) and dabigatran etexilate (a direct thrombin inhibitor) have shown considerable promise in large-scale, randomised clinical studies for the management of thromboembolic disorders, and have been approved for clinical use in specific indications. Rivaroxaban is licensed for the prevention of venous thromboembolism in patients undergoing elective hip or knee replacement surgery, the treatment of deep-vein thrombosis and prevention of recurrent venous thromboembolism, and for stroke prevention in patients with non-valvular atrial fibrillation. Based on the clinical trial data for rivaroxaban, feedback on its use in clinical practice and the authors' experience with the use of rivaroxaban, practical guidance for the use of rivaroxaban in special patient populations and specific clinical situations is provided. Although most recommendations are in line with the European summary of product characteristics for the approved indications, additional and, in several areas, different recommendations are given based on review of the literature and the authors' clinical experience.

[Recommendations on use of direct oral anticoagulants in the perioperative period]. / Recomendaciones de uso de los anticoagulantes orales directos en el período perioperatorio.

Because of the characteristics of direct oral anticoagulants (DOA), the lack of an antidote to completely reverse their anticoagulant effects, the absence of standardization in monitoring of their effects, and limited experience of their use, specific recommendations for their management in the perioperative period or in emergencies are required. In elective surgery, in patients with normal renal function and low hemorrhagic/ thrombotic risk, DOA should be withdrawn 2 days before the intervention; when the hemorrhagic/ thrombotic risk is higher, bridge therapy with a low molecular weight hepatin beginning 5 days before the intervention is proposed as an alternative. In emergency surgery, systematic administration of hemostatic drugs as prophylaxis is not recommended. In DOA-related acute hemorrhage, administration of prothrombin complex concentrate, fresh plasma or factor VIIa should be evaluated, and general measures to control bleeding should be implemented.

Surgery and invasive procedures in patients on long-term treatment with direct oral anticoagulants: thrombin or factor-Xa inhibitors. Recommendations of the Working Group on Perioperative Haemostasis and the French Study Group on Thrombosis and Haemostasis.

Direct oral anticoagulants (DOAs)--inhibitors of thrombin or factor-Xa--are expected to replace vitamin K antagonists in most of their indications. Patients receiving long-term treatment with DOAs are likely to be exposed to elective or emergency surgery or invasive procedures. Owing to the present lack of experience in such conditions, we cannot make recommendations, but only propose perioperative management for optimal safety regarding the risk of bleeding and thrombosis. DOAs may increase surgical bleeding, they have no validated antagonists, they cannot be monitored by simple standardized laboratory assays and their pharmacokinetics vary significantly between patients. Although DOAs differ in many respects, the proposals in the perioperative setting need not be specific to each. For procedures with low haemorrhagic risk, a therapeutic window of 48 hours (last administration 24 hours before surgery, restart 24 hours after) is proposed. For procedures with medium or high haemorrhagic risk, we suggest stopping DOAs 5 days before surgery to ensure complete elimination in all patients. Treatment should be resumed only when the risk of bleeding has been controlled. In patients at high thrombotic risk (e.g. those in atrial fibrillation with a history of stroke), bridging with heparin (low molecular-weight heparin, or unfractionated heparin, if the former is contraindicated) is proposed. In an emergency, the procedure should be postponed for as long as possible (minimum 1-2 half-lives) and non-specific antihaemorrhagic agents, such as recombinant human activated factor VIIa or prothrombin complex concentrates should not be given for prophylactic reversal due to their uncertain benefit-risk.

Prevention of the renarrowing of coronary arteries using drug-eluting stents in the perioperative period: an update.

The management of patients scheduled for surgery with a coronary stent, and receiving 1 or more antiplatelet drugs, has many controversies. The premature discontinuation of antiplatelet drugs substantially increases the risk of stent thrombosis (ST), myocardial infarction, and cardiac death, and surgery under an altered platelet function could also lead to an increased risk of bleeding in the perioperative period. Because of the conflict in the recommendations, this article reviews the current antiplatelet protocols after positioning a coronary stent, the evidence of increased risk of ST associated with the withdrawal of antiplatelet drugs and increased bleeding risk associated with its maintenance, the different perioperative antiplatelet protocols when patients are scheduled for surgery or need an urgent operation, and the therapeutic options if excessive bleeding occurs.

Regional anaesthesia and antithrombotic agents: recommendations of the European Society of Anaesthesiology.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: performing neuraxial anaesthesia in patients receiving antithrombotic drugs is controversial due to the increased risk of spinal epidural haematoma. Strict adherence to the recommended time intervals between the administration of anticoagulants, neuraxial blockade and the removal of catheters is thought to improve patient safety and reduce the risk of haematoma. Appropriate guidelines have been prepared by a number of national societies of anaesthesiologists, but they do not have universal acceptance. The introduction of new anticoagulants together with recent reports of stent thrombosis in patients with perioperative cessation of antiplatelet drugs have considerably broadened the issue and made revision necessary. To overcome deficiencies in content and applicability, the European Society of Anaesthesiology has taken the initiative to provide current and comprehensive guidelines for the continent as a whole. METHODS: extensive review of the literature. RESULTS AND CONCLUSIONS: in order to minimise bleeding complications during regional anaesthetic techniques, care should be taken to avoid traumatic puncture. If a bloody tap occurs when intraoperative anticoagulation is planned, postponing surgery should be considered. Alternatively, catheters can be placed the night before surgery. Regional anaesthesia in patients receiving full anticoagulation treatment continues to be contraindicated. Catheter manipulation and removal carry similar risks to insertion and the same criteria should apply. Appropriate neurological monitoring is essential during the postoperative recovery period and following catheter removal. The final decision to perform regional anaesthesia in patients receiving drugs that affect haemostasis has to be taken after careful assessment of individual risks and benefits.

New anticoagulants and regional anesthesia.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: The use of pharmacological thromboprophylaxis in the perioperative period may conflict with regional anesthetic techniques in which maintaining hemostatic integrity is essential. Recently, new anticoagulants have been developed with more efficacy and a better safety profile. This article reviews the basis for the actual recommendations and the current status and management of these new drugs. RECENT FINDINGS: Recent studies have outlined that the risk of epidural hematoma after neuraxial anesthesia may be higher than estimated. Therefore, it is imperative to follow the published recommendations. The use of new anticoagulant drugs may take into account the pharmacological profile of each one to safely perform regional anesthesia, mainly the time to reach peak plasma level and half-life. SUMMARY: When new anticoagulant drugs are used for thromboprophylaxis in orthopedic surgery, the performance of neuraxial anesthetic techniques should be based on their pharmacology. If a peripheral blockade is chosen, these recommendations should be followed when a block is performed in a noncompressible area.