Managing central venous access during a health care crisis.

OBJECTIVE: During the COVID-19 pandemic, central venous access line teams were implemented at many hospitals throughout the world to provide access for critically ill patients. The objective of this study was to describe the structure, practice patterns, and outcomes of these vascular access teams during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: We conducted a cross-sectional, self-reported study of central venous access line teams in hospitals afflicted with the COVID-19 pandemic. To participate in the study, hospitals were required to meet one of the following criteria: development of a formal plan for a central venous access line team during the pandemic; implementation of a central venous access line team during the pandemic; placement of central venous access by a designated practice group during the pandemic as part of routine clinical practice; or management of an iatrogenic complication related to central venous access in a patient with COVID-19. RESULTS: Participants from 60 hospitals in 13 countries contributed data to the study. Central venous line teams were most commonly composed of vascular surgery and general surgery attending physicians and trainees. Twenty sites had 2657 lines placed by their central venous access line team or designated practice group. During that time, there were 11 (0.4%) iatrogenic complications associated with central venous access procedures performed by the line team or group at those 20 sites. Triple lumen catheters, Cordis (Santa Clara, Calif) catheters, and nontunneled hemodialysis catheters were the most common types of central venous lines placed by the teams. Eight (14%) sites reported experience in placing central venous lines in prone, ventilated patients with COVID-19. A dedicated line cart was used by 35 (59%) of the hospitals. Less than 50% (24 [41%]) of the participating sites reported managing thrombosed central lines in COVID-19 patients. Twenty-three of the sites managed 48 iatrogenic complications in patients with COVID-19 (including complications caused by providers outside of the line team or designated practice group). CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of a dedicated central venous access line team during a pandemic or other health care crisis is a way by which physicians trained in central venous access can contribute their expertise to a stressed health care system. A line team composed of physicians with vascular skill sets provides relief to resource-constrained intensive care unit, ward, and emergency medicine teams with a low rate of iatrogenic complications relative to historical reports. We recommend that a plan for central venous access line team implementation be in place for future health care crises.

Improving the Power of the American Society of Anesthesiology Classification System to Risk Stratify Vascular Surgery Patients Based on National Surgical Quality Improvement Project-Defined Functional Status.

BACKGROUND: Recently published reports have shown that the American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) classification system has limited applicability in vascular surgery patients. Most patients undergoing vascular procedures are designated as ASA class III, limiting discrimination in preoperative risk assessment. The 2006 National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (NSQIP), containing over 170,000 surgical cases, demonstrated that functional status is an important predictor of mortality. We propose that dividing ASA class III into 2 subgroups, based on NSQIP-defined functional status, improves the predictive value of the ASA scheme. METHODS: The 2006 NSQIP database was queried for ASA class III patients undergoing vascular surgery procedures. Patients were divided into groups IIIA and IIIB based on independent or dependent (partial or complete) functional status, respectively. Difference in 30-day survival between subgroups was evaluated using Kaplan-Meier and logistic regression analyses. Differences in postoperative morbidity and length of stay were compared using the unpaired t-test. RESULTS: ASA class III patients having undergone vascular surgery procedures numbered 11,555 (68%). Of those 9,913 (85.7%) patients were independent (IIIA), and 1,642 (14.3%) were dependent (IIIB). Mean 30-day mortality was 1.3% in subgroup IIIA, and 6.5% in IIIB (logrank P < 0.001, χ2, 137.8). Mean lengths of stay between subgroups IIIA and IIIB were 5.4 and 13.2 days (P < 0.001). The risk of NSQIP-defined postoperative complications was 0.16 in IIIA and 0.32 in IIIB (P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: A 5-fold difference in mortality was observed between patients who were functionally independent and dependent. A significant increase in length of stay and incidence of postoperative complications was also observed in subgroup IIIB. Subdividing ASA class III vascular surgery patients markedly improves the value of the ASA classification system. Given the "high-risk" nature of patients with vascular disease, the addition of functional status to the preoperative assessment will assist in predicting outcomes in this patient population.