2023 Update on Vascular Anesthesia.

The authors thank thank the editors for this opportunity to review the recent literature on vascular surgery and anesthesia and provide this clinical update. The last in a series of updates on this topic was published in 2019.1 This review explores evolving discussions and current trends related to vascular surgery and anesthesia that have been published since then. The focus is on the major points discussed in the recent literature in the following areas: carotid artery surgery, infrarenal aortic surgery, peripheral vascular surgery, and the preoperative evaluation of vascular surgical patients.

Comparison of Landmark-Guided Versus Fluoroscopy-Guided Cerebrospinal Fluid Drain-Related Complications After Aortic Repairs.

OBJECTIVE: Cerebrospinal fluid drains (CSFDs) are efficacious in preventing spinal cord injury after thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic repair with extensive coverage. Increasingly, fluoroscopy is used to guide placement instead of the traditional landmark-based approach, but it is unknown which approach is associated with fewer complications. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: In the operating room. PARTICIPANTS: Patients having undergone thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic repair with a CSFD over a 7-year period at a single center. INTERVENTIONS: No intervention. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Groups were reviewed and statistically compared with respect to baseline characteristics, ease of CSFD placement, and major and minor complications directly related to placement. A total of 150 CSFDs were placed with landmark guidance as opposed to 95 with fluoroscopy guidance. Compared to the landmark group, patients with fluoroscopy-guided CSFDs were older (p < 0.008), had lower American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status scores (p = 0.008), required fewer CSFD placement attempts (p = 0.011), had the CSFD in place for longer duration (p < 0.001), and had a similar incidence of CSFD-related complications (p > 0.999). Composites of both major (4.5% of cases) and minor CSFD-related complications (6.1% of cases), the primary outcomes of the study, occurred with similar incidences between the 2 groups (p > 0.999 for both comparisons) after adjusting potential confounders. CONCLUSIONS: In patients undergoing thoracic or thoracoabdominal aortic repairs, there were no significant differences in the risk of major and minor CSFD-related complications between fluoroscopic guidance and the landmark approach. Although the authors' institution is a high-volume center for this type of procedure, the study was limited by a small sample size. Hence, regardless of the technique used for the placement of CSFD, the risks related to the placement should be balanced carefully against the potential benefits resulting from spinal cord injury prevention. Fluoroscopy-aided insertion of CSFD requires fewer attempts and, hence, may be better tolerated by patients.

Right Heart Failure Management: Focus on Mechanical Support Options.

Millions of American adults suffer from right heart failure (RHF), a condition associated with high rates of hospitalization, organ failure, and death. There is a multitude of etiologies and mechanisms that lead to RHF, often in a feedforward spiral of decline. The management of advanced cases of RHF can be particularly difficult. For patients who are refractory to the medical optimization of volume status, hemodynamic and pharmacologic support, and rhythm control, mechanical therapies may be warranted. Currently available mechanical assist devices for RHF include venoarterial extracorporeal oxygenation and right ventricular assist devices, both surgical and percutaneous. Each advanced therapy has its own potential advantages and limitations, and often is appropriate in different clinical contexts. In this review, the authors describe the pathophysiology and medical therapies for RHF and then focus on the different types of advanced therapies that currently exist to help inform medical decision-making for this complicated patient cohort.

Hypothermia and Prolonged Time From Procedure End to Extubation After Endovascular Thoracic Aortic Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Perioperative hypothermia (core temperature <36°C) occurs in 50%-to-80% of patients recovering from thoracic aortic surgery, though its effects have not been described fully in this context. The authors, therefore, sought to characterize the incidence of perioperative hypothermia and its association with time from procedure end to extubation in endovascular aortic surgical patients. DESIGN: A retrospective cohort study. SETTING: At a single academic tertiary center. PARTICIPANTS: Patients recovering from thoracic aortic surgery with lumbar drains. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 196 patients were included in this study, 55 of whom were hypothermic with temperatures <35.0°C at the end of surgery. Though the unadjusted time to extubation was not statistically different in the hypothermic group (median 8 minutes, IQR 5-13.5 minutes) compared to the normothermic group (median 7 minutes, IQR 4-12 minutes; p = 0.062), multivariate predictors of increased time from procedure end to extubation included hypothermia (p = 0.011), age (p = 0.009), diabetes (p = 0.015), history of carotid disease (p = 0.040), and crystalloid volume (p = 0.019). CONCLUSIONS: Hypothermia in patients recovering from endovascular aortic surgery was associated with prolonged time from procedure end to extubation. Because of the retrospective observational nature of the authors' analysis, it was not possible to determine the extent to which prolonged mechanical ventilation was influenced by low temperature.

Propofol Versus Remifentanil Sedation for Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement: A Single Academic Center Experience.

OBJECTIVE: Comparison of remifentanil versus propofol for sedation during transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR) procedures to analyze the risk of sedation-related hypoxemia and hypotension. Secondary outcomes included the rate of conversion to general anesthesia, procedure length, rate of intensive care unit (ICU) admission, ICU and hospital lengths of stay, and 30-day mortality. DESIGN: Retrospective cohort study. SETTING: A single tertiary teaching hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-nine patients who had propofol or remifentanil sedation for TAVR between March 2017 and March 2020. INTERVENTION: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: There were 130 patients (50.2%) in the propofol cohort and 129 patients (49.8%) in the remifentanil cohort. The primary outcomes were oxygen saturation nadir values and vasopressor infusion use. Remifentanil was associated with a lower oxygen saturation nadir, as compared to propofol (91.3% v . 95.4%, p < 0.001). Risk factors associated with hypoxemia (defined as <92%) were body mass index (p = 0.0004), obstructive sleep apnea (p = 0.004), and remifentanil maintenance (p < 0.001). Vasopressor infusion use was significantly higher with propofol (64.9% v . 8.5%, p < 0.001). Propofol maintenance and angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitor/angiotensin II receptor-blocker use were the only variables identified as risk factors for vasopressor use (p < 0.001 and p = 0.009). CONCLUSIONS: For patients undergoing TAVR with conscious sedation, remifentanil was associated with more hypoxemia while propofol was associated with a higher rate of vasopressor use.

Anesthesia for Combined Heart and Liver Transplantation.

A heart or liver transplantation procedure performed in isolation itself presents multiple challenges for the perioperative team. Accordingly, combining both transplants yields a vastly more complicated surgery, with many unique multisystem and multidisciplinary considerations. Although combined heart and liver transplantations are being performed with increasing frequency, nationwide experience is relatively limited at most institutions. The aim of this review is to discuss the perioperative challenges presented to the anesthesiology teams and provide evidence-based guidance for the management of these daunting procedures.

One-year Results of a Factorial Randomized Trial of Aspirin versus Placebo and Clonidine versus Placebo in Patients Having Noncardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The authors previously reported that perioperative aspirin and/or clonidine does not prevent a composite of death or myocardial infarction 30 days after noncardiac surgery. Moreover, aspirin increased the risk of major bleeding and clonidine caused hypotension and bradycardia. Whether these complications produce harm at 1 yr remains unknown. METHODS: The authors randomized 10,010 patients with or at risk of atherosclerosis and scheduled for noncardiac surgery in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to clonidine/aspirin, clonidine/aspirin placebo, clonidine placebo/aspirin, or clonidine placebo/aspirin placebo. Patients started taking aspirin or placebo just before surgery; those not previously taking aspirin continued daily for 30 days, and those taking aspirin previously continued for 7 days. Patients were also randomly assigned to receive clonidine or placebo just before surgery, with the study drug continued for 72 h. RESULTS: Neither aspirin nor clonidine had a significant effect on the primary 1-yr outcome, a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, with a 1-yr hazard ratio for aspirin of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.12; P = 0.948; 586 patients [11.8%] vs. 589 patients [11.8%]) and a hazard ratio for clonidine of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.20; P = 0.218; 608 patients [12.1%] vs. 567 patients [11.3%]), with effect on death or nonfatal infarction. Reduction in death and nonfatal myocardial infarction from aspirin in patients who previously had percutaneous coronary intervention at 30 days persisted at 1 yr. Specifically, the hazard ratio was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.95) in those with previous percutaneous coronary intervention and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.91to 1.16) in those without (interaction P = 0.033). There was no significant effect of either drug on death, cardiovascular complications, cancer, or chronic incisional pain at 1 yr (all P > 0.1). CONCLUSIONS: Neither perioperative aspirin nor clonidine have significant long-term effects after noncardiac surgery. Perioperative aspirin in patients with previous percutaneous coronary intervention showed persistent benefit at 1 yr, a plausible sub-group effect.

Anesthesia for Resection and Reconstruction of the Trachea and Carina.

Airway surgery poses a host of unique challenges to both the surgical and anesthesiology teams. Accordingly, there are a variety of surgical, anesthetic, and airway management options to be strategically considered. Management can be challenging during multidisciplinary preoperative planning, during the surgical procedure itself, and during recovery. In this review, emphasis is placed on anesthesia challenges for patients undergoing major tracheal or carinal surgery with specific considerations related to perioperative management.

Aspirin in Patients With Previous Percutaneous Coronary Intervention Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery.

Background: Uncertainty remains about the effects of aspirin in patients with prior percutaneous coronary intervention (PCI) having noncardiac surgery. Objective: To evaluate benefits and harms of perioperative aspirin in patients with prior PCI. Design: Nonprespecified subgroup analysis of a multicenter factorial trial. Computerized Internet randomization was done between 2010 and 2013. Patients, clinicians, data collectors, and outcome adjudicators were blinded to treatment assignment. (ClinicalTrials.gov: NCT01082874). Setting: 135 centers in 23 countries. Patients: Adults aged 45 years or older who had or were at risk for atherosclerotic disease and were having noncardiac surgery. Exclusions were placement of a bare-metal stent within 6 weeks, placement of a drug-eluting stent within 1 year, or receipt of nonstudy aspirin within 72 hours before surgery. Intervention: Aspirin therapy (overall trial, n = 4998; subgroup, n = 234) or placebo (overall trial, n = 5012; subgroup, n = 236) initiated within 4 hours before surgery and continued throughout the perioperative period. Of the 470 subgroup patients, 99.9% completed follow-up. Measurements: The 30-day primary outcome was death or nonfatal myocardial infarction; bleeding was a secondary outcome. Results: In patients with prior PCI, aspirin reduced the risk for the primary outcome (absolute risk reduction, 5.5% [95% CI, 0.4% to 10.5%]; hazard ratio [HR], 0.50 [CI, 0.26 to 0.95]; P for interaction = 0.036) and for myocardial infarction (absolute risk reduction, 5.9% [CI, 1.0% to 10.8%]; HR, 0.44 [CI, 0.22 to 0.87]; P for interaction = 0.021). The effect on the composite of major and life-threatening bleeding in patients with prior PCI was uncertain (absolute risk increase, 1.3% [CI, -2.6% to 5.2%]). In the overall population, aspirin increased the risk for major bleeding (absolute risk increase, 0.8% [CI, 0.1% to 1.6%]; HR, 1.22 [CI, 1.01 to 1.48]; P for interaction = 0.50). Limitation: Nonprespecified subgroup analysis with small sample. Conclusion: Perioperative aspirin may be more likely to benefit rather than harm patients with prior PCI. Primary Funding Source: Canadian Institutes of Health Research.

ZMapp Reinforces the Airway Mucosal Barrier Against Ebola Virus.

Filoviruses, including Ebola, have the potential to be transmitted via virus-laden droplets deposited onto mucus membranes. Protecting against such emerging pathogens will require understanding how they may transmit at mucosal surfaces and developing strategies to reinforce the airway mucus barrier. Here, we prepared Ebola pseudovirus (with Zaire strain glycoproteins) and used high-resolution multiple-particle tracking to track the motions of hundreds of individual pseudoviruses in fresh and undiluted human airway mucus isolated from extubated endotracheal tubes. We found that Ebola pseudovirus readily penetrates human airway mucus. Addition of ZMapp, a cocktail of Ebola-binding immunoglobulin G antibodies, effectively reduced mobility of Ebola pseudovirus in the same mucus secretions. Topical delivery of ZMapp to the mouse airways also facilitated rapid elimination of Ebola pseudovirus. Our work demonstrates that antibodies can immobilize virions in airway mucus and reduce access to the airway epithelium, highlighting topical delivery of pathogen-specific antibodies to the lungs as a potential prophylactic or therapeutic approach against emerging viruses or biowarfare agents.

Paravertebral Block for Thoracic Surgery.

Local anesthetic injected into a wedge-shaped space lateral to the spinal nerves as they emerge from the intervertebral foramina produces somatosensory and sympathetic nerve blockade effective for anesthesia and for managing pain of unilateral origin from the chest and abdomen. Paravertebral blockade (PVB) is versatile and may be applied unilaterally or bilaterally. Unlike thoracic epidural, the PVB technique may be used to avoid contralateral sympathectomy, thereby minimizing hypotension and leading to better preservation of blood pressure. There are no reports on systemic toxicity associated with bilateral PVB despite the need for relatively large doses of local anesthetics. This review includes an important historic background and captures the resurgence of PVB-an almost lost technique. Thoracic PVB provides post-thoracotomy pain relief comparable with thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) with lower side effects supported by moderate-quality evidence. The feasibility and potential of bilateral thoracic PVB for bilateral thoracic surgery appear practical. However, there is existing controversy in the assumption that thoracic PVB is a satisfactory, safer alternative when anticoagulation status is a contraindication to thoracic epidural placement. During the last 2 decades of systematic reviews and meta-analyses, both TEA and PVB have been deemed appropriate in the management of thoracic surgery. A multimodal approach to analgesia includes regional techniques for thoracic surgery that may reduce the likelihood of the development of postoperative complications and chronic pain. PURPOSE OF THIS REVIEW: The authors evaluated current opinion, clinical practice, new multimodal adjuvants, regional anesthesia, and innovation and technology related PVB in the thoracic surgery patient population. The review focuses on history, techniques, application, ease of placement, and relative safety of this regional technique. For this review, studies and reference lists were retrieved from the Cochrane library, Embase, and Medline from January 1995 through January 2017. SUMMARY: Existing evidence demonstrates noninferiority of thoracic PVB compared with TEA for postoperative analgesia, with fewer side effects for unilateral and bilateral thoracic surgery, including video-assisted thoracoscopy. The determining factors in selecting the regional technique of choice include the following: (1) tolerance of side effects associated with TEA, (2) consensus on best practice or technique, and (3) operator experience. There is no consensus on the optimal approach for thoracic PVB technique or any standardization when comparing the landmark, ultrasound-guided, or stimulation-based PVB approaches. Moreover, the efficacy of TEA compared with PVB in preventing post-thoracotomy chronic pain syndrome has not been investigated thoroughly and requires future clinical trials.

Clonidine in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Marked activation of the sympathetic nervous system occurs during and after noncardiac surgery. Low-dose clonidine, which blunts central sympathetic outflow, may prevent perioperative myocardial infarction and death without inducing hemodynamic instability. METHODS: We performed a blinded, randomized trial with a 2-by-2 factorial design to allow separate evaluation of low-dose clonidine versus placebo and low-dose aspirin versus placebo in patients with, or at risk for, atherosclerotic disease who were undergoing noncardiac surgery. A total of 10,010 patients at 135 centers in 23 countries were enrolled. For the comparison of clonidine with placebo, patients were randomly assigned to receive clonidine (0.2 mg per day) or placebo just before surgery, with the study drug continued until 72 hours after surgery. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 30 days. RESULTS: Clonidine, as compared with placebo, did not reduce the number of primary-outcome events (367 and 339, respectively; hazard ratio with clonidine, 1.08; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.93 to 1.26; P=0.29). Myocardial infarction occurred in 329 patients (6.6%) assigned to clonidine and in 295 patients (5.9%) assigned to placebo (hazard ratio, 1.11; 95% CI, 0.95 to 1.30; P=0.18). Significantly more patients in the clonidine group than in the placebo group had clinically important hypotension (2385 patients [47.6%] vs. 1854 patients [37.1%]; hazard ratio 1.32; 95% CI, 1.24 to 1.40; P<0.001). Clonidine, as compared with placebo, was associated with an increased rate of nonfatal cardiac arrest (0.3% [16 patients] vs. 0.1% [5 patients]; hazard ratio, 3.20; 95% CI, 1.17 to 8.73; P=0.02). CONCLUSIONS: Administration of low-dose clonidine in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery did not reduce the rate of the composite outcome of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction; it did, however, increase the risk of clinically important hypotension and nonfatal cardiac arrest. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01082874.).

Aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: There is substantial variability in the perioperative administration of aspirin in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, both among patients who are already on an aspirin regimen and among those who are not. METHODS: Using a 2-by-2 factorial trial design, we randomly assigned 10,010 patients who were preparing to undergo noncardiac surgery and were at risk for vascular complications to receive aspirin or placebo and clonidine or placebo. The results of the aspirin trial are reported here. The patients were stratified according to whether they had not been taking aspirin before the study (initiation stratum, with 5628 patients) or they were already on an aspirin regimen (continuation stratum, with 4382 patients). Patients started taking aspirin (at a dose of 200 mg) or placebo just before surgery and continued it daily (at a dose of 100 mg) for 30 days in the initiation stratum and for 7 days in the continuation stratum, after which patients resumed their regular aspirin regimen. The primary outcome was a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction at 30 days. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 351 of 4998 patients (7.0%) in the aspirin group and in 355 of 5012 patients (7.1%) in the placebo group (hazard ratio in the aspirin group, 0.99; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.86 to 1.15; P=0.92). Major bleeding was more common in the aspirin group than in the placebo group (230 patients [4.6%] vs. 188 patients [3.8%]; hazard ratio, 1.23; 95% CI, 1.01, to 1.49; P=0.04). The primary and secondary outcome results were similar in the two aspirin strata. CONCLUSIONS: Administration of aspirin before surgery and throughout the early postsurgical period had no significant effect on the rate of a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction but increased the risk of major bleeding. (Funded by the Canadian Institutes of Health Research and others; POISE-2 ClinicalTrials.gov number, NCT01082874.).

Brachial Arterial Pressure Monitoring during Cardiac Surgery Rarely Causes Complications.

BACKGROUND: Brachial arterial catheters better estimate aortic pressure than radial arterial catheters but are used infrequently because complications in a major artery without collateral flow are potentially serious. However, the extent to which brachial artery cannulation promotes complications remains unknown. The authors thus evaluated a large cohort of cardiac surgical patients to estimate the incidence of related serious complications. METHODS: The institutional Society of Thoracic Surgeons Adult Cardiac Surgery Database and Perioperative Health Documentation System Registry of the Cleveland Clinic were used to identify patients who had brachial artery cannulation between 2007 and 2015. Complications within 6 months after surgery were identified by International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision diagnostic and procedural codes, Current Procedural Terminology procedure codes, and Society of Thoracic Surgeons variables. The authors reviewed electronic medical records to confirm that putative complications were related plausibly to brachial arterial catheterization. Complications were categorized as (1) vascular, (2) peripheral nerve injury, or (3) infection. The authors evaluated associations between brachial arterial complications and patient comorbidities and between complications and in-hospital mortality and duration of hospitalization. RESULTS: Among 21,597 qualifying patients, 777 had vascular or nerve injuries or local infections, but only 41 (incidence 0.19% [95% CI, 0.14 to 0.26%]) were potentially consequent to brachial arterial cannulation. Vascular complications occurred in 33 patients (0.15% [0.10 to 0.23%]). Definitely or possibly related infection occurred in 8 (0.04% [0.02 to 0.08%]) patients. There were no plausibly related neurologic complications. Peripheral arterial disease was associated with increased risk of complications. Brachial catheter complications were associated with prolonged hospitalization and in-hospital mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Brachial artery cannulation for hemodynamic monitoring during cardiac surgery rarely causes complications.