An Exploratory Analysis of ChatGPT Compared to Human Performance With the Anesthesiology Oral Board Examination: Initial Insights and Implications.

BACKGROUND: Chat Generative Pre-Trained Transformer (ChatGPT) has been tested and has passed various high-level examinations. However, it has not been tested on an examination such as the American Board of Anesthesiology (ABA) Standardized Oral Examination (SOE). The SOE is designed to assess higher-level competencies, such as judgment, organization, adaptability to unexpected clinical changes, and presentation of information. METHODS: Four anesthesiology fellows were examined on 2 sample ABA SOEs. Their answers were compared to those produced by the same questions asked to ChatGPT. All human and ChatGPT responses were transcribed, randomized by module, and then reproduced as complete examinations, using a commercially available software-based human voice replicator. Eight ABA applied examiners listened to and scored the topic and modules from 1 of the 4 versions of each of the 2 sample examinations. The ABA did not provide any support or collaboration with any authors. RESULTS: The anesthesiology fellow's answers were found to have a better median score than ChatGPT, for the module topics scores (P = .03). However, there was no significant difference in the median overall global module scores between the human and ChatGPT responses (P = .17). The examiners were able to identify the ChatGPT-generated answers for 23 of 24 modules (95.83%), with only 1 ChatGPT response perceived as from a human. In contrast, the examiners thought the human (fellow) responses were artificial intelligence (AI)-generated in 10 of 24 modules (41.67%). Examiner comments explained that ChatGPT generated relevant content, but were lengthy answers, which at times did not focus on the specific scenario priorities. There were no comments from the examiners regarding Chat GPT fact "hallucinations." CONCLUSIONS: ChatGPT generated SOE answers with comparable module ratings to anesthesiology fellows, as graded by 8 ABA oral board examiners. However, the ChatGPT answers were deemed subjectively inferior due to the length of responses and lack of focus. Future curation and training of an AI database, like ChatGPT, could produce answers more in line with ideal ABA SOE answers. This could lead to higher performance and an anesthesiology-specific trained AI useful for training and examination preparation.

Perioperative care of patients with recent stroke undergoing nonemergent, nonneurological, noncardiac, nonvascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of published literature regarding postoperative stroke and mortality in patients with a history of stroke and to provide a framework for preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care in an elective setting. RECENT FINDINGS: Patients with nonneurological, noncardiac, and nonvascular surgery within three months after stroke have a 153-fold risk, those within 6 months have a 50-fold risk, and those within 12 months have a 20-fold risk of postoperative stroke. There is a 12-fold risk of in-hospital mortality within three months and a three-to-four-fold risk of mortality for more than 12 months after stroke. The risk of stroke and mortality continues to persist years after stroke. Recurrent stroke is common in patients in whom anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy is discontinued. Stroke and time elapsed after stroke should be included in the preoperative assessment questionnaire, and a stroke-specific risk assessment should be performed before surgical planning is pursued. SUMMARY: In patients with a history of a recent stroke, anesthesiology, surgery, and neurology experts should create a shared mental model in which the patient/surrogate decision-maker is informed about the risks and benefits of the proposed surgical procedure; secondary-stroke-prevention medications are reviewed; plans are made for interruptions and resumption; and intraoperative care is individualized to reduce the likelihood of postoperative stroke or death.

The Implementation of Enhanced Recovery After Spine Surgery in High and Low/Middle-income Countries: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

In this review article, we explore the implementation and outcomes of enhanced recovery after spine surgery (spine ERAS) across different World Bank country-income levels. A systematic literature search was conducted through PubMed, Embase, Scopus, and CINAHL databases for articles on the implementation of spine ERAS in both adult and pediatric populations. Study characteristics, ERAS elements, and outcomes were analyzed and meta-analyses were performed for length of stay (LOS) and cost outcomes. The number of spine ERAS studies from low-middle-income countries (LMICs) increased since 2017, when the first spine ERAS implementation study was published. LMICs were more likely than high-income countries (HICs) to conduct studies on patients aged ≥18 years (odds ratio [OR], 6.00; 95% CI, 1.58-42.80), with sample sizes 51 to 100 (OR, 4.50; 95% CI, 1.21-22.90), and randomized controlled trials (OR, 7.25; 95% CI, 1.77-53.50). Preoperative optimization was more frequently implemented in LMICs than in HICs (OR, 2.14; 95% CI, 1.06-4.41), and operation time was more often studied in LMICs (OR 3.78; 95% CI, 1.77-8.35). Implementation of spine ERAS resulted in reductions in LOS in both LMIC (-2.06; 95% CI, -2.47 to -1.64 d) and HIC (-0.99; 95% CI, -1.28 to -0.70 d) hospitals. However, spine ERAS implementation did result in a significant reduction in costs. This review highlights the global landscape of ERAS implementation in spine surgery, demonstrating its effectiveness in reducing LOS across diverse settings. Further research with standardized reporting of ERAS elements and outcomes is warranted to explore the impact of spine ERAS on cost-effectiveness and other patient-centered outcomes.

Assessing Practice Variation of Anesthetic Management for Endovascular Thrombectomy in Acute Ischemic Stroke: A Comprehensive Multicenter Survey.

OBJECTIVE: This study explored the current global landscape of periprocedural care of acute ischemic stroke patients undergoing endovascular thrombectomy (EVT). METHODS: An anonymous, 54-question electronic survey was sent to 354 recipients in hospitals worldwide. The responses were stratified by World Bank country income level into high-income (HICs) and low/middle-income (LMICs) countries. RESULTS: A total of 354 survey invitations were issued. Two hundred twenty-three respondents started the survey, and 87 fully completed surveys were obtained from centers in which anesthesiologists were routinely involved in EVT care (38 in HICs; 49 in LMICs). Respondents from 35 (92.1%) HICs and 14 (28.6%) LMICs reported that their centers performed >50 EVTs annually. Respondents from both HICs and LMICs reported low rates of anesthesiologist involvement in pre-EVT care, though a communication system was in place in 100% of HIC centers and 85.7% of LMIC centers to inform anesthesiologists about potential EVTs. Respondents from 71.1% of HIC centers and 51% of LMIC centers reported following a published guideline during EVT management, though the use of cognitive aids was low in both (28.9% and 24.5% in HICs and LMICs, respectively). Variability in multiple areas of practice, including choice of anesthetic techniques, monitoring and management of physiological variables during EVT, and monitoring during intrahospital transport, were reported. Quality metrics were rarely tracked or reported to the anesthesiology teams. CONCLUSIONS: This study demonstrated variability in anesthesiology involvement and in clinical care during and after EVT. Centers may consider routinely involving anesthesiologists in pre-EVT care, using evidence-based recommendations for EVT management, and tracking adherence to published guidelines and other quality metrics.

Utilizing Artificial Intelligence and Chat Generative Pretrained Transformer to Answer Questions About Clinical Scenarios in Neuroanesthesiology.

OBJECTIVE: We tested the ability of chat generative pretrained transformer (ChatGPT), an artificial intelligence chatbot, to answer questions relevant to scenarios covered in 3 clinical guidelines, published by the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SNACC), which has published management guidelines: endovascular treatment of stroke, perioperative stroke (Stroke), and care of patients undergoing complex spine surgery (Spine). METHODS: Four neuroanesthesiologists independently assessed whether ChatGPT could apply 52 high-quality recommendations (HQRs) included in the 3 SNACC guidelines. HQRs were deemed present in the ChatGPT responses if noted by at least 3 of the 4 reviewers. Reviewers also identified incorrect references, potentially harmful recommendations, and whether ChatGPT cited the SNACC guidelines. RESULTS: The overall reviewer agreement for the presence of HQRs in the ChatGPT answers ranged from 0% to 100%. Only 4 of 52 (8%) HQRs were deemed present by at least 3 of the 4 reviewers after 5 generic questions, and 23 (44%) HQRs were deemed present after at least 1 additional targeted question. Potentially harmful recommendations were identified for each of the 3 clinical scenarios and ChatGPT failed to cite the SNACC guidelines. CONCLUSIONS: The ChatGPT answers were open to human interpretation regarding whether the responses included the HQRs. Though targeted questions resulted in the inclusion of more HQRs than generic questions, fewer than 50% of HQRs were noted even after targeted questions. This suggests that ChatGPT should not currently be considered a reliable source of information for clinical decision-making. Future iterations of ChatGPT may refine algorithms to improve its reliability as a source of clinical information.

Differences in Perioperative Management of Patients Undergoing Complex Spine Surgery: A Global Perspective.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this survey was to understand institutional spine surgery practices and their concordance with published best practices/recommendations. METHODS: Using a global internet-based survey examining perioperative spine surgery practice, reported institutional spine pathway elements (n=139) were compared with the level of evidence published in guideline recommendations. The concordance of clinical practice with guidelines was categorized as poor (≤20%), fair (21%-40%), moderate (41%-60%), good (61%-80%), or very good (81%-100%). RESULTS: Seventy-two of 409 (17.6%) institutional contacts started the survey, of which 31 (7.6%) completed the survey. Six (19.4%) of the completed surveys were from respondents in low/middle-income countries, and 25 (80.6%) were from respondents in high-income countries. Forty-one incomplete surveys were not included in the final analysis, as most were less than 40% complete. Five of 139 (3.6%) reported elements had very good concordance for the entire cohort; hospitals with spine surgery pathways reported 18 elements with very good concordance, whereas institutions without spine surgery pathways reported only 1 element with very good concordance. Reported spine pathways included between 7 and 47 separate pathway elements. There were 87 unique elements in the reviewed pathways. Only 3 of 87 (3.4%) elements with high-quality evidence demonstrated very good practice concordance. CONCLUSIONS: This global survey-based study identified practice variation and low adoption rates of high-quality evidence in the care of patients undergoing complex spine surgery.

Perioperative Care of Patients Undergoing Major Complex Spinal Instrumentation Surgery: Clinical Practice Guidelines From the Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care.

Evidence-based standardization of the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery can improve outcomes such as enhanced patient satisfaction, reduced intensive care and hospital length of stay, and reduced costs. The Society for Neuroscience in Anesthesiology and Critical Care (SNACC) tasked an expert group to review existing evidence and generate recommendations for the perioperative management of patients undergoing complex spine surgery, defined as surgery on 2 or more thoracic and/or lumbar spine levels. Institutional clinical management protocols can be constructed based on the elements included in these clinical practice guidelines, and the evidence presented.

Autonomic dysreflexia-like syndrome in a T12 paraplegic during thoracic spine surgery.

A 19-year-old African American man with a T12 spinal cord lesion underwent a T4-L5 thoracolumbar spinal fusion. Intraoperatively, his arterial blood pressure acutely increased from 110/60 to 260/130 mm Hg without a change in heart rate. The patient did not have pheochromocytoma, carcinoid syndrome, or thyroid storm. This presentation differs from autonomic dysreflexia because the spinal cord lesion was well below T6, hypertension was elicited with somatic stimulation above the lesion, and the response required aggressive pharmacologic management. This presentation is consistent with similar cases that support a central autonomic process.

Spinal Anesthetic in a Patient With a Platelet Count of 7000 × 109/L and Undiagnosed Thrombotic Thrombocytopenic Purpura: A Case Report.

A parturient with unknown thrombotic thrombocytopenic purpura (TTP) received spinal anesthesia for cesarean delivery with subsequent discovery of a platelet count of 7000 × 10/L. Neurologic recovery was normal. Limited data exist to determine the risk of spinal epidural hematoma (SEH) in severely thrombocytopenic patients because they often receive alternate labor analgesia or general anesthesia during cesarean delivery. There is reporting bias in the literature toward cases in which severely thrombocytopenic patients sustain complications after regional anesthesia. It is important to report all cases of neuraxial anesthesia in severely thrombocytopenic patients, including those such as ours, wherein patients recover normally.