Preanesthesia medical evaluation for electroconvulsive therapy: a review of the literature.

OBJECTIVE: Electroconvulsive therapy (ECT) is widely used for the treatment of psychiatric disorders, yet there is few published literature to guide the practitioner in the preprocedural evaluation of patients. Based on a review of the literature, we sought to develop a concise, algorithmic approach to be used when evaluating patients for ECT, including those with underlying conditions, such as cardiovascular and neurological disorders. METHODS: The databases of Ovid MEDLINE, PubMed, the Web of Knowledge, and PsychINFO were searched from January 2000 through December 2011. All abstracts were reviewed for relevancy to preprocedural ECT evaluation, and full articles of selected abstracts were reviewed in full, along with bibliographies of each. Algorithms were then constructed using the clinical information obtained from the selected articles. RESULTS: Our review of the literature located 275 articles using the search criteria. After review, 38 articles were selected. A total of 167 articles were excluded because they did not pertain to medical comorbidities in patients undergoing ECT, and an additional 70 were excluded because they did not pertain to ECT. Bibliography review of the selected articles located an additional 10 articles. CONCLUSIONS: Although ECT is generally a safe and effective therapy, some patient subgroups, such as those with certain cardiac conditions or history of cerebrovascular disease, require additional evaluation or, rarely, postponement of ECT. Chronic medical conditions should be optimized before undergoing ECT. Most patient populations are able to undergo ECT safely and effectively.

Practice Changing Updates in Perioperative Medicine Literature 2022. A Systematic Review.

Perioperative medicine is a rapidly growing multidisciplinary field with significant advances published each year. In this review, we highlight important perioperative publications in 2022. A multi-database literature search from January to December of 2022 was undertaken. Original research articles, systematic reviews, meta-analyses, and guidelines were included. Abstracts, case reports, letters, protocols, pediatric and obstetric articles, and cardiac surgery literature were excluded. Two authors reviewed each reference using the Distiller SR systematic review software (Evidence Partners Inc., Ottawa, Ont, Canada). A modified Delphi technique was used to identify 8 practice-changing articles. We identified another 10 articles for tabular summaries. We highlight why these articles have the potential to change clinical perioperative practice and areas where more information is needed.

Year 3 of COVID-19: Harsh Truths, Brutal Realities, and Glimmers of Hope.

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2, the virus causing coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), has now killed 1 of every 303 Americans. Whereas 4 vaccines are approved in the United States and masks are widely available, too few are fully immunized and most of the population has stopped wearing protective masks. The ongoing consequences of this include continued excess morbidity and mortality and the generation of immune-evading variants and subvariants, which in toto are injurious and ultimately self-defeating. Herein we briefly update and review COVID-19 vaccines, waning immunity, and new variants.

Preoperative Evaluation and Management of Patients With Select Chronic Gastrointestinal, Liver, and Renal Diseases.

Patients with chronic gastrointestinal, hepatic, and renal disease are frequently encountered in clinical practice. This is due in part to the rising prevalence of risk factors associated with these conditions. These patients are increasingly being considered for surgical intervention and are at higher risk for multiple perioperative complications. Many are able to safely undergo surgery but require unique considerations to ensure optimal perioperative care. In this review, we highlight relevant perioperative physiology and outline our approach to the evaluation and management of patients with select chronic gastrointestinal, hepatic, and renal diseases. A comprehensive preoperative evaluation with a multidisciplinary approach is often beneficial, and specialist involvement should be considered. Intraoperative and postoperative plans should be individualized based on the unique medical and surgical characteristics of each patient.

Practice-Changing Updates in Perioperative Medicine Literature 2020-2021: A Systematic Review.

Recent literature published in a variety of multidisciplinary journals has significantly influenced perioperative patient care. Distilling and synthesizing the clinically important literature can be challenging. This review summarizes practice-changing articles in perioperative medicine from the years 2020 and 2021. Embase, Ovid, and EBM reviews databases were queried from January 2020 to December 2021. Inclusion criteria were original research, systematic review, meta-analysis, and important guidelines. Exclusion criteria were conference abstracts, case reports, letters, protocols, pediatric and obstetric articles, and cardiac surgery literature. Two authors reviewed each reference using the Distiller SR systematic review software (Evidence Partners Inc., Ottawa, Ont., Canada). A modified Delphi technique was used to identify 9 practice-changing articles. We identified another 13 articles for tabular summaries, as they were relevant to an internist's perioperative evaluation of a patient. Articles were selected to highlight the clinical implications of new evidence in each field. We have also pointed out limitations of each study and clinical populations where they are not applicable.

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2021.

It can be challenging to identify new evidence that may shift clinical practice within internal medicine. Synthesis of relevant articles and guideline updates can facilitate staying informed of these changes. The titles and abstracts from the 7 general internal medicine outpatient journals with highest impact factors and relevance were reviewed by 8 internal medicine physicians. Coronavirus disease 2019 research was excluded. The New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), The Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), The British Medical Journal (BMJ), Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA Internal Medicine, and Public Library of Science Medicine were reviewed. Additionally, article synopsis collections and databases were reviewed: American College of Physicians Journal Club, NEJM Journal Watch, BMJ Evidence-Based Medicine, McMaster/DynaMed Evidence Alerts, and Cochrane Reviews. A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus based on clinical relevance to outpatient internal medicine, potential impact on practice, and strength of evidence. Article qualities and importance were debated until consensus was reached. Clusters of articles pertinent to the same topic were considered together. In total, 8 practice-changing articles were included.

Preoperative Evaluation Before Noncardiac Surgery.

The medical complexity of surgical patients is increasing and medical specialties are frequently asked to assist with the perioperative management surgical patients. Effective pre-anesthetic medical evaluations are a valuable tool in providing high-value, patient-centered surgical care and should systematically address risk assessment and identify areas for risk modification. This review outlines a structured approach to the pre-anesthetic medical evaluation, focusing on the asymptomatic patient. It discusses the evidence supporting the use of perioperative risk calculation tools and focused preoperative testing. We also introduce important key topics that will be explored in greater detail in upcoming reviews in this series.

Preoperative Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography and Clinical Factors for Assessment of Cardiac Risk after Noncardiac Surgery.

BACKGROUND: The role of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) in the risk stratification of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery in the current era is unclear. The aim of this study was to evaluate the yield of DSE and the additive role of DSE to clinical criteria for preoperative risk stratification of patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. METHODS: The study included 4,494 patients undergoing DSE ≤90 days before noncardiac surgery. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, and all-cause mortality ≤30 days after noncardiac surgery. RESULTS: The overall 30-day postoperative cardiac event rate was 2.3%. The mortality rate was 0.9% overall and 0.7% and 1.3% after normal and abnormal results on DSE, respectively. Among clinical variables, the modified Revised Cardiac Risk Index score demonstrated the strongest association with postoperative risk (P < .001). Patients with Revised Cardiac Risk Index scores of ≥3 had an event rate of 7.5%. The event rates for patients with wall motion score index ≥1.7 at baseline, left ventricular ejection fractions <40% at peak stress, or ischemic thresholds <70% of age-predicted maximal heart rate were 7.1%, 8.6%, and 7.9%, respectively. After adjusting for clinical variables, the overall result of DSE (P < .001), baseline and peak-stress wall motion score index (P < .001 and P = .014, respectively), peak-stress left ventricular ejection fraction (P < .001), and the number of ischemic segments (P = .027) were all associated with postoperative cardiac events. Incremental multivariate analysis demonstrated that an overall abnormal result on DSE, added to clinical variables, was associated with an increased risk for postoperative cardiac events (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% CI, 1.35-3.17; P < .001). CONCLUSIONS: Baseline and peak-stress findings on preoperative DSE add to the prognostic utility of clinical variables for stratifying cardiac risk after noncardiac surgery.

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2018.

The expansive scope of general internal medicine makes it difficult to identify practice-changing medical literature. Clinical updates can be facilitated by synthesizing relevant articles and implications for practice. Six internal medicine physicians reviewed the titles and abstracts in the 7 general internal medicine clinical outpatient journals with the highest impact factor and relevance to the internal medicine outpatient physician: New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM), Lancet, Annals of Internal Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), JAMA-Internal Medicine, British Medical Journal (BMJ), and Public Library of Science (PLoS) Medicine. The following collections of article synopses and databases were also reviewed: American College of Physicians Journal Club, NEJM Journal Watch, BMJ Evidence-Based medicine, McMaster/DynaMed Evidence Alerts, and Cochrane Reviews. A modified Delphi method was used to gain consensus on articles based on clinical relevance to outpatient Internal Medicine, potential impact on practice, and strength of evidence. Article qualities and importance were debated until consensus was reached. Clusters of articles pertinent to the same topic were considered together. In total, 7 practice-changing articles were included.

Cardiac Events after Noncardiac Surgery in Patients Undergoing Preoperative Dobutamine Stress Echocardiography: Findings From the Mayo Poce-DSE Investigators.

BACKGROUND: Current guidelines support the use of dobutamine stress echocardiography (DSE) prior to noncardiac surgery in higher-risk patients who are unable to perform at least 4 metabolic equivalents of physical activity. We evaluated postoperative outcomes of patients in different operative risk categories after preoperative DSE. METHODS: We collected data from the medical record on 4494 patients from January 1, 2006 to December 31, 2011 who had DSE up to 90 days prior to a noncardiac surgery. Patients were divided into low, intermediate, and high preoperative surgery-specific risk. Baseline demographic data and risk factors were abstracted from the medical record, as were postoperative cardiac events including myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, and mortality within 30 days after surgery. RESULTS: There were 103 cardiac outcomes (2.3%), which included myocardial infarction (n = 57, 1.3%), resuscitated cardiac arrest (n = 26, 0.6%), and all-cause mortality (n = 40, 0.9%). Cardiac event rates were 0.0% (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.0%-3.9%) in the low-surgical-risk group, 2.1% (95% CI, 1.6%-2.5%) in the intermediate-surgical-risk group, and 3.4% (95% CI, 2.0%-4.4%) in the high-risk group. Thirty-day postoperative mortality rates were 0%, 0.9%, and 0.8% for the low-risk, intermediate-risk, and high-risk surgical groups, respectively, and were not statistically different. CONCLUSIONS: These findings demonstrate low cardiac event rates in patients who underwent a DSE prior to noncardiac surgery. The previously accepted construct of low-, intermediate-, and high-risk surgeries based on postoperative events of <1%, 1%-5%, and >5% overestimates the actual risk in contemporary settings.

Update in perioperative medicine: practice changing evidence published in 2016.

This summary reviews 18 key articles published in 2016 which have significant practice implications for the perioperative medical care of surgical patients. Due to the multi-disciplinary nature of the practice of perioperative medicine, important new evidence is published in journals representing a variety of medical and surgical specialties. Keeping current with the evidence that drives best practice in perioperative medicine is therefore challenging. We set out to identify, critically review, and summarize key evidence which has the most potential for practice change. We integrated the new evidence into the existing body of medical knowledge and identified practical implications for real world patient care. The articles address issues related to anticoagulation, transfusion threshold, immunosuppressive medications, postoperative delirium, myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, postoperative pain management, perioperative management of antihypertensives, perioperative fasting, and perioperative diabetic control.

Primary Care Physicians Practicing Preventive Medicine in the Outpatient Setting.

BACKGROUND: Preventive care is an important part of primary care medicine, yet much variation in its practice exists. The aim of this study is to assess physicians' perspectives of practicing preventive medicine and evaluate which topics are deemed most important. METHODS: All primary care medicine providers at two separate academic medical centers (Mayo Clinic, MN and Mayo Clinic, FL) were surveyed via an E-mail questionnaire assessing physicians' perception of the role of preventive medicine during both acute/routine and yearly visits, physicians' perception of patients' response to preventive medicine topics, and which preventive medicine topics are commonly practiced. RESULTS: Of 445 providers meeting inclusion criteria, a total of 183 (41.1%) responded. Providers were more likely to engage patients in preventive medicine during yearly visits more so than acute visits (3.82 vs. 4.72, range 1-5 Likert Scale), yet providers were very likely to partake in such practices during both visits. Providers perceived that patients received the practice of preventive medicine very well (4.13 on 1-5 Likert Scale). No significant difference between provider practice and patient perception was noted between the two sites, although there was some variation based on clinical experience of the provider. Providers were found to most commonly practice topics recommended by the United States Preventive Services Task Force. CONCLUSIONS: Our study found a high predisposition to practicing preventive medicine. Providers seem to practice according to published evidence-based medicine recommendations.

Update in Outpatient General Internal Medicine: Practice-Changing Evidence Published in 2015.

Identifying new practice-changing articles is challenging. To determine the 2015 practice-changing articles most relevant to outpatient general internal medicine, 3 internists independently reviewed the titles and abstracts of original articles, synopses of single studies and syntheses, and databases of syntheses. For original articles, internal medicine journals with the 7 highest impact factors were reviewed: New England Journal of Medicine, Lancet, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), British Medical Journal, Public Library of Science Medicine, Annals of Internal Medicine, and JAMA Internal Medicine. For synopses of single studies and syntheses, collections in American College of Physicians Journal Club, Journal Watch, and Evidence-Based Medicine were reviewed. For databases of synthesis, Evidence Updates and the Cochrane Library were reviewed. More than 100 articles were identified. Criteria for inclusion were as follows: clinical relevance, potential for practice change, and strength of evidence. Clusters of important articles around one topic were considered as a single-candidate series. The 5 authors used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on inclusion of 7 topics for in-depth appraisal.

Update in perioperative medicine: practice-changing evidence published in 2015.

Evidence in perioperative medicine is published in a wide variety of journals, given the multidisciplinary nature of its practice which spans medicine and its subspecialties, as well as surgery and anesthesiology. It can be difficult to identify new and important evidence, as perioperative practice continues to evolve in multiple areas such as medication management, anticoagulation and cardiac risk stratification, among others. New, high-quality evidence is published each year, and must be placed into the context of not only existing literature, but also practical real-world patient care. We sought to systematically identify, critically evaluate and concisely summarize the practice implications of 10 articles published in 2015 for the practicing perioperative clinician.

Update in outpatient general internal medicine: practice-changing evidence published in 2014.

The practice of outpatient general internal medicine requires a diverse and evolving knowledge base. General internists must identify practice-changing shifts in the literature and reflect on their impact. Accordingly, we conducted a review of practice-changing articles published in outpatient general internal medicine in 2014. To identify high-quality, clinically relevant publications, we reviewed all titles and abstracts published in the following primary data sources in 2014: New England Journal of Medicine, Journal of the American Medical Association (JAMA), Annals of Internal Medicine, JAMA Internal Medicine, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. All 2014 primary data summaries from Journal Watch-General Internal Medicine and ACP JournalWise also were reviewed. The authors used a modified Delphi method to reach consensus on inclusion of 8 articles using the following criteria: clinical relevance to outpatient internal medicine, potential for practice change, and strength of evidence. Clusters of important articles around one clinical question were considered as a single-candidate series. The article merits were debated until consensus was reached on the final 8, spanning a variety of topics commonly encountered in outpatient general internal medicine.