Comparison of the Efficacy of HSK3486 and Propofol for Induction of General Anesthesia in Adults: A Multicenter, Randomized, Double-blind, Controlled, Phase 3 Noninferiority Trial.

BACKGROUND: Propofol is an intravenous anesthetic associated with hypotension, respiratory depression, and injection-site pain. HSK3486 injectable emulsion (ciprofol) is a 2,6-disubstituted phenol derivative with fast onset and quick, stable recovery. Previous studies support HSK3486 as an effective, safe anesthetic with substantially less injection-site pain than propofol. The primary objective of this study was to investigate the noninferiority of HSK3486 compared with propofol in successful general anesthesia induction. METHODS: Two hundred fifty-five participants were enrolled in HSK3486-304, a multicenter, randomized (2:1), double-blind, propofol-controlled, phase 3 study evaluating HSK3486 for general anesthesia induction in adults undergoing elective surgery with tracheal intubation. The primary endpoint was successful anesthesia induction, defined as 1 or less on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scale. Key secondary endpoints were proportion of participants with injection-site pain on the Numerical Rating Scale of 1 or greater and a composite endpoint, including the proportion of participants successfully induced while maintaining the desired anesthetic depth and without substantial cardiac and respiratory events. Safety endpoints included adverse events, abnormal vital signs, and injection-site pain. RESULTS: Two hundred fifty-one participants (HSK3486, n = 168; propofol, n = 83) were included in the analyses. General anesthesia was successfully induced in 97.0% versus 97.6% of participants with HSK3486 and propofol, respectively. The difference in success rate was -0.57% (95% CI, -5.4 to 4.2%); the noninferiority boundary of -8% was not crossed. Thirty participants (18.0%) had injection-site pain with HSK3486 versus 64 (77.1%) with propofol (P < 0.0001). Eighty-one participants (48.2%) with HSK3486 versus 42 (50.6%) with propofol (P = 0.8780) satisfied the composite endpoint. When injection-site pain was excluded, the incidence of treatment-emergent adverse events related to study drug was 17.9% for HSK3486 and 14.5% for propofol. CONCLUSIONS: The study met its primary objective and endpoint, demonstrating noninferiority of HSK3486 compared with propofol in successful anesthetic induction. Substantially less injection-site pain was associated with HSK3486 than with propofol.

PeriOperative Quality Initiative (POQI) international consensus statement on perioperative arterial pressure management.

Arterial pressure monitoring and management are mainstays of haemodynamic therapy in patients having surgery. This article presents updated consensus statements and recommendations on perioperative arterial pressure management developed during the 11th POQI PeriOperative Quality Initiative (POQI) consensus conference held in London, UK, on June 4-6, 2023, which included a diverse group of international experts. Based on a modified Delphi approach, we recommend keeping intraoperative mean arterial pressure ≥60 mm Hg in at-risk patients. We further recommend increasing mean arterial pressure targets when venous or compartment pressures are elevated and treating hypotension based on presumed underlying causes. When intraoperative hypertension is treated, we recommend doing so carefully to avoid hypotension. Clinicians should consider continuous intraoperative arterial pressure monitoring as it can help reduce the severity and duration of hypotension compared to intermittent arterial pressure monitoring. Postoperative hypotension is often unrecognised and might be more important than intraoperative hypotension because it is often prolonged and untreated. Future research should focus on identifying patient-specific and organ-specific hypotension harm thresholds and optimal treatment strategies for intraoperative hypotension including choice of vasopressors. Research is also needed to guide monitoring and management strategies for recognising, preventing, and treating postoperative hypotension.

Perianal Paget's-an aggressive disease.

AIM: Perianal Paget's disease (PAPD) is a rare disorder with a predisposition to anal and colorectal malignancies and an unclear prognosis. Our previous 25-year series demonstrated a non-aggressive nature. This study aims to describe our updated institutional experience. METHODS: This is a retrospective review of all patients diagnosed with primary PAPD from 1991 to 2021. A prospectively maintained institutional database was searched which included demographics, clinical and pathological manifestations, treatment methods, recurrence, oncological outcome and mortality. RESULTS: Thirty patients were diagnosed with PAPD. Fifteen were women (50%); the average age at diagnosis was 71 ± 10.7 years, and the average lesion size was 3.7 ± 2.6 cm. At diagnosis, 12 (40%) were harbouring invasive anal adenocarcinoma. Eight (27%) developed adenocarcinomas concurrent with PAPD recurrence at a mean interval of 9 ± 4.4 years (range 1.9-14.8). The Kaplan-Meier curve estimated overall survival of 93%, 86%, 82%, 65% and 56% at 1, 3, 5, 10 and 15 years, respectively. Median survival was 16 years. Six (20%) had disease-related mortality. Initially, nine (30%) were treated with abdominoperineal resection (APR), 15 (50%) underwent local resection, three (10%) were treated with radiotherapy, two (7%) received only topical therapy and one (3%) chose observation. Fifteen (50%) experienced recurrence of PAPD, two after undergoing APR. Five (17%) had persistent disease until death. Only 10 (33%) did not experience PAPD recurrence, seven of whom underwent APR. The mean follow-up time was 9.2 ± 6.2 years. CONCLUSIONS: Perianal Paget's disease is an aggressive entity with high rates of synchronous anal adenocarcinoma at diagnosis and development of metachronous adenocarcinoma later in life.

Utilization of Wearable Pedometer Devices in the Perioperative Period: A Qualitative Systematic Review.

Functional capacity assessment is important for perioperative risk stratification; however, there are currently limited options for objective and economical functional capacity evaluation. Pedometer functions are now widely available in mobile devices and offer a nonintrusive and objective approach to measuring patient activity level over time. Therefore, we conducted this systematic review to assess the value of pedometer readings in predicting perioperative outcomes. We systematically searched PubMed, EMBASE (Ovid), Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), and Web of Science Citation Index for studies, which assessed the correlation between perioperative (30 days before to 30 days after surgery) pedometer data and perioperative outcomes. We identified a total of 18 studies for inclusion. Seven of the studies recorded preoperative pedometer data, and 13 studies recorded postoperative pedometer data. Notably, 10 of the studies covered oncologic surgery patients. The included studies consistently reported that preoperative pedometer readings correlated with postoperative complication rates. In addition, in-hospital postoperative pedometer readings correlated with postdischarge complications and readmissions. Perioperative pedometer data demonstrated consistent and biologically plausible association with perioperative outcomes. Further studies are needed to validate the use of pedometer in the perioperative period and to identify the optimal approach for its use to potentially improve patient outcomes.

Total intravenous anesthesia versus inhalation anesthesia: how do outcomes compare?

RECENT FINDINGS: Surgical procedures that involve general anesthesia are performed with either volatile anesthetics or propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia. Both techniques are safe and provide appropriate conditions for surgery. Despite being a well established anesthetic, the use of propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) remains low. Possible explanations include the perceived increase risk of awareness, lack of target controlled infusion devices, increased turnover time for device set up and individual preference. SUMMARY: There are some scenarios where patients could potentially benefit from propofol-based TIVA rather than a volatile anesthetic (e.g. postoperative nausea and vomiting) and some other clinical scenarios where the use of propofol-based anesthesia remains controversial since the strength of the evidence remains low. PURPOSE: In this review we will summarize the clinical evidence comparing the effect of propofol-based TIVA and volatile anesthetic on postoperative outcomes such as postoperative nausea and vomiting, postoperative pain, quality of recovery, postoperative cognitive dysfunction and cancer outcomes.

Rescue Treatment of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting: A Systematic Review of Current Clinical Evidence.

Although prophylactic antiemetics are commonly used perioperatively, an estimated 30% of surgical patients still suffer from postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). Very few prospective trials have studied rescue treatment of PONV after failure of prophylaxis, providing limited evidence to support clinical management. In patients who have failed PONV prophylaxis, administering a rescue antiemetic from the same drug class has been reported to be ineffective. For many antiemetics currently used in PONV rescue, significant uncertainty remains around the effective dose range, speed of onset, duration of effect, safety, and overall risk-benefit ratio. As prompt, effective PONV rescue after failure of prophylaxis is important to optimize postoperative recovery and resource utilization, we conduct this systematic review to summarize the current evidence available on the topic.

Framework, component, and implementation of enhanced recovery pathways.

The introduction of enhanced recovery pathways (ERPs) has led to a considerable paradigm shift towards evidence-based, multidisciplinary perioperative care. Such pathways are now widely implemented in a variety of surgical specialties, with largely positive results. In this narrative review, we summarize the principles, components and implementation of ERPs, focusing on recent developments in the field. We also discuss 'special cases' in ERPs, including: surgery in frail patients; emergency procedures; and patients with Severe Acute Respiratory Syndrome Coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2/COVID-19).

International Delphi Expert Consensus on Safe Return to Surgical and Endoscopic Practice: From the Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this work is to formulate recommendations based on global expert consensus to guide the surgical community on the safe resumption of surgical and endoscopic activities. BACKGROUND: The COVID-19 pandemic has caused marked disruptions in the delivery of surgical care worldwide. A thoughtful, structured approach to resuming surgical services is necessary as the impact of COVID-19 becomes better controlled. The Coronavirus Global Surgical Collaborative sought to formulate, through rigorous scientific methodology, consensus-based recommendations in collaboration with a multidisciplinary group of international experts and policymakers. METHODS: Recommendations were developed following a Delphi process. Domain topics were formulated and subsequently subdivided into questions pertinent to different aspects of surgical care in the COVID-19 crisis. Forty-four experts from 15 countries across 4 continents drafted statements based on the specific questions. Anonymous Delphi voting on the statements was performed in 2 rounds, as well as in a telepresence meeting. RESULTS: One hundred statements were formulated across 10 domains. The statements addressed terminology, impact on procedural services, patient/staff safety, managing a backlog of surgeries, methods to restart and sustain surgical services, education, and research. Eighty-three of the statements were approved during the first round of Delphi voting, and 11 during the second round. A final telepresence meeting and discussion yielded acceptance of 5 other statements. CONCLUSIONS: The Delphi process resulted in 99 recommendations. These consensus statements provide expert guidance, based on scientific methodology, for the safe resumption of surgical activities during the COVID-19 pandemic.

Neoadjuvant Therapy in Stage II/III Rectal Cancer: A Retrospective Study in a Disparate Population and the Effect on Survival.

BACKGROUND: Kentucky has one of the highest rectal cancer incidences in the United States. High poverty rates have led to poor insurance coverage and inadequate access to care. The treatment of locally advanced rectal cancer utilizes a multimodal regimen requiring regular access to expert care. The rate of receipt of neoadjuvant therapy in Kentucky is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the rate and factors associated with the receipt of neoadjuvant therapy for localized advanced rectal cancer in Kentucky and the effect on overall survival. DESIGN: This is a retrospective database review. SETTINGS: This study was conducted by utilizing the Kentucky Cancer Registry at an academic center. PATIENTS: All patients diagnosed with stage II/III rectal adenocarcinoma from 2005 to 2015 in the Commonwealth of Kentucky were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the factors associated with nonreceipt of neoadjuvant therapy and overall survival. RESULTS: Of 1896 patients, only 46.8% received neoadjuvant therapy. Factors associated with not receiving neoadjuvant therapy included older age, female sex, low education level, high poverty level, and treatment at nonacademic centers. Survival analysis demonstrated significantly improved survival in patients receiving neoadjuvant therapy compared with other treatment regimens. LIMITATIONS: This study was limited by the retrospective nature of the review and by unmeasured confounders. CONCLUSIONS: Our study was the first to evaluate the factors behind the low rates of neoadjuvant therapy for locally advanced rectal cancer in Kentucky. Neoadjuvant therapy in this population is beneficial for survival; efforts should be made in policy and education with focus on older patients, female patients, and treatment at nonacademic centers. Centralization of rectal cancer care improves outcomes, but we must be aware of the effect it may have on disparate populations with poor access. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B596. TERAPIA NEOADYUVANTE EN EL MANEJO DEL CNCER DE RECTO EN ESTADIO II / III UN ESTUDIO RETROSPECTIVO EN UNA POBLACIN DISPAR Y EL EFECTO EN LA SUPERVIVENCIA: ANTECEDENTES:El estado de Kentucky tiene una de las mayores incidencias de cáncer de recto en los EE. UU. Debido a una alta tasa de pobreza, el porcentaje de la población que cuenta con seguro de salud, es muy limitado, y por lo tanto el acceso a una atención de alto nivel es muy bajo. El tratamiento del cáncer de recto localmente avanzado, es multidisciplinario, lo que exige acceso y disponibilidad a un grupo experto. Se desconoce la tasa de pacientes que reciben terapia neoadyuvante en Kentucky.OBJETIVO:Establecer la tasa y los factores asociados con el uso de terapia neoadyuvante en el tratamiento del cáncer de recto localmente avanzado en Kentucky, y su efecto en la supervivencia global.DISEÑO:Revisión retrospectiva de una base de datos.ESCENARIO:Este estudio se llevó a cabo utilizando el Registro de Cáncer de Kentucky en un centro académico.PACIENTES:Se incluyen todos los pacientes diagnosticados con adenocarcinoma de recto, de la Mancomunidad (Commonwealth) de Kentucky, en estadio II / III entre 2005 y 2015.PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO:Establecer los factores asociados con el hecho de no recibir terapia neoadyuvante; y establecer la supervivencia global.RESULTADOS:De 1896 pacientes evaluados, solo el 46,8% recibió terapia neoadyuvante. Los factores asociados, para no haber recibido terapia neoadyuvante fueron: la edad avanzada, sexo femenino, bajo nivel educativo, alto nivel de pobreza y tratamiento en centros no académicos. El análisis de la supervivencia mostró una supervivencia significativamente mejor en los pacientes que recibieron terapia neoadyuvante en comparación con otros esquemas de tratamiento.LIMITACIONES:Revisión retrospectiva, factores de confusión no medidos.CONCLUSIONES:Nuestro estudio ha sido el primero en evaluar los factores determinantes de las bajas tasas de terapia neoadyuvante para el tratamiento del cáncer de recto localmente avanzado en Kentucky. La terapia neoadyuvante mejora y favorece la supervivencia en esta población, por lo tanto se deben hacer esfuerzos en las políticas de salud, así como en educación, enfocados a los pacientes mayores, pacientes femeninas y tratamiento en centros no académicos. El centralizar la atención del cáncer de recto, mejora los resultados, pero debemos ser conscientes del efecto que puede tener en poblaciones desiguales económicamente, con acceso deficiente a la posibilidad de recibir atención de alto nivel. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B596.

Preoperative opioid, sedative, and antidepressant use is associated with increased postoperative hospital costs in colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Opioid (OPD), sedative (SDT), and antidepressant (ADM) prescribing has increased dramatically over the last 20 years. This study evaluated preoperative OPD, SDT, and ADM use on hospital costs in patients undergoing colorectal resection at a single institution. METHODS: This study was a retrospective record review. The local ACS-NSQIP database was queried for adult patients (age ≥ 18 years) undergoing open/laparoscopic, partial/total colectomy, or proctectomy from January 1, 2013 to December 31, 2016. Individual patient medical records were reviewed to determine preoperative OPD, SDT, and AD use. Hospital cost data from index admission were captured by the hospital cost accounting system and matched to NSQIP query-identified cases. All ACS-NSQIP categorical patient characteristic, operative risk, and outcome variables were compared in medication groups using chi-square tests or Fisher's exact tests, and continuous variables were compared using Mann-Whitney U tests. RESULTS: A total of 1185 colorectal procedures were performed by 30 different surgeons. Of these, 27.6% patients took OPD, 18.5% SDT, and 27.8% ADM preoperatively. Patients taking OPD, SDT, and ADM were found to have increased mean total hospital costs (MTHC) compared to non-users (30.8 vs 23.6 for OPD, 31.6 vs 24.4 for SDT, and 30.7 vs 23.8 for ADM). OPD and SDT use were identified as independent risk factors for increased MTHC on multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: Preoperative OPD and SDT use can be used to predict increased MTHC in patients undergoing colorectal resections.

Outcome of Organ Dysfunction in the Perioperative Period.

While intraoperative mortality has diminished greatly over the last several decades, the risk of death within 30 days of surgery remains stubbornly high and is ultimately related to perioperative organ failure. Perioperative strokes, while rare (<2% in noncardiac surgery), are associated with a more than 10-fold increase in mortality. Rapid identification and treatment are key to maximizing long-term outcomes. Postoperative delirium (POD) and postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) are separate but related perioperative neurological disorders, both of which are associated with poor long-term outcomes. To date, there are few known interventions that can ameliorate the risk of perioperative central nervous system dysfunction. Major adverse cardiac events (MACE) are a major contributor to adverse clinical outcomes following surgical procedures. Recently, advances in diagnostic strategies (eg, high-sensitivity cardiac troponin [hs-cTn] assays) have improved our understanding of MACE. Recently, the dabigatran in patients with myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS; Management of myocardial injury After NoncArdiac surGEry) trial demonstrated that a direct thrombin inhibitor could improve outcomes following MINS. While the risk of acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) after surgery is approximately 0.2%, other less severe complications (eg, pneumonia, reintubation) are closer to 2%. While intensive care unit (ICU) concepts related to ARDS have migrated into the operating room, whether or not adverse pulmonary outcomes impact long-term outcomes in surgical patients remains a matter of debate. The standardization of acute kidney injury (AKI) definition has improved the ability of clinicians to measure and study the incidence of this important source of perioperative morbidity. AKI is associated with increased mortality as well as nonrenal morbidity (eg, myocardial infarction) after major surgery. Gastrointestinal complications after surgery range from ileus (common in abdominal procedures and associated with an increased length of stay) to less common complications such as mesenteric ischemia and gastrointestinal bleeding, both of which are associated with very high mortality. Outside of cardiothoracic surgery, the incidence of perioperative hepatic injury is not well described but, in this population, is associated with worsened long-term outcomes. Hyperglycemia is a common perioperative complication and occurs in patients undergoing both cardiac and noncardiac surgery. Both hyper- and hypoglycemia are associated with worsened long-term outcomes in cardiac and noncardiac surgery. Better diagnosis and increased understanding of perioperative organ injury has led to an increased appreciation for the specific role that particular organ systems play in poor long-term outcomes and has set the stage for targeted therapeutic interventions.

A Practical Guide for Anesthesia Providers on the Management of Coronavirus Disease 2019 Patients in the Acute Care Hospital.

The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic has infected millions of individuals and posed unprecedented challenges to health care systems. Acute care hospitals have been forced to expand hospital and intensive care capacity and deal with shortages in personal protective equipment. This guide will review 2 areas where the anesthesiologists will be caring for COVID-19 patients: the operating room and on airway teams. General principles for COVID-19 preparation and hospital procedures will be reviewed to serve as a resource for anesthesia departments to manage COVID-19 or future pandemics.

Silent Hypoxemia in Patients with COVID-19 Pneumonia: A Review.

During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic due to severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) infection, patients presented with COVID-19 pneumonia of varying severity. The phenomenon of severe hypoxemia without signs of respiratory distress is also known as silent or hidden hypoxemia. Although silent hypoxemia is not unique to pneumonia due to SARS-CoV-2 infection, this phenomenon is now recognized to be associated with severe COVID-19 pneumonia. Proper management of critically ill patients is the key to reducing mortality. Herein, we summarize the possible and rare factors contributing to silent hypoxemia in patients with COVID-19. Microvascular thrombosis causes dead space ventilation in the lungs, and the flow of pulmonary capillaries is reduced, which leads to an imbalance in the V/Q ratio. The dissociation curve of oxyhemoglobin shifts to the left and limits the release of oxygen to the tissue. SARS-CoV-2 interferes with the synthesis of hemoglobin and reduces the ability to carry oxygen. The accumulation of endogenous carbon monoxide and carboxyhemoglobin will reduce the total oxygen carrying capacity and interfere with pulse oxygen saturation readings. There are also some non-specific factors that cause the difference between pulse oximetry and oxygen partial pressure. We propose some potentially more effective clinical alternatives and recommendations for optimizing the clinical management processes of patients with COVID-19. This review aims to describe the prevalence of silent hypoxemia in COVID-19 pneumonia, to provide an update on what is known of the pathophysiology, and to highlight the importance of diagnosing silent hypoxemia in patients with COVID-19 pneumonia.

Comprehensive Quality Improvement Program for Intraoperative Transesophageal Echocardiography: Development, Implementation, and Initial Experience.

OBJECTIVE: To develop and implement a comprehensive transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) quality improvement (QI) program and assess for potential improvements in TEE performed by cardiac anesthesiologists. DESIGN: Prospective institutionally approved QI program. SETTING: Academic tertiary care center. PARTICIPANTS: The study comprised cardiac anesthesiologists. INTERVENTIONS: An instrument comprising 15 quality measures to assess TEE examinations pre- and post-cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) was developed for the present study. TEE examinations before the introduction of the QI program were assessed retrospectively, and examinations performed after its introduction were reviewed prospectively over a 2-year period. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: A total of 118 TEE studies were analyzed, 48 and 70 studies before and after introduction of the TEE QI program, respectively. Half of the studies were performed pre-CPB, and half of them were performed post-CPB. Multivariate linear mixed regression models were used to assess the effect of the QI program. Interrater variability was assessed among internal reviewers by means of the Shrout-Fleiss reliability intraclass correlation coefficient. Five quality measures demonstrated a significant improvement in studies after CPB after implementation, including 3 imaging criteria (left ventricle, tricuspid valve, and pulmonary artery) and 2 documentation criteria (completeness of demographic/clinical data and timely reporting of documentation). The inter-rater variability analysis yielded an average intraclass correlation coefficient of 0.90 before and 0.78 after the QI program initiation, consistent with excellent agreement among the 4 reviewers. CONCLUSIONS: The present study demonstrated the ability to create and implement a formal QI program for intraoperative TEE in an academic tertiary care cardiac surgical group. The initial data showed significant improvement in several quality measures related to TEE performance.

The problem of postoperative respiratory depression.

WHAT IS KNOWN AND OBJECTIVE: Postsurgical recovery is influenced by multiple pre-, intra- and perioperative pharmacotherapeutic interventions, including the administration of medications that can induce respiratory depression postoperatively. We present a succinct overview of the topic, including the nature and magnitude of the problem, contributing factors, current limited options, and potential novel therapeutic approach. COMMENT: Pre-, intra- and perioperative medications are commonly administered for anxiety, anaesthesia, muscle relaxation and pain relief among other reasons. Several of the medications alone or in joint-action can be additive or synergistic producing respiratory depression. Given the large number of surgical procedures that are performed each year, even a small percentage of postoperative respiratory complications translates into a large number of affected patients. WHAT IS NEW AND CONCLUSION: Due to the large number of surgeries performed each year, and the variety of medications used before, during, and after surgery, the occurrence of postoperative respiratory depression is surprisingly common. It is a significant medical problem and burden on hospital resources. There is a need for new strategies to prevent and treat the acute and collateral problems associated with postoperative respiratory depression.

A Retrospective Review: Patient-Reported Preoperative Prescription Opioid, Sedative, or Antidepressant Use Is Associated with Worse Outcomes in Colorectal Surgery.

BACKGROUND: Prescription opioid, sedative, and antidepressant use has been on the rise. The effect of these medications on outcomes in colorectal surgery has not been established. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the impact of preoperative prescription opioid, sedative, and antidepressant use on postoperative outcomes following colorectal surgery. DESIGN: This study was a retrospective database and medical record review. SETTINGS: This study was conducted at University of Kentucky utilizing the local American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project database. PATIENTS: All patients ≥18 years of age who underwent colorectal resection for all indications, excluding trauma, between January 1, 2013, and December 31, 2016, were included. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcomes measured were the rates of 30-day postoperative morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Of 1201 patients, 30.2% used opioids, 18.4% used sedatives, and 28.3% used antidepressants preoperatively. Users of any medication class had higher ASA classification, rates of dyspnea, and severe chronic obstructive pulmonary disease than nonusers. Opioid users also had higher rates of ostomy creation, contaminated wound classification, prolonged operation time, and postoperative transfusion. Postoperatively, patients had higher rates of intra-abdominal infection (opioids: 21.5% vs 15.2%, p = 0.009; sedatives: 23.1% vs 15.7%, p = 0.01; antidepressants: 22.4% vs 15.0%, p = 0.003) and respiratory failure (opioids: 11.0% vs 6.3%, p = 0.007; sedatives: 12.2% vs 6.7%, p = 0.008; antidepressants: 10.9% vs 6.5%, p = 0.02). Reported opioid or sedative users had a prolonged hospital length of stay of 2 days (p < 0.001) compared with nonusers. After adjustment for all predictors of poor outcome, opioid and sedative use was associated with increased 30-day morbidity and mortality following colorectal procedures (OR, 1.43; 95% CI, 1.07-1.91 and OR, 1.48; 95% CI, 1.05-2.08). LIMITATIONS: This study was a retrospective review and a single-institution study, and it had unmeasured confounders. CONCLUSIONS: We identified that patient-reported prescription opioid and sedative use is associated with higher 30-day composite adverse outcomes in colorectal resections, highlighting the need for the evaluation of opioid and sedative use as a component of the preoperative risk stratification. See Video Abstract at http://links.lww.com/DCR/B226. REVISIÓN RETROSPECTIVA: EL USO DE OPIOIDES, SEDANTES O ANTIDEPRESORES EN EL PREOPERATORIO SE ASOCIAN CON MALOS RESULTADOS EN CIRUGÍA COLORECTAL: El uso de opioides, sedantes y antidepresores esta en aumento. No se ha establecido el efecto de estos medicamentos en los resultados de la cirugía colorrectal.Evaluar el impacto del uso preoperatorio de opioides, sedantes y antidepresores en los resultados después de una cirugía colorrectal.Base de datos retrospectiva y revisión de registros médicos.Este estudio se realizó en la Universidad de Kentucky utilizando la base de datos del Proyecto de Mejora de Calidad Quirúrgica Nacional del Colegio Estadounidense de Cirujanos.Todos los pacientes ≥ 18 años que se sometieron a una resección colorrectal por diversas indicaciones, excluyendo los traumas, entre el 1 de Enero de 2013 y el 31 de Diciembre de 2016.Tasas de morbilidad y mortalidad postoperatorias a los 30 días.De 1201 pacientes, 30.2% usaron opioides, 18.4% usaron sedantes y 28.3% usaron antidepresores antes de la cirugía. Los pacientes tratados con cualquiera de los medicamentos mencionados, presentaban un ASA mas elevado, tasas de disnea y EPOC mas graves en comparación con pacientes sin tratamiento previo. Los consumidores de opioides también tuvieron tasas más altas de creación de ostomías, clasificación mas alta de heridas contaminadas, un tiempo de operación prolongado y transfusión postoperatoria mayor. Después de la cirugía los pacientes que tuvieron tasas más altas de infección intraabdominal (opioides: 21.5% vs 15.2%, p = 0.009, sedantes: 23.1% vs 15.7%, p = 0.01, antidepresivos: 22.4% vs 15.0%, p = 0.003) e insuficiencia respiratoria (opioides: 11.0% vs 6.3%, p = 0.007, sedantes: 12.2% vs 6.7%, p = 0.008, antidepresivos: 10.9% vs 6.5%, p = 0.02). Los consumidores de opioides o sedantes tuvieron una estadía hospitalaria prolongada de más de 2 días (p <0.001) en comparación con los consumidores. Después de haber realizado el ajuste de todos los predictores de mal pronóstico, el uso de opioides y sedantes se asoció con una mayor morbilidad y mortalidad a los 30 días después de cirugía colorrectal (OR 1.43 [IC 95% 1.07-1.91] y OR 1.48 [IC 95% 1.05-2.08], respectivamente)Revisión retrospectiva, estudio de una sola institución, factores de confusión no evaluados.Identificamos que el consumo de opiáceos y sedantes recetados a los pacientes se asocian con resultados adversos complejos más allá de 30 días en casos de resección colorrectal, destacando la necesidad de su respectiva evaluación como componentes de la estratificación de riesgo preoperatorio. Consulte Video Resumen http://links.lww.com/DCR/B226. (Traducción-Dr. Xavier Delgadillo).

American Society for Enhanced Recovery and Perioperative Quality Initiative Joint Consensus Statement on the Role of Neuromonitoring in Perioperative Outcomes: Cerebral Near-Infrared Spectroscopy.

Some neurological complications following surgery have been related to a mismatch in cerebral oxygen supply and demand that may either lead to more subtle changes of brain function or overt complications like stroke or coma. Discovery of a perioperative neurological complication may be outside the treatment window, thereby making prevention an important focus. Early commercial devices used differential spectroscopy to measure relative changes from baseline of 2 chromophores: oxy- and deoxyhemoglobin. It was the introduction of spatially resolved spectroscopy techniques that allowed near-infrared spectroscopy (NIRS)-based cerebral oximetry as we know it today. Modern cerebral oximeters measure the hemoglobin saturation of blood in a specific "optical field" containing arterial, capillary, and venous blood, not tissue oxygenation itself. Multiple cerebral oximeters are commercially available, all of which have technical differences that make them noninterchangeable. The mechanism and meaning of these measurements are likely not widely understood by many practicing physicians. Additionally, as with many clinically used monitors, there is a lack of high-quality evidence on which clinicians can base decisions in their effort to use cerebral oximetry to reduce neurocognitive complications after surgery. Therefore, the Sixth Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI-6) consensus conference brought together an international team of multidisciplinary experts including anesthesiologists, surgeons, and critical care physicians to objectively survey the literature on cerebral oximetry and provide consensus, evidence-based recommendations for its use in accordance with the GRading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) criteria for evaluating biomedical literature. The group produced the following consensus recommendations: (1) interpreting perioperative cerebral oximetry measurements in the context of a preinduction baseline value; (2) interpreting perioperative cerebral oximetry measurements in the context of the physiologic variables that affect them; (3) using caution in comparing cerebral oximetry values between different manufacturers; (4) using preoperative cerebral oximetry to identify patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes after cardiac surgery; (5) using intraoperative cerebral oximetry indexed to preinduction baseline to identify patients at increased risk of adverse outcomes after cardiac surgery; (6) using cerebral oximetry to identify and guide management of acute cerebral malperfusion during cardiac surgery; (7) using an intraoperative cerebral oximetry-guided interventional algorithm to reduce intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay after cardiac surgery. Additionally, there was agreement that (8) there is insufficient evidence to recommend using intraoperative cerebral oximetry to reduce mortality or organ-specific morbidity after cardiac surgery; (9) there is insufficient evidence to recommend using intraoperative cerebral oximetry to improve outcomes after noncardiac surgery.

American Society for Enhanced Recovery and Perioperative Quality Initiative Joint Consensus Statement on the Role of Neuromonitoring in Perioperative Outcomes: Electroencephalography.

Electroencephalographic (EEG) monitoring to indicate brain state during anesthesia has become widely available. It remains unclear whether EEG-guided anesthesia influences perioperative outcomes. The sixth Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI-6) brought together an international team of multidisciplinary experts from anesthesiology, biomedical engineering, neurology, and surgery to review the current literature and to develop consensus recommendations on the utility of EEG monitoring during anesthesia. We retrieved a total of 1023 articles addressing the use of EEG monitoring during anesthesia and conducted meta-analyses from 15 trials to determine the effect of EEG-guided anesthesia on the rate of unintentional awareness, postoperative delirium, neurocognitive disorder, and long-term mortality after surgery. After considering current evidence, the working group recommends that EEG monitoring should be considered as part of the vital organ monitors to guide anesthetic management. In addition, we encourage anesthesiologists to be knowledgeable in basic EEG interpretation, such as raw waveform, spectrogram, and processed indices, when using these devices. Current evidence suggests that EEG-guided anesthesia reduces the rate of awareness during total intravenous anesthesia and has similar efficacy in preventing awareness as compared with end-tidal anesthetic gas monitoring. There is, however, insufficient evidence to recommend the use of EEG monitoring for preventing postoperative delirium, neurocognitive disorder, or postoperative mortality.

American Society for Enhanced Recovery and Perioperative Quality Initiative Joint Consensus Statement on Postoperative Delirium Prevention.

Postoperative delirium is a geriatric syndrome that manifests as changes in cognition, attention, and levels of consciousness after surgery. It occurs in up to 50% of patients after major surgery and is associated with adverse outcomes, including increased hospital length of stay, higher cost of care, higher rates of institutionalization after discharge, and higher rates of readmission. Furthermore, it is associated with functional decline and cognitive impairments after surgery. As the age and medical complexity of our surgical population increases, practitioners need the skills to identify and prevent delirium in this high-risk population. Because delirium is a common and consequential postoperative complication, there has been an abundance of recent research focused on delirium, conducted by clinicians from a variety of specialties. There have also been several reviews and recommendation statements; however, these have not been based on robust evidence. The Sixth Perioperative Quality Initiative (POQI-6) consensus conference brought together a team of multidisciplinary experts to formally survey and evaluate the literature on postoperative delirium prevention and provide evidence-based recommendations using an iterative Delphi process and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) Criteria for evaluating biomedical literature.

Fourth Consensus Guidelines for the Management of Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting.

This consensus statement presents a comprehensive and evidence-based set of guidelines for the care of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in both adult and pediatric populations. The guidelines are established by an international panel of experts under the auspices of the American Society of Enhanced Recovery and Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia based on a comprehensive search and review of literature up to September 2019. The guidelines provide recommendation on identifying high-risk patients, managing baseline PONV risks, choices for prophylaxis, and rescue treatment of PONV as well as recommendations for the institutional implementation of a PONV protocol. In addition, the current guidelines focus on the evidence for newer drugs (eg, second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 [5-HT3] receptor antagonists, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists, and dopamine antagonists), discussion regarding the use of general multimodal PONV prophylaxis, and PONV management as part of enhanced recovery pathways. This set of guidelines have been endorsed by 23 professional societies and organizations from different disciplines (Appendix 1).Guidelines currently available include the 3 iterations of the consensus guideline we previously published, which was last updated 6 years ago; a guideline published by American Society of Health System Pharmacists in 1999; a brief discussion on PONV management as part of a comprehensive postoperative care guidelines; focused guidelines published by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland and the Association of Perianesthesia Nursing; and several guidelines published in other languages.The current guideline was developed to provide perioperative practitioners with a comprehensive and up-to-date, evidence-based guidance on the risk stratification, prevention, and treatment of PONV in both adults and children. The guideline also provides guidance on the management of PONV within enhanced recovery pathways.The previous consensus guideline was published 6 years ago with a literature search updated to October 2011. Several guidelines, which have been published since, are either limited to a specific populations or do not address all aspects of PONV management. The current guideline was developed based on a systematic review of the literature published up through September 2019. This includes recent studies of newer pharmacological agents such as the second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, a dopamine antagonist, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists as well as several novel combination therapies. In addition, it also contains an evidence-based discussion on the management of PONV in enhanced recovery pathways. We have also discussed the implementation of a general multimodal PONV prophylaxis in all at-risk surgical patients based on the consensus of the expert panel.