Role of anaesthesia in endoscopic and external dacryocystorhinostomy: A meta-analysis of 3282 cases.

Distal acquired lacrimal obstruction is a common adulthood pathology whose primary treatment is represented by EXT-DCR and END-DCR. When considering their influencing factors, the role of the type of anaesthesia applied during these surgeries has a major role. The aim of this study is to systematically analyse the influence of general and local/regional anaesthesia on the final success rates of EXT-DCR and END-DCR. Primary EXT-DCR and END-DCR articles published later than 2000 with at least 50 single clinician procedures were selected. Exclusion criteria included acute dacryocystitis, tumours, studies focussing on revision surgeries, surgeries with adjunctive procedures, not clearly demarcated surgeons, mixed cohort study of acquired and congenital disorders. This systematic review was conducted in accordance with MOOSE guidelines; where feasible, a meta-analysis of the collected results was conducted. As a result, 11,445 articles were selected of which 2741 were examined after screening, and 16 included after full text review (0.6% of the initial papers). Among all papers included, the number of EXT-DCR was not enough to provide a solid analysis of the effect of anaesthesia; conversely, a significant difference of success rate was noted between local anaesthesia + sedation (85.1%, IC 77.8%-90.4%), and general anaesthesia (90.8%, IC 88.8%-92.4%) in END-DCR (p = 0.048). In conclusion, END-DCR performed with general anaesthesia should be considered as the solution of choice; however, local anaesthesia, eventually associated with a sedation, can be used as an alternative in selected cases. No meaningful conclusions could be drawn for EXT-DCR, due to the lack of data.

Nationwide survey on the current practice of ventricular tachycardia ablation.

METHODS: We performed a nationwide survey on the current practice of ventricular tachycardia catheter ablation in Italy during the year 2016. RESULTS: Among 145 operators participating in the survey, 58 (40.0%) did not perform any ventricular tachycardia ablation in 2016. Among those performing ventricular tachycardia ablation, 9 operators (6.2%) performed only right ventricular endocardial catheter ablation, 52 (35.9%) performed endocardial catheter ablation both in the right and left ventricle (LV) and 26 (17.9%) performed both endocardial and epicardial LV catheter ablations. Seventy operators (89.7%) among the 78 performing LV and epicardial ablations treated patients with ischemic cardiomyopathy; ablations in the setting of other causes were less frequently performed. The following were considered as minimum requirements for ventricular tachycardia ablation: presence of a three-dimensional mapping system (120 operators, 82.8%), ICU in the hospital (118 operators, 81.4%), operator's training in high volume centers (93 operators, 64.1%). Twenty-eight operators (19.3%) performed catheter ablation in patients with electrical storm only after hemodynamic stabilization, 41 operators (28.3%) also during the acute phase and 9 operators (6.2%) never performed catheter ablation in electrical storm patients; the remaining 67 operators did not perform ventricular tachycardia ablation at all, or performed ablations only in the right ventricle. CONCLUSION: The present survey provides a snapshot of the current invasive treatment of ventricular tachycardia by catheter ablation. The procedure, especially in the setting of ischemic cardiomyopathy, is performed nationwide. Complex cases, including those with electrical storm, should be managed within a preestablished integrated network of regional referral centers able to transfer patients as soon as possible.