General Anesthesia versus Sedation, Both with Hemodynamic Control, during Intraarterial Treatment for Stroke: The GASS Randomized Trial.

BACKGROUND: It is speculated that the anesthetic strategy during endovascular therapy for stroke may have an impact on the outcome of the patients. The authors hypothesized that conscious sedation is associated with a better functional outcome 3 months after endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke compared with general anesthesia. METHODS: In this single-blind, randomized trial, patients received either a standardized general anesthesia or a standardized conscious sedation. Blood pressure control was also standardized in both groups. The primary outcome measure was a modified Rankin score less than or equal to 2 (0 = no symptoms; 5 = severe disability) assessed 3 months after treatment. The main secondary outcomes were complications, mortality, reperfusion results, and National Institutes of Health Stroke Scores at days 1 and 7. RESULTS: Of 351 randomized patients, 345 were included in the analysis. The primary outcome occurred in 129 of 341 (38%) of the patients: 63 (36%) in the conscious sedation group and 66 (40%) in the general anesthesia group (relative risk, 0.91 [95% CI, 0.69 to 1.19]; P = 0.474). Patients in the general anesthesia group experienced more intraoperative hypo- or hypertensive episodes, while the cumulative duration was not different (mean ± SD, 36 ± 31 vs. 39 ± 25 min; P = 0.079). The time from onset and from arrival to puncture were longer in the general anesthesia group (mean difference, 19 min [i.e., -00:19] [95% CI, -0:38 to 0] and mean difference, 9 min [95% CI, -0:18 to -0:01], respectively), while the time from onset to recanalization was similar in both groups. Recanalization was more often successful in the general anesthesia group (144 of 169 [85%] vs. 131 of 174 [75%]; P = 0.021). The incidence of symptomatic intracranial hemorrhage was similar in both groups. CONCLUSIONS: The functional outcomes 3 months after endovascular treatment for stroke were similar with general anesthesia and sedation. Our results, therefore, suggest that clinicians can use either approach.

Influence of videolaryngoscopy using McGrath Mac on the need for a helper to perform intubation during general anaesthesia: a multicentre randomised video-no-video trial.

OBJECTIVE: We hypothesised that videolaryngoscopy modifies practice of tracheal intubation. DESIGN: Randomised single-blinded study (video and no-video groups). SETTING: Three institutions: one academic, one non-profit and one profit. PARTICIPANTS: Patients >18 years, requiring orotracheal intubation, without predicted difficult intubation. Non-inclusion criterion was patients requiring a rapid-sequence intubation. 300 patients were included, 271 randomised, 256 analysed: 123 in the no-video and 133 in the video groups. INTERVENTION: Tracheal intubation using a McGrath Mac videolaryngoscope, the sequence being video recorded. PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the proportion of intubations where assistance is necessary on request of the operator. Secondary outcomes included intraoperative variables (intubation difficulty scale and its components, percentage of glottic opening score, oesophageal Intubation, duration of intubation, removal of the screen cover in the no-video group, global evaluation of the ease of intubation, bispectral index, heart rate and blood pressure), intraoperative and postoperative complications (hoarseness or sore throat) and cooperation of the anaesthesiology team. RESULTS: Requirement for assistance was not decreased in the Video group: 36.1% (95% CI 27.9 to 44.9) vs 45.5% (95% CI 36.5 to 54.7) in the no-video group, p=0.74; OR: 0.7 (95% CI 0.4 to 1.1) and absolute risk: 0.10 (95% CI -0.03 to 0.22). Intubation difficulty scale was similar in both groups (p=0.05). Percentage of glottic opening score was better in the Video group (median of 100 (95% CI (100 to 100) and 80 (95%CI (80 to 90) in the no-video group; p<0.001) as Cormack and Lehane grade (p=0001). Ease of intubation was considered better in the video group (p<0.001). Other secondary outcomes were similar between groups. Screen cover was removed in 7.3% (95% CI (2.7 to 11.9)) of the cases in the video group. No serious adverse event occurred. Communication and behaviour within the anaesthesia team were appropriate in all cases. CONCLUSION: In patients without predicted difficult intubation, videolaryngoscopy did not decrease the requirement for assistance to perform intubation. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02926144; Results.

Reducing the time to successful intravenous cannulation in anaesthetised children with poor vein visibility using a near-infrared device: A randomised multicentre trial.

BACKGROUND: During inhalational induction of anaesthesia for children, severe respiratory events can occur but can be rapidly treated once intravenous access is in place. Reducing the time to successful cannulation during inhalational induction for children with poor vein visibility would improve safety. OBJECTIVE: To study the effectiveness of a near-infrared (NIR) vascular imaging device (Veinviewer) to facilitate intravenous cannulation. DESIGN: A prospective, multicentre, randomised, open clinical trial. SETTING: The operating rooms of three paediatric hospitals in Paris, France, from 1 October 2012 to 31 March 2016. PATIENTS: Children up to the age of 7 years, with poor vein visibility requiring general anaesthesia. INTERVENTION: Inhalational anaesthesia was initiated and intravenous cannulation was performed with the standard approach or with the Veinviewer Vision. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was the time to successful intravenous cannulation. A secondary outcome was the proportion of successful first attempts. RESULTS: The mean time to successful intravenous cannulation was 200 (95% CI, 143 to 295) seconds in the Veinviewer and 252 (95% CI, 194 to 328) seconds for the control group: hazard ratio 1.28 (1.02 to 1.60) (P = 0.03). The adjusted hazard ratio for known predictive factors was 1.25 (0.99 to 1.56) (P = 0.06). Success at the first attempt was 64.6% (102/158) in the 'Veinviewer' group vs. 55.6% (85/153) in the 'control' group (P = 0.10). CONCLUSION: The Veinviewer has limited value in reducing the time to successful intravenous cannulation during inhalational anaesthesia for young children with poor vein visibility. However, there is a strong trend to reducing the delay in some cases and, given its absence of side effects, it could be part of a rescue option for a difficult venous-access strategy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT01685866 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Correction to: COVID-19-associated acute cerebral venous thrombosis: clinical, CT, MRI and EEG features.

An amendment to this paper has been published and can be accessed via the original article.

Guidelines on muscle relaxants and reversal in anaesthesia.

OBJECTIVES: To provide an update to the 1999 French guidelines on "Muscle relaxants and reversal in anaesthesia", a consensus committee of sixteen experts was convened. A formal policy of declaration and monitoring of conflicts of interest (COI) was developed at the outset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any industrial funding (i.e. pharmaceutical, medical devices). The authors were required to follow the rules of the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE®) system to assess the quality of the evidence on which the recommendations were based. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations based on low-quality evidence were stressed. Few of the recommendations remained ungraded. METHODS: The panel focused on eight questions: (1) In the absence of difficult mask ventilation criteria, is it necessary to check the possibility of ventilation via a facemask before muscle relaxant injection? Is it necessary to use muscle relaxants to facilitate facemask ventilation? (2) Is the use of muscle relaxants necessary to facilitate tracheal intubation? (3) Is the use of muscle relaxants necessary to facilitate the insertion of a supraglottic device and management of related complications? (4) Is it necessary to monitor neuromuscular blockade for airway management? (5) Is the use of muscle relaxants necessary to facilitate interventional procedures, and if so, which procedures? (6) Is intraoperative monitoring of neuromuscular blockade necessary? (7) What are the strategies for preventing and treating residual neuromuscular blockade? (8) What are the indications and precautions for use of both muscle relaxants and reversal agents in special populations (e.g. electroconvulsive therapy, obese patients, children, neuromuscular diseases, renal/hepatic failure, elderly patients)? All questions were formulated using the Population, Intervention, Comparison and Outcome (PICO) model for clinical questions and evidence profiles were generated. The results of the literature analysis and the recommendations were then assessed using the GRADE® system. RESULTS: The summaries prepared by the SFAR Guideline panel resulted in thirty-one recommendations on muscle relaxants and reversal agents in anaesthesia. Of these recommendations, eleven have a high level of evidence (GRADE 1±) while twenty have a low level of evidence (GRADE 2±). No recommendations could be provided using the GRADE® system for five of the questions, and for two of these questions expert opinions were given. After two rounds of discussion and an amendment, a strong agreement was reached for all the recommendations. CONCLUSION: Substantial agreement exists among experts regarding many strong recommendations for the improvement of practice concerning the use of muscle relaxants and reversal agents during anaesthesia. In particular, the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care (SFAR) recommends the use of a device to monitor neuromuscular blockade throughout anaesthesia.

GASS Trial study protocol: a multicentre, single-blind, randomised clinical trial comparing general anaesthesia and sedation during intra-arterial treatment for stroke.

INTRODUCTION: Treatment of acute stroke has drastically changed in the last 10 years. Endovascular therapy is now the standard of care for patients with a stroke caused by a large vessel occlusion in the anterior circulation. The impact of the type of anaesthesia (general anaesthesia or conscious sedation) during endovascular therapy on the outcome of the patients is still a matter of debate. Previous studies are mostly retrospective and/or focused on the early postprocedure outcome and/or without blood pressure goals and/or single-centre small size studies. We therefore designed a multicentre study hypothesising that conscious sedation is associated with a better functional outcome 3 months after endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke compared with general anaesthesia. METHODS/ANALYSIS: The General Anesthesia vs Sedation for Stroke (GASS) Trial is a randomised, parallel, single-blind, multicentre study of 350 patients undergoing endovascular therapy for the treatment of stroke. Patients will be randomly allocated to receive either a general anaesthesia or a conscious sedation. The primary outcome measure is the modified Rankin score assessed 3 months after the treatment. Data will be analysed on the intention-to-treat principle. ETHICS/DISSEMINATION: The GASS Trial has been approved by an independent ethics committee for all study centres. Participant recruitment begins in September 2016. Results will be published in international peer-reviewed medical journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02822144.

Management of the child's airway under anaesthesia: The French guidelines.

OBJECTIVE: To provide French guidelines about "Airway management during paediatric anaesthesia". DESIGN: A consensus committee of 17 experts from the French Society of Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Medicine (Société Française d'Anesthésie-Réanimation, SFAR) and the Association of French speaking paediatric anaesthesiologists and intensivists (Association Des Anesthésistes Réanimateurs Pédiatriques d'Expression Francophone, ADARPEF) was convened. The entire process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors followed the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE®) system to assess the quality of evidence. The potential drawbacks of making strong recommendations in the presence of low-quality evidence were emphasised. Few recommendations were not graded. METHODS: The panel focused on 7 questions: 1) Supraglottic Airway devices 2) Cuffed endotracheal tubes 3) Videolaryngoscopes 4) Neuromuscular blocking agents 5) Rapid sequence induction 6) Airway device removal 7) Airway management in the child with recent or ongoing upper respiratory tract infection. Population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes (PICO) questions were reviewed and updated as needed, and evidence profiles were generated. The analysis of the literature and the redaction of the recommendations were then conducted according to the GRADE® methodology. RESULTS: The SFAR Guideline panel provides 17 statements on "airway management during paediatric anaesthesia". After two rounds of discussion and various amendments, a strong agreement was reached for 100% of the recommendations. Of these recommendations, 6 have a high level of evidence (Grade 1 ± ), 6 have a low level of evidence (Grade 2 ± ) and 5 are experts' opinions. No recommendation could be provided for 3 questions. CONCLUSIONS: Substantial agreement exists among experts regarding many strong recommendations for paediatric airway management.

Prospective analysis of serious cardiorespiratory events in children during ophthalmic artery chemotherapy for retinoblastoma under a deep standardized anesthesia.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Serious adverse cardiorespiratory events complicate super selective ophthalmic artery chemotherapy for retinoblastoma in anesthetized children. Their mechanism remains unclear but may be attributed to an autonomic nervous reflex induced by the catheter close to the ophthalmic artery. Inadequate depth of anesthesia during catheter stimulation might be an aggravating factor. Thus, we tested whether deep general anesthesia reduced the incidence of serious cardiorespiratory events. METHODS: Children were prospectively included in this observational study. Standardized deep general anesthesia with sevoflurane, rocuronium, and sufentanil was administered. Sevoflurane MAC was kept between 1.5 and 1.7 and additional sufentanil administered. Serious cardiorespiratory event criteria were predefined and included arterial hypotension, bradycardia, and severe decrease in lung compliance. They were recorded and the factors influencing their occurrence were investigated. RESULTS: One hundred fifteen procedures were performed on 32 children. The median MAC of sevoflurane was 1.5 and median BIS value was 44. Serious cardiorespiratory events occurred in 20% of procedures and were mainly severe decrease in lung compliance (83% of events). All of them required active treatment. One procedure was aborted due to cardiorespiratory compromise and required an epinephrine infusion. All severe decreases in lung compliance occurred within 2 minutes after catheter insertion in the ophthalmic artery. No recorded demographic and endovascular characteristics were associated with serious cardiorespiratory events. CONCLUSION: Serious cardiorespiratory events occur commonly during super selective ophthalmic artery chemotherapy. Standardized deep anesthesia with analgesia did not appear to be protective. No predictive factors were identified, but these events systematically arose within 2 minutes after ophthalmic artery catheter insertion. Anesthetists and neuroradiologists should be prepared to manage these serious complications and parents should be informed of the risks.

Muscle relaxation for tracheal intubation during paediatric anaesthesia: A meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis.

BACKGROUND: Muscle relaxation for tracheal intubation during paediatric anaesthesia remains a subject of debate. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the current meta-analysis was to investigate the effect of muscle relaxants (MR) compared with opioids on intubation conditions in children. DESIGN: Meta-analysis of randomised controlled studies. DATA SOURCES: Exhaustive literature analysis. ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA: Clinical trials, with no high-risk bias, that examined the effect of MR in comparison with opioids on intubation conditions (excellent: primary outcome, acceptable: secondary outcome) in children were included. RESULTS: Excellent intubation conditions were not significantly different in their occurrence between children receiving MR or opioids, risk ratio [95% Confidence Interval]  = 1.17 [0.96, 1.43], I = 36%, number of studies = 5, number of patients = 226. However, trial sequential analysis indicated the lack of power of this result and the need for more trials to provide certainty for this outcome (81 patients needed in future trials). Acceptable intubation conditions were more frequent when administering MR, risk ratio = 1.25 [1.06, 1.47], I = 70%, number of studies = 6, number of patients = 362. This effect was confirmed using the trial sequential analysis. Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation analysis found a low and moderate quality of evidences for excellent and acceptable intubation conditions, respectively. CONCLUSION: The current meta-analysis shows that the use of MR during tracheal intubation might improve the quality of intubation conditions. Further studies, including at least 81 children, are required to confirm this and determine the impact of MR on complications related to intubation.

Development and validation of a risk score to predict the probability of postoperative vomiting in pediatric patients: the VPOP score.

BACKGROUND: Few data are available in the literature on risk factors for postoperative vomiting (POV) in children. OBJECTIVE: The aim of the study was to establish independent risk factors for POV and to construct a pediatric specific risk score to predict POV in children. METHODS: Characteristics of 2392 children operated under general anesthesia were recorded. The dataset was randomly split into an evaluation set (n = 1761), analyzed with a multivariate analysis including logistic regression and backward stepwise procedure, and a validation set (n = 450), used to confirm the accuracy of prediction using the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve (ROCAUC ), to optimize sensitivity and specificity. RESULTS: The overall incidence of POV was 24.1%. Five independent risk factors were identified: stratified age (>3 and <6 or >13 years: adjusted OR 2.46 [95% CI 1.75-3.45]; ≥6 and ≤13 years: aOR 3.09 [95% CI 2.23-4.29]), duration of anesthesia (aOR 1.44 [95% IC 1.06-1.96]), surgery at risk (aOR 2.13 [95% IC 1.49-3.06]), predisposition to POV (aOR 1.81 [95% CI 1.43-2.31]), and multiple opioids doses (aOR 2.76 [95% CI 2.06-3.70], P < 0.001). A simplified score was created, ranging from 0 to 6 points. Respective incidences of POV were 5%, 6%, 13%, 21%, 36%, 48%, and 52% when the risk score ranged from 0 to 6. The model yielded a ROCAUC of 0.73 [95% CI 0.67-0.78] when applied to the validation dataset. CONCLUSIONS: Independent risk factors for POV were identified and used to create a new score to predict which children are at high risk of POV.

Is platelet transfusion efficient to restore platelet reactivity in patients who are responders to aspirin and/or clopidogrel before emergency surgery?

PURPOSE: The aim of this study was to confirm that emergency platelet transfusion effectively restores platelet function to patients receiving antiplatelet therapy (APT) with aspirin and/or clopidogrel. PATIENTS AND METHODS: This was a prospective observational case report series conducted between January 1, 2009, and January 1, 2012. All responder patients according to the Verify Now device requiring emergency platelet transfusion because of a potentially life-threatening hemorrhage or before emergency neurosurgery were included. Aspirin or P2Y12-specific tests were used as appropriate for patients under aspirin or clopidogrel. Patients who were responders to aspirin had an aspirin reaction unit of less than 550, and patients who were responders to clopidogrel had an inhibition percentage of more than 20%. The Verify Now test was performed again after platelet transfusion. Pretransfusion and posttransfusion test results were compared. RESULTS: During the 36-month period, 25 patients met the inclusion criteria. Of these patients, 4 were receiving dual APT, 8 were receiving clopidogrel only, and 13 were receiving aspirin only. The average platelet transfusion dose was 0.12 UI/kg (range, 0.10-0.14 UI/kg). For patients under clopidogrel, the inhibition percentage lowered significantly after transfusion (median 54 [range, 31-69] before and 25 [range, 18-50] after transfusion; p < 0.005) but remained above the 20% threshold. Our patients were still responsive to clopidogrel after platelet transfusion. This result is conflicting with the existing literature. The median aspirin reaction unit of aspirin users before and after transfusion were 420 (range, 400-470) and 630 (range, 610-640), respectively (p = 0.001). The efficacy of platelet transfusion to restore aspirin-mediated disaggregation is confirmed by our case series. CONCLUSION: Platelet transfusion does not restore platelet function in patients under clopidogrel, but it is efficient for patients under aspirin. This sheds new light on previous large-scale studies that have been unable to show any effectiveness of emergency platelet transfusion in patients under APT. Emergency platelet transfusion may only be indicated in aspirin users who are responders and not in all patients under APT as is actually recommended.