Perioperative Renin-Angiotensin System Inhibitors Improve Major Outcomes of Heart Failure Patients Undergoing Cardiac Surgery: A Propensity-Adjusted Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: The aim of this study was to study the association of perioperative administration of renin angiotensin system inhibitors (RASi) and clinical outcomes of patients with heart failure (HF) undergoing cardiac surgery. SUMMARY BACKGROUND DATA: It is controversial whether the perioperative RASi should be administered in HF patients undergoing cardiac surgery. METHODS: A total of 2338 patients with HF and undergoing CABG and/or valve surgeries at multiple hospitals from 2001 to 2015 were identified from STS database. After adjustment using propensity score and instrumental variable, logistic regression was conducted to analyze the influence of preoperative continuation of RASi (PreRASi) on short-term in-hospital outcomes. Independent risk factors of 30-day mortality, major adverse cardiovascular events (MACE), and renal failure were analyzed by use of stepwise logistic regression. The effects of pre- and postoperative use of RASi (PostRASi) on long-term mortality were analyzed using survival analyses. Stepwise Cox regression was conducted to analyze the independent risk factors of 6-year mortality. The relationships of HF status and surgery type with perioperative RASi, as well as PreRASi-PostRASi, were also evaluated by subgroup analyses. RESULTS: PreRASi was associated with lower incidences of 30-day mortality [ P < 0.0001, odds ratio (OR): 0.556, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.405-0.763], stroke ( P =0.035, OR: 0.585, 95% CI: 0.355-0.962), renal failure ( P =0.007, OR: 0.663, 95% CI: 0.493-0.894). Both PreRASi ( P =0.0137) and PostRASi ( P =0.007) reduced 6-year mortality compared with the No-RASi groups. CONCLUSIONS: Pre- and postoperative use of RASi was associated with better outcomes for the patients who have HF and undergo CABG and/or valve surgeries. Preoperative continuation and postoperative restoration are warranted in these patients.

Feasibility of Postoperative Day One or Day Two Discharge After Robotic Cardiac Surgery.

INTRODUCTION: The robotic platform reduces the invasiveness of cardiac surgical procedures, thus facilitating earlier discharge in select patients. We sought to evaluate the characteristics, perioperative management, and early outcomes of patients who underwent postoperative day 1 or 2 (POD1-2) discharge after robotic cardiac surgery at our institution. METHODS: Retrospective review of 169 patients who underwent robotic cardiac surgery at our facility between 2019 and 2021 identified 57 patients discharged early on POD1 (n = 19) or POD2 (n = 38) and 112 patients who underwent standard discharge (POD3 or later). Relevant data were extracted and compared. RESULTS: In the early discharge group, median patient age was 62 [IQR: 55, 66] (IQR = interquartile range) years, and 70.2% (40/57) were male. Median Society of Thoracic Surgeons predictive risk of mortality score was 0.36 [IQR: 0.25, 0.56] %. The most common procedures performed were mitral valve repair [66.6%, (38/57)], atrial mass resection [10.5% (6/57)], and coronary artery bypass grafting [10.5% (6/57)]. The only significant differences between the POD1 and POD2 groups were shorter operative time, higher rate of in-operating room extubation, and shorter ICU length of stay in the POD1 group. Lower in-hospital morbidity and comparable 30-day mortality and readmission rates were observed between the early and standard discharge groups. CONCLUSIONS: POD1-2 discharge after various robotic cardiac operations afforded lower morbidity and similar 30-day readmission and mortality rates compared to discharge on POD3 or later. Our findings support the feasibility of POD1-2 discharge after robotic cardiac surgery for patients with low preoperative risk, an uncomplicated postoperative course, and appropriate postoperative management protocols.

Acute Amiodarone Pulmonary Toxicity.

Amiodarone is an effective antiarrhythmic that frequently is used during the perioperative period. Amiodarone possesses a significant adverse reaction profile. Amiodarone-induced pulmonary toxicity (AIPT) is among the most serious adverse effects and is a leading cause of death associated with its use. Despite significant advances in the understanding of AIPT, its etiology and pathogenesis remain incompletely understood. The diagnosis of AIPT is one of exclusion. The clinical manifestations of AIPT are categorized broadly as acute, subacute, and chronic. Acute AIPT is a rarer and more aggressive form of the disease, most often encountered in cardiothoracic surgery. Acute respiratory distress syndrome (ARDS) is the predominating pattern of amiodarone's acute pulmonary toxicity. The incidence, risk factors, pathogenesis, and diagnosis of acute AIPT are speculative. Early cardiothoracic literature investigating AIPT often attributed amiodarone to the development of postoperative ARDS. Subsequent studies have found no association between amiodarone and acute AIPT and ARDS development. As a drug that is frequently prescribed to a patient population deemed most at risk for this fatal disease, the conflicting evidence on acute AIPT needs further investigation and clarification.

Intranasal Medication Administration Using a Squeeze Bottle Atomizer Results in Overdosing if Deployed in Supine Patients.

BACKGROUND: Vasoconstrictors and local anesthetics are commonly administered using a squeeze bottle atomizer to the nasal mucosa to reduce edema, limit bleeding, and provide analgesia. Despite widespread use, there are few clinical guidelines that address technical details related to safe administration. The purpose of this study was to quantify, via simulation, the amount of liquid delivered to the nasal mucosa when patients are in the supine and upright positions and administration parameters that would reliably provide the desired amount of medication per spray. METHODS: A convenience sample of 10 anesthesia residents was studied. Providers were instructed to use a 25-mL dip and tube nasal squeeze bottle to administer the test solution (sterile water) to a mannequin in the upright (90° elevation) and supine (0° elevation) position. After mannequin testing, additional testing was completed with the spray bottles at 0°, 15°, 30°, 45°, and 90° to determine the relationship between the angles of administration and the amount of liquid dispensed. RESULTS: The mean volume delivered per spray was substantially greater when administered in the supine position (0.56 ± 0.22 mL) compared with the upright position (0.041 ± 0.02 mL, difference = 0.52 mL, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.37-0.67 mL, P < .001). Converting the administered volume to the dose of phenylephrine that would be administered using our standard 0.25% solution, an estimated additional 1300 mcg is delivered per spray in the supine position compared with the upright position (95% CI, 925-1675 mcg, P < .001). Administration with a delivery angle of ≤30° resulted in significantly more volume than when the bottle was oriented at a 90° angle. The volume dispensed at 45° was not different from the volume delivered at 90° (0.032 ± 0.006 mL vs 0.030 ± 0.005 mL, P = .34). CONCLUSIONS: We found a 14-fold increase in the volume (ie, dose) delivered per spray when a nasal squeeze bottle was used with a mannequin in the supine position compared with the upright position. Given the reported toxicity from the use of intranasal medication and the inadvertent overdosing that occurs when squeeze bottle atomizers are used in clinical practice, our data suggest that all intranasal drugs should be administered with a precise, metered-dose device. If a metered-dose device is unavailable, the medication should be delivered at an angle of ≥45°; however, we recommend administering the drug with the patient in the sitting position and the bottle at 90° because only a small change in angle below 45° will result in a substantial increase in medication delivered.

Preoperative Aspirin Does Not Increase Transfusion or Reoperation in Isolated Valve Surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Preoperative aspirin has been studied in patients undergoing isolated coronary artery bypass graft surgery. However, there is a paucity of clinical data available evaluating perioperative aspirin in other cardiac surgical procedures. This study was designed to investigate the effects of aspirin on bleeding and transfusion in patients undergoing non-emergent, isolated, heart valve repair or replacement. DESIGN: Retrospective, cohort study. SETTING: Academic medical center. PARTICIPANTS: A total of 694 consecutive patients having non-emergent, isolated, valve repair or replacement surgery at an academic medical center were identified. INTERVENTIONS: Of the 488 patients who met inclusion criteria, 2 groups were defined based on their preoperative use of aspirin: those taking (n = 282), and those not taking (n = 206) aspirin within 5 days of surgery. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Binary logistic regression was used to examine relationships among demographic and clinical variables. No significant difference was found between the aspirin and non-aspirin groups with respect to the percentage receiving red blood cell (RBC) transfusion, mean RBC units transfused in those who required transfusion, massive transfusion of RBC, or amounts of fresh frozen plasma, cryoprecipitate, or platelets. Aspirin was not associated with an increase in the rate of re-exploration for bleeding (5.3% v 6.3%, p = 0.478). Major adverse cardiocerebral events (MACE), 30-day mortality, and 30-day readmission rates were not statistically different between the aspirin-and non-aspirin-treated groups. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative aspirin therapy in elective, isolated, valve surgery did not result in an increase in transfusion or reoperation for bleeding and was not associated with reduced readmission rate, MACE, or 30-day mortality.