Liberal or restrictive antimicrobial prophylaxis for surgical site infection: systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials.

BACKGROUND: Antimicrobial prophylaxis is widely used to prevent surgical site infection. Amid growing concern about antimicrobial resistance, we determined the effectiveness of antimicrobial prophylaxis. METHODS: We searched MEDLINE, EMBASE, CENTRAL, and WHO-ICTRP between January 1, 1990 and January 1, 2020 for trials randomising adults undergoing surgery to liberal (more doses) or restrictive (fewer or no doses) perioperative antimicrobial prophylaxis. Pairs of researchers reviewed articles and extracted data, and a senior author resolved discrepancies. The primary outcome measure was surgical site infection or bacteriuria for urological procedures. We calculated average risk difference (RD) with 95% confidence intervals and prediction intervals (PI) using random effects models, and present risk ratios (RR). We assessed evidence certainty using GRADE methodology, and risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool (PROSPERO: CRD42018116946). RESULTS: From 6593 records, we identified 294 trials including 86 146 patients. Surgical site infection occurred in 2237/44 113 (5.1%) patients receiving liberal prophylaxis vs 2889/42 033 (6.9%) receiving restrictive prophylaxis (RD -0.01 [-0.02 to -0.01]; relative risk 0.72 [0.67-0.77]; I2=52%, PI -0.05-0.02). There was a small benefit of prophylaxis in 161 trials comparing no prophylaxis with ≥1 dose (RD -0.02 [-0.03 to -0.02]; RR 0.58 [0.52-0.65]; I2=62%, PI -0.06-0.02). Treatment effect varied from a strong effect in urology to no benefit in 7/19 specialities. Tests for publication bias suggest 62 unreported trials and evidence certainty was very low. Treatment harms were reported in 43/294 trials. CONCLUSIONS: A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised trials revealed that more liberal antimicrobial prophylaxis is associated with a small reduction in the risk of surgical site infection, although antimicrobial harms are poorly reported. Further evidence about the risks of antimicrobial prophylaxis to inform current widespread use is urgently needed.

The PREVENNT randomised, double-blind, controlled trial of preoperative intravenous iron to treat anaemia before major abdominal surgery: an independent discussion.

Anaemia is a common finding in patients presenting for major elective surgery and is associated with poor outcomes including death and complications. Iron deficiency is the leading cause of perioperative anaemia. Intravenous (i.v.) iron is considered to be an effective and safe treatment for iron deficiency anaemia and is recommended by expert opinion for treatment of preoperative anaemia, although evidence from clinical trials is lacking. The PREVENTT trial was a large multicentre trial investigating the effects of i.v. iron on red cell transfusion, death, complications and quality of life in 487 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. The principal finding of this multicentre randomised placebo controlled trial was that there was no difference in the co-primary outcomes of blood transfusion or death, or the number of transfusion episodes, within 30 days after surgery, in patients that received preoperative i.v. iron therapy compared to placebo. The major inferential differences in this independent discussion relate to the limitations of the PREVENTT trial and its implications for future practice. Although PREVENTT represents the best evidence available to guide perioperative use of i.v. iron, it is likely that the study was underpowered. In the context of already widespread adoption of preoperative i.v. iron therapy, many clinicians may have felt they lacked equipoise. In light of the PREVENTT study routine use of i.v. iron in patients undergoing elective abdominal surgery cannot be recommended. Further research should define the optimum red cell transfusion strategy for patients undergoing surgery and idenify other surgical groups who may benefit from this intervention.

A restrictive versus liberal transfusion strategy to prevent myocardial injury in patients undergoing surgery for fractured neck of femur: a feasibility randomised trial (RESULT-NOF).

BACKGROUND: The optimum transfusion strategy in patients with fractured neck of femur is uncertain, particularly if there is coexisting cardiovascular disease. METHODS: We conducted a prospective, single-centre, randomised feasibility trial of two transfusion strategies. We randomly assigned patients undergoing surgery for fractured neck of femur to a restrictive (haemoglobin, 70-90 g L-1) or liberal (haemoglobin, 90-110 g L-1) transfusion strategy throughout their hospitalisation. Feasibility outcomes included: enrolment rate, protocol compliance, difference in haemoglobin, and blood exposure. The primary clinical outcome was myocardial injury using troponin estimations. Secondary outcomes included major adverse cardiac events, postoperative complications, duration of hospitalisation, mortality, and quality of life. RESULTS: We enrolled 200 (22%) of 907 eligible patients, and 62 (31%) showed decreased haemoglobin (to 90 g L-1 or less) and were thus exposed to the intervention. The overall protocol compliance was 81% in the liberal group and 64% in the restrictive group. Haemoglobin concentrations were similar preoperatively and at postoperative day 1 but lower in the restrictive group on day 2 (mean difference [MD], 7.0 g L-1; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.6-12.4). Lowest haemoglobin within 30 days/before discharge was lower in the restrictive group (MD, 5.3 g L-1; 95% CI, 1.7-9.0). Overall, 58% of patients in the restrictive group received no transfusion compared with 4% in the liberal group (difference in proportion, 54.5%; 95% CI, 36.8-72.2). The proportion with the primary clinical outcome was 14/26 (54%, liberal) vs 24/34 (71%, restrictive), and the difference in proportion was -16.7% (95% CI, -41.3 to 7.8; P=0.18). CONCLUSION: A clinical trial of two transfusion strategies in hip fracture with a clinically relevant cardiac outcome is feasible. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03407573.

Effect of Lower Tidal Volume Ventilation Facilitated by Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal vs Standard Care Ventilation on 90-Day Mortality in Patients With Acute Hypoxemic Respiratory Failure: The REST Randomized Clinical Trial.

Importance: In patients who require mechanical ventilation for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, further reduction in tidal volumes, compared with conventional low tidal volume ventilation, may improve outcomes. Objective: To determine whether lower tidal volume mechanical ventilation using extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal improves outcomes in patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure. Design, Setting, and Participants: This multicenter, randomized, allocation-concealed, open-label, pragmatic clinical trial enrolled 412 adult patients receiving mechanical ventilation for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, of a planned sample size of 1120, between May 2016 and December 2019 from 51 intensive care units in the UK. Follow-up ended on March 11, 2020. Interventions: Participants were randomized to receive lower tidal volume ventilation facilitated by extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal for at least 48 hours (n = 202) or standard care with conventional low tidal volume ventilation (n = 210). Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome was all-cause mortality 90 days after randomization. Prespecified secondary outcomes included ventilator-free days at day 28 and adverse event rates. Results: Among 412 patients who were randomized (mean age, 59 years; 143 [35%] women), 405 (98%) completed the trial. The trial was stopped early because of futility and feasibility following recommendations from the data monitoring and ethics committee. The 90-day mortality rate was 41.5% in the lower tidal volume ventilation with extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group vs 39.5% in the standard care group (risk ratio, 1.05 [95% CI, 0.83-1.33]; difference, 2.0% [95% CI, -7.6% to 11.5%]; P = .68). There were significantly fewer mean ventilator-free days in the extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group compared with the standard care group (7.1 [95% CI, 5.9-8.3] vs 9.2 [95% CI, 7.9-10.4] days; mean difference, -2.1 [95% CI, -3.8 to -0.3]; P = .02). Serious adverse events were reported for 62 patients (31%) in the extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group and 18 (9%) in the standard care group, including intracranial hemorrhage in 9 patients (4.5%) vs 0 (0%) and bleeding at other sites in 6 (3.0%) vs 1 (0.5%) in the extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal group vs the control group. Overall, 21 patients experienced 22 serious adverse events related to the study device. Conclusions and Relevance: Among patients with acute hypoxemic respiratory failure, the use of extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal to facilitate lower tidal volume mechanical ventilation, compared with conventional low tidal volume mechanical ventilation, did not significantly reduce 90-day mortality. However, due to early termination, the study may have been underpowered to detect a clinically important difference. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02654327.

The Effect of High-Flow Nasal Cannula Oxygen Therapy on Mortality and Intubation Rate in Acute Respiratory Failure: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVE: High-flow nasal cannulae are used in adults with or at risk of acute respiratory failure. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to evaluate the evidence for their use in this setting. DATA SOURCES: Ovid Medline, Embase, and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews. STUDY SELECTION: Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing administration of high-flow nasal cannulae with usual care (i.e., conventional oxygen therapy or noninvasive ventilation) in adults with respiratory failure. The primary outcome was hospital mortality; the rate of intubation and assessment of delirium and comfort were secondary outcomes. DATA EXTRACTION: One hundred forty-seven nonduplicate citations were screened, 32 underwent full screening and data extraction, and 14 trials were eligible for inclusion in the review. Nine trials were used in the meta-analysis, including a total of 2,507 subjects. DATA SYNTHESIS: When high-flow nasal cannulae were compared with usual care, there was no difference in mortality (high-flow nasal cannulae, 60/1,006 [6%] vs usual care, 90/1,106 [8.1%]) (n = 2,112; p = 0.29; I, 25%; fixed effect model: odds ratio, 0.83; 95% CI, 0.58-1.17) or rate of intubation (high-flow nasal cannulae, 119/1,207 [9.9%] vs usual care, 204/1,300 [15.7%]) (n = 2,507; p = 0.08; I, 53%; random effect model: odds ratio, 0.63; 95% CI, 0.37-1.06). A qualitative analysis of 13 studies on tolerability and comfort suggested that high-flow nasal cannulae are associated with improved patient comfort and dyspnea scores. Trial sequential analyses on primary and secondary outcomes suggested that required information size was not reached. CONCLUSIONS: No difference in mortality or intubation was detected in patients with acute respiratory failure treated with high-flow nasal cannulae compared with usual care. High-flow nasal cannulae seem well tolerated by patients. Further large randomized controlled trials are required to evaluate their utility in this setting.

ICU admission after surgery: who benefits?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Death following surgery remains a major cause of death worldwide, and ICU admission following major surgery is considered a standard of care in many healthcare systems. However, ICU resources are finite and expensive, thus identifying those most likely to benefit is of great importance. RECENT FINDINGS: Advances in surgical and perioperative management have moved the focus of postoperative care to preventing complications and reducing duration of hospitalisation. Recent health services research has failed to find association between ICU admission and improved outcome in many types of elective major noncardiac surgery. Use of alternatives to ICU such as post anaesthesia care units (PACUs), high dependency units (HDUs) or specialist wards with enhanced nursing care are able to perform some elements of ICU monitoring in a less intensive environment, and may provide a better alternative to the traditional model of ICU admission for many patients having major surgery. ICU admission should still be considered for very high-risk patients and those having complex or emergency surgery. Improved triage tools are required to identify those at the highest risk of death or complications. SUMMARY: Identifying those most at risk of death and complications following surgery and preventing them is the major challenge of perioperative care in the coming decades. Future research should focus on how postoperative care can best be structured to provide optimum care to patients within available resources. Incidence of complications or failure to rescue (FtR) may provide useful metrics in future research.

Five-Year Mortality and Hospital Costs Associated with Surviving Intensive Care.

RATIONALE: Survivors of critical illness experience significant morbidity, but the impact of surviving the intensive care unit (ICU) has not been quantified comprehensively at a population level. OBJECTIVES: To identify factors associated with increased hospital resource use and to ascertain whether ICU admission was associated with increased mortality and resource use. METHODS: Matched cohort study and pre/post-analysis using national linked data registries with complete population coverage. The population consisted of patients admitted to all adult general ICUs during 2005 and surviving to hospital discharge, identified from the Scottish Intensive Care Society Audit Group registry, matched (1:1) with similar hospital control subjects. Five-year outcomes included mortality and hospital resource use. Confounder adjustment was based on multivariable regression and pre/post within-individual analyses. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Of 7,656 ICU patients, 5,259 survived to hospital discharge (5,215 [99.2%] matched to hospital control subjects). Factors present before ICU admission (comorbidities/pre-ICU hospitalizations) were stronger predictors of hospital resource use than acute illness factors. In the 5 years after the initial hospital discharge, compared with hospital control subjects, the ICU cohort had higher mortality (32.3% vs. 22.7%; hazard ratio, 1.33; 95% confidence interval, 1.22-1.46; P < 0.001), used more hospital resources (mean hospital admission rate, 4.8 vs. 3.3/person/5 yr), and had 51% higher mean 5-year hospital costs ($25,608 vs. $16,913/patient). Increased resource use persisted after confounder adjustment (P < 0.001) and using pre/post-analyses (P < 0.001). Excess resource use and mortality were greatest for younger patients without significant comorbidity. CONCLUSIONS: This complete, national study demonstrates that ICU survivorship is associated with higher 5-year mortality and hospital resource use than hospital control subjects, representing a substantial burden on individuals, caregivers, and society.

Which intravenous fluid for the surgical patient?

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: This review appraises recent evidence and provides clinical guidance on optimal perioperative fluid therapy. RECENT FINDINGS: Choice of perioperative intravenous fluid continues to be the source of much debate. Not all crystalloids are equivalent, and there is growing evidence that balanced solutions are superior to 0.9% saline in many situations. Recent evidence from the critical care population has highlighted risks associated with synthetic colloids; this and the absence of demonstrable benefit in the surgical population make it difficult to recommend their use in the perioperative period. Giving the correct amount of fluid may be as important as the choice of the fluid used. There is increasing evidence that excessive positive fluid balance is harmful to patients but there have been no randomized trials comparing maintenance fluid strategy. A knowledge of the physiology and accurate estimation of fluid balance is important for water and electrolyte homeostasis until the patient is able to resume adequate enteral nutrition. SUMMARY: Balanced crystalloids are the fluid of choice for perioperative resuscitation and optimization in patients not requiring blood products. Avoidance of a grossly positive sodium and water balance during the maintenance phase is likely to be important, but has not been assessed in randomized trials.

Fenoldopam to prevent acute kidney injury after major surgery-a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) after surgery is associated with increased mortality and healthcare costs. Fenoldopam is a selective dopamine-1 receptor agonist with renoprotective properties. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials comparing fenoldopam with placebo to prevent AKI after major surgery. METHODS: We searched EMBASE, PubMed, meta-Register of randomised controlled trials and Cochrane CENTRAL databases for trials comparing fenoldopam with placebo in patients undergoing major surgery. The primary outcome was incidence of new AKI. Secondary outcomes were requirement for renal replacement therapy and hospital mortality. RESULTS: Eighty-three publications were screened; 23 studies underwent full data extraction and scoring. Six trials were suitable for inclusion in the data synthesis (total of 507 subjects undergoing cardiovascular surgery, partial nephrectomy, liver transplant surgery). Five studies were rated at high risk of bias. Data on post-operative incidence of AKI were available in five of the six trials (total of 471 patients) but definitions of AKI varied between studies. Of the 238 patients receiving fenoldopam, 45 (18.9%) developed AKI compared to 62 (26.6%) of the 233 patients who received placebo (p = 0.004, I (2) = 0 %; random-effects model odds ratio 0.46, 95% confidence interval 0.27-0.79). In patients treated with fenoldopam, there was no difference in renal replacement therapy (n = 478; p = 0.11, I (2) = 47%; fixed-effect model odds ratio 0.27, 95% confidence interval 0.06-1.19) or hospital mortality (p = 0.60, I (2) = 0 %; fixed-effect model odds ratio 1.0, 95% confidence interval 0.14-7.37). CONCLUSIONS: In this analysis, peri-operative treatment with fenoldopam was associated with a significant reduction in post-operative AKI but it had no impact on renal replacement therapy or hospital mortality. Equipoise remains for further large trials in this area since the studies were conducted in three types of surgery, the majority of studies were rated at high risk of bias and the criteria for AKI varied between trials.

Effect of a perioperative, cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm on outcomes following major gastrointestinal surgery: a randomized clinical trial and systematic review.

IMPORTANCE: Small trials suggest that postoperative outcomes may be improved by the use of cardiac output monitoring to guide administration of intravenous fluid and inotropic drugs as part of a hemodynamic therapy algorithm. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the clinical effectiveness of a perioperative, cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm. DESIGN, SETTING, AND PARTICIPANTS: OPTIMISE was a pragmatic, multicenter, randomized, observer-blinded trial of 734 high-risk patients aged 50 years or older undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery at 17 acute care hospitals in the United Kingdom. An updated systematic review and meta-analysis were also conducted including randomized trials published from 1966 to February 2014. INTERVENTIONS: Patients were randomly assigned to a cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm for intravenous fluid and inotrope (dopexamine) infusion during and 6 hours following surgery (n=368) or to usual care (n=366). MAIN OUTCOMES AND MEASURES: The primary outcome was a composite of predefined 30-day moderate or major complications and mortality. Secondary outcomes were morbidity on day 7; infection, critical care-free days, and all-cause mortality at 30 days; all-cause mortality at 180 days; and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: Baseline patient characteristics, clinical care, and volumes of intravenous fluid were similar between groups. Care was nonadherent to the allocated treatment for less than 10% of patients in each group. The primary outcome occurred in 36.6% of intervention and 43.4% of usual care participants (relative risk [RR], 0.84 [95% CI, 0.71-1.01]; absolute risk reduction, 6.8% [95% CI, -0.3% to 13.9%]; P = .07). There was no significant difference between groups for any secondary outcomes. Five intervention patients (1.4%) experienced cardiovascular serious adverse events within 24 hours compared with none in the usual care group. Findings of the meta-analysis of 38 trials, including data from this study, suggest that the intervention is associated with fewer complications (intervention, 488/1548 [31.5%] vs control, 614/1476 [41.6%]; RR, 0.77 [95% CI, 0.71-0.83]) and a nonsignificant reduction in hospital, 28-day, or 30-day mortality (intervention, 159/3215 deaths [4.9%] vs control, 206/3160 deaths [6.5%]; RR, 0.82 [95% CI, 0.67-1.01]) and mortality at longest follow-up (intervention, 267/3215 deaths [8.3%] vs control, 327/3160 deaths [10.3%]; RR, 0.86 [95% CI, 0.74-1.00]). CONCLUSIONS AND RELEVANCE: In a randomized trial of high-risk patients undergoing major gastrointestinal surgery, use of a cardiac output-guided hemodynamic therapy algorithm compared with usual care did not reduce a composite outcome of complications and 30-day mortality. However, inclusion of these data in an updated meta-analysis indicates that the intervention was associated with a reduction in complication rates. TRIAL REGISTRATION: isrctn.org Identifier: ISRCTN04386758.

The Effect of Lower Tidal Volume Ventilation Facilitated by Extracorporeal Carbon Dioxide Removal Compared With Conventional Lung Protective Ventilation on Cardiac Function.

OBJECTIVES: Lower tidal volume ventilation (targeting 3 mL/kg predicted body weight, PBW) facilitated by extracorporeal carbon dioxide removal (ECCO2R) has been investigated as a potential therapy for acute hypoxemic respiratory failure (AHRF) in the pRotective vEntilation with veno-venouS lung assisT in respiratory failure (REST) trial. We investigated the effect of this strategy on cardiac function, and in particular the right ventricle. DESIGN: Substudy of the REST trial. SETTING: Nine U.K. ICUs. PATIENTS: Patients with AHRF (Pao2/Fio2 < 150 mm Hg [20 kPa]). INTERVENTION: Transthoracic echocardiography and N-terminal pro-B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) measurements were collected at baseline and postrandomization in patients randomized to ECCO2R or usual care. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome measures were a difference in tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion (TAPSE) on postrandomization echocardiogram and difference in NT-proBNP postrandomization. RESULTS: There were 21 patients included in the echocardiography cohort (ECCO2R, n = 13; usual care, n = 8). Patient characteristics were similar in both groups at baseline. Median (interquartile range) tidal volumes were lower in the ECCO2R group compared with the usual care group postrandomization; 3.6 (3.1-4.2) mL/kg PBW versus 5.2 (4.9-5.7) mL/kg PBW, respectively (p = 0.01). There was no difference in the primary outcome measure of mean (sd) TAPSE in the ECCO2R and usual care groups postrandomization; 21.3 (5.4) mm versus 20.1 (3.2) mm, respectively (p = 0.60). There were 75 patients included in the NT-proBNP cohort (ECCO2R, n = 36; usual care, n = 39). Patient characteristics were similar in both groups at baseline. Median (interquartile range [IQR]) tidal volumes were lower in the ECCO2R group than the usual care group postrandomization; 3.8 (3.3-4.2) mL/kg PBW versus 6.7 (5.8-8.1) mL/kg PBW, respectively (p < 0.0001). There was no difference in median (IQR) NT-proBNP postrandomization; 1121 (241-5370) pg/mL versus 1393 (723-4332) pg/mL in the ECCO2R and usual care groups, respectively (p = 0.30). CONCLUSIONS: In patients with AHRF, a reduction in tidal volume facilitated by ECCO2R, did not modify cardiac function.

Point-of-care echocardiography and thoracic ultrasound in the management of critically ill patients with COVID-19 infection: Experience in three regional UK intensive care units.

Introduction: Point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) has an established role in the management of the critically ill. Information and experience of its use in those with COVID-19 disease is still evolving. We undertook a review of cardiac and thoracic ultrasound examinations in patients with COVID-19 on the intensive care unit (ICU). Our aim was to report key findings and their impact on patient management. Methods: A retrospective evaluation of critically ill patients with COVID-19 was undertaken in three adult ICUs, who received point-of-care cardiac and/or thoracic ultrasound during the 2019-2020 COVID-19 pandemic. We recorded baseline demographic data, principal findings, change in clinical management and outcome data. Results: A total of 55 transthoracic echocardiographic examinations scans were performed on 35 patients. 35/55 (64%) echocardiograms identified an abnormality, most commonly a dilated or impaired right ventricle (RV) and 39/55 (70%) scans resulted in a change in management. Nine patients (26%) were found to have pulmonary arterial thrombosis on CTPA or post-mortem. More than 50% of these patients showed evidence of right ventricular dilatation or impairment. Of the patients who were known to have pulmonary arterial thrombosis and died, 83% had evidence of right ventricular dilatation or impairment. 32 thoracic ultrasound scans were performed on 23 patients. Lung sliding and pleural thickening were present bilaterally in all studies. Multiple B-lines were present in all studies, and sub-pleural consolidation was present bilaterally in 72%. Conclusion: POCUS is able to provide useful and clinically relevant information in those critically ill with COVID-19 infection, resulting in change in management in a high proportion of patients. Common findings in this group are RV dysfunction, multiple B-lines and sub-pleural consolidation.

Perioperative blood transfusion in major abdominal cancer surgery: a multi-centre service evaluation and national survey.

Background: Anaemia is associated with complications and death after surgery. Perioperative red-cell transfusion triggers are not well defined in patients having oncological surgery, or with cardiovascular disease. Methods: We carried out a prospective multicentre cohort study and a clinician survey of UK transfusion practice in adult patients undergoing surgery for abdominal malignancy. The primary outcome was red cell transfusion. Secondary outcomes were transfusion trigger haemoglobin, incidence of complications, length of hospital stay, and acute hospital mortality. Results: In this prospective cohort study, data were collected on 412 patients undergoing surgery for intrabdominal malignancy in 14 NHS hospitals. Twenty-two (5.2%) patients received preoperative, 42 (10.2%) intraoperative, and 52 (12.2%) postoperative red blood cell transfusion. The mean postoperative transfusion trigger was 75.3 g L-1, and the mean number of units of red blood cells transfused was 1.5 (standard deviation, 1.1). Seventeen (4.0%) patients had a documented postoperative troponin elevation. Five (1.2%) patients died within 30 days of surgery. In the survey, 117 clinicians submitted complete responses, of whom 62 (53%) indicated that a transfusion threshold of 70 g L-1 was appropriate: however, this decreased to six (5.1%) if there was evidence of recent cardiac ischaemia. There were 100 (86%) respondents who indicated equipoise for a trial of restrictive vs liberal transfusion, decreasing to 56% if there was coexisting cardiovascular disease. Conclusions: Many patients having oncological surgery receive red cell transfusion, the majority being given postoperatively. Restrictive transfusion practice is generally followed; however, variability exists especially in cardiovascular disease. Equipoise exists for a study of transfusion thresholds in this group.

Perioperative intravenous iron to treat patients with fractured hip surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Background: Treatment of preoperative anemia with intravenous iron is common within elective surgical care pathways. It is plausible that this treatment may improve care for people with hip fractures many of whom are anemic because of pre-existing conditions, fractures, and surgery. Objective: To review the evidence for intravenous iron administration on outcomes after hip fracture. Design: We followed a predefined protocol and conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the use of intravenous iron to treat anemia before and after emergency hip fracture surgery. The planned primary outcome was a difference in length of stay between those treated with intravenous iron and the control group. Other outcomes analyzed were 30-day mortality, requirement for blood transfusion, changes in quality of life, and hemoglobin concentration on discharge from the hospital. Data Sources: EMBASE, MEDLINE, The Cochrane Library (CENTRAL, DARE) databases, Clinicaltrials.gov, and ISRCTN trial registries. Date of final search March 2022. Eligibility Criteria: Adult patients undergoing urgent surgery for hip fracture. Studies considered patients who received intravenous iron and were compared with a control group. Results: Four randomized controlled trials (RCT, 732 patients) and nine cohort studies (2986 patients) were included. The RCTs were at low risk of bias, and the nonrandomized studies were at moderate risk of bias. After metanalysis of the RCTs there was no significant difference in the primary outcome, length of hospital stay, between the control group and patients receiving intravenous iron (mean difference: -0.59, 95% confidence interval [CI]; -1.20 to 0.03; I 2 = 30%, p = 0.23). Intravenous iron was not associated with a difference in 30-day mortality (n = 732, OR: 1.14, 95% CI: 0.62-2.1; I 2 = 0%, p = 0.50), nor with the requirement for transfusion (n = 732, OR: 0.85, 95% CI: 0.63-1.14; I 2 = 0%, p < 0.01) in the analyzed RCTs. Functional outcomes and quality of life were variably reported in three studies. Conclusion: The evidence on the use of intravenous iron in patients with hip fracture is low quality and shows no difference in length of acute hospital stay and transfusion requirements in this population. Improved large, multicentre, high-quality studies with patient-centered outcomes will be required to evaluate the clinical and cost-effectiveness of this treatment.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of intravascular temperature management vs. surface cooling in comatose patients resuscitated from cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: To systematically review the effectiveness and safety of intravascular temperature management (IVTM) vs. surface cooling methods (SCM) for induced hypothermia (IH). METHODS: Systematic review and meta-analysis. English-language PubMed, Embase and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews were searched on May 27, 2019. The quality of included observational studies was graded using the Newcastle-Ottawa Quality Assessment tool. The quality of included randomized trials was evaluated using the Cochrane Collaboration's risk of bias tool. Random effects modeling was used to calculate risk differences for each outcome. Statistical heterogeneity and publication bias were assessed using standard methods. ELIGIBILITY: Observational or randomized studies comparing survival and/or neurologic outcomes in adults aged 18 years or greater resuscitated from out-of-hospital cardiac arrest receiving IH via IVTM vs. SCM were eligible for inclusion. RESULTS: In total, 12 studies met inclusion criteria. These enrolled 1573 patients who received IVTM; and 4008 who received SCM. Survival was 55.0% in the IVTM group and 51.2% in the SCM group [pooled risk difference 2% (95% CI -1%, 5%)]. Good neurological outcome was achieved in 40.9% in the IVTM and 29.5% in the surface group [pooled risk difference 5% (95% CI 2%, 8%)]. There was a 6% (95% CI 11%, 2%) lower risk of arrhythmia with use of IVTM and 15% (95% CI 22%, 7%) decreased risk of overcooling with use of IVTM vs. SCM. There was no significant difference in other evaluated adverse events between groups. CONCLUSIONS: IVTM was associated with improved neurological outcomes vs. SCM among survivors resuscitated following cardiac arrest. These results may have implications for care of patients in the emergency department and intensive care settings after resuscitation from cardiac arrest.

The association between ICU admission and emergency hospital readmission following emergency general surgery.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between postoperative intensive care (ICU) admission following emergency general surgery (EGS) and emergency hospital readmission has not been widely investigated. METHODS: Retrospective analysis of registry data for patients undergoing EGS in Scotland, 2005-2007. Exposure of interest was ICU admission status (direct from theatre; indirect after initial care on ward; no ICU admission). The primary outcome was emergency hospital readmission within 30 days of discharge. RESULTS: Thirty-seven thousand one hundred seventy-three patients were included in the analysis. Overall emergency readmission rate was 8% (n = 2983): 2756 (7.8%) in patients without postoperative ICU admission; 155 (12.1%) with direct ICU admission and 65 (14.7%) with indirect ICU admission. Indirect ICU admission was associated with increased hospital readmission rates (HR 1.24 [1.03, 1.49]; p = 0.024) compared with direct ICU admission. ICU admission was associated with increased three-year readmission rates (p = 0.006) and costs (p < 0.001) compared with initial ward care. CONCLUSION: Indirect ICU admission is associated with increased emergency hospital readmission and healthcare costs for patients undergoing EGS.