Wide Awake Local Anesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT) technique improves the efficiency of distal nerve blocks for carpal tunnel release.

BACKGROUND: Axillary block is the standard for carpal tunnel release (CTR), providing effective anesthesia, and tolerance of tourniquet. Conversely, distal blocks are less used due to poor tolerance of tourniquet. Wide Awake Local Anesthesia No Tourniquet (WALANT), proposed for hand and wrist surgeries, avoids its use. This study assesses the benefits of the addition of WALANT to distal blocks during endoscopic CTR (eCTR). METHODS: This randomized, open-label, controlled trial prospectively enrolled 60 patients scheduled for eCTR. Patients were randomized to receive distal blocks at the wrist combined to either a high arm tourniquet (Distal block group) or a WALANT in the area of surgery (Distal + Walant group). The primary endpoint was the global pain score summing pain scores related to puncture, local anesthetic injection, pneumatic tourniquet, surgical procedure, tourniquet deflation, and residual sensitivity after surgery. RESULTS: Mean global pain score was significantly reduced in the Distal + Walant group (0.5 ± 1.4 vs. 2.2 ± 2.4; p < 0.001). No need for an additional anesthetic procedure was required in the Distal + Walant group. Even if the quality of visualization was high in both groups, it was better in the Distal block group (5 [5-5] vs. 4 [4-5]; p < 0.001). No rescue tourniquet was necessary for the Distal + Walant group. The rate of hematoma 15 days post-surgery was significantly reduced in the Distal + Walant group (20% vs. 57%; p < 0.01). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of WALANT to distal blocks is adapted for eCTR. This combined technique decreases perioperative pain scores, provides good surgery conditions, and reduces the risk of postoperative hematoma. CLINICAL TRIAL NUMBER AND REGISTRY URL: The trial was registered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT04494100) on July 31, 2020 https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04494100?term=CMC+ambroise+pare&cntry=FR&draw=4&rank=28.

Low-dose corticosteroid therapy for cardiogenic shock in adults (COCCA): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Cardiogenic shock (CS) is a life-threatening condition characterized by circulatory insufficiency caused by an acute dysfunction of the heart pump. The pathophysiological approach to CS has recently been enriched by the tissue consequences of low flow, including inflammation, endothelial dysfunction, and alteration of the hypothalamic-pituitary-adrenal axis. The aim of the present trial is to evaluate the impact of early low-dose corticosteroid therapy on shock reversal in adults with CS. METHOD/DESIGN: This is a multicentered randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial with two parallel arms in adult patients with CS recruited from medical, cardiac, and polyvalent intensive care units (ICU) in France. Patients will be randomly allocated into the treatment or control group (1:1 ratio), and we will recruit 380 patients (190 per group). For the treatment group, hydrocortisone (50 mg intravenous bolus every 6 h) and fludrocortisone (50 µg once a day enterally) will be administered for 7 days or until discharge from the ICU. The primary endpoint is catecholamine-free days at day 7. Secondary endpoints include morbidity and all-cause mortality at 28 and 90 days post-randomization. Pre-defined subgroups analyses are planned, including: postcardiotomy, myocardial infarction, etomidate use, vasopressor use, and adrenal profiles according the short corticotropin stimulation test. Each patient will be followed for 90 days. All analyses will be conducted on an intention-to-treat basis. DISCUSSION: This trial will provide valuable evidence about the effectiveness of low dose of corticosteroid therapy for CS. If effective, this therapy might improve outcome and become a therapeutic adjunct for patients with CS. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov , NCT03773822 . Registered on 12 December 2018.

Efficacy of parasternal block to decrease intraoperative opioid use in coronary artery bypass surgery via sternotomy: a randomized controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: This study aims to assess the effect of a preoperative parasternal plane block (PSB) on opioid consumption required to maintain hemodynamic stability during sternotomy for coronary artery bypass graft surgery. METHODS: This double-blind, randomized, placebo-controlled trial prospectively enrolled 35 patients scheduled for coronary artery bypass graft surgery under general anesthesia with propofol and remifentanil. Patients were randomized to receive preoperative PSB using either ropivacaine (PSB group) or saline solution (placebo group) (1:1 ratio). The primary endpoint was the maximal effect-site concentration of remifentanil required to maintain heart rate and blood pressure within the recommended ranges during sternotomy. RESULTS: Median maximum concentration of remifentanil necessary to maintain adequate hemodynamic status during sternotomy was significantly reduced in PSB group (4.2 (2.5-6.0) ng/mL) compared with placebo group (7.0 (5.2-8.0) ng/mL) (p=0.02). Mean maximum concentration of propofol used to control depth of anesthesia was also reduced (3.9±1.1 µg/mL vs 5.0±1.5 µg/mL, PSB vs placebo, respectively; p=0.02). This reduction in propofol consumption during sternotomy enabled a more adequate level of sedation to be maintained in patients (minimum patient state index was 11.7±8.7 in placebo group and 18.3±6.8 in PSB group; p=0.02). PSB reduced postoperative inflammatory response by limiting concentrations of proinflammatory cytokines IL-8, IL-18, IL-23, IL-33 and MCP-1 measured in the first 7-day after surgery (p<0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative PSB reduced the maximum concentrations of remifentanil and propofol required to maintain hemodynamic stability and depth of anesthesia during sternotomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT03734159.Sébastien Bloc, M.D.1,2; Brieuc P. Pérot, Ph.D.3; Hadrien Gibert, M.D.1; Jean-Dominique Law Koune, M.D.1; Yannick Burg, M.D.1; Didier Leclerc, M.D.1; Anne-Sophie Vuitton, M.D.1; Christophe De La Jonquière, M.D.1; Marine Luka, L.S.3; Thierry Waldmann, M.D.4; Nicolas Vistarini, M.D.4; Stéphane Aubert, M.D.4; Mickaël M. Ménager, Ph.D.3; Messaouda Merzoug, Ph.D.2; Cécile Naudin, Ph.D.2; Pierre Squara, M.D.2,5.

Low Tidal Volume Mechanical Ventilation Against No Ventilation During Cardiopulmonary Bypass in Heart Surgery (MECANO): A Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications are common after cardiac surgery and have been related to lung collapse during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). No consensus exists regarding the effects of maintaining mechanical ventilation during CPB to decrease these complications. RESEARCH QUESTION: To determine whether maintaining low-tidal ventilation (3 mL/kg 5 times/min, with positive end expiratory pressure of 5 cm H2O) during CPB (ventilation strategy) was superior to a resting-lung strategy with no ventilation (no ventilation strategy) regarding postoperative pulmonary complications, including mortality. STUDY DESIGN AND METHODS: In a randomized controlled trial, patients undergoing cardiac surgery at a single center from May 2017 through August 2019 were randomized to the ventilation or no ventilation strategy during CPB (1:1 ratio). Apart from the CPB phase, perioperative ventilation procedures were standardized. RESULTS: The study included 1,501 patients (mean age, 68.8 ± 10.3 years; 1,152 (76.7%) men; mean EuroSCORE II, 2.3 ± 2.7). Seven hundred fifty-six patients were in the ventilation strategy group, and no differences existed in baseline characteristics and types of procedures between the two groups. An intention-to-treat analysis yielded no significant difference between the ventilation and no ventilation groups regarding incidence of the primary composite outcome combining death, early respiratory failure, ventilation support beyond day 2, and reintubation, with 112 of 756 patients (14.8%) in the ventilation group vs 133 of 745 patients (17.9%) in the no ventilation group (OR, 0.80; 95% CI, 0.61-1.05; P = .11). Strict per-protocol analyses of 1,338 patients (89.1%) with equally distributed preoperative characteristics yielded similar results (OR, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.60-1.09; P = .16). Post hoc analysis of the subgroup who underwent isolated coronary artery bypass graft procedures (n = 725) showed that the ventilation strategy was superior to the no ventilation strategy regarding the primary outcome (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.37-0.84; P = .005). INTERPRETATION: Among patients undergoing cardiac surgery with CPB, continuation of low tidal volume ventilation was not superior to no ventilation during CPB with respect to postoperative complications, including death, early respiratory failure, ventilation support beyond day 2, and reintubation. TRIAL REGISTRY: ClinicalTrials.gov; No.: NCT03098524; URL: www.clinicaltrials.gov.

Patch validation: an observational study protocol for the evaluation of a multisignal wearable sensor in patients during anaesthesia and in the postanaesthesia care unit.

INTRODUCTION: Except for operating rooms, postanaesthesia care units and intensive care units, where the monitoring of vital signs is continuous, intermittent care is standard practice. However, at a time when only the patients with the most serious conditions are hospitalised and only a fraction of these patients are in intensive care units, this type of monitoring is no longer sufficient. Wireless monitoring has been proposed, but it requires rigorous validation. The aim of this observational study is to compare vital signs obtained from a precordial patch sensor to those obtained with conventional monitoring. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This patch validation trial will be an observational, prospective, single-centre open study of 115 anaesthetised adult patients monitored with both a wireless sensor (myAngel VitalSigns, Devinnova, Montpellier, France) and a standard bedside monitor (Carescape Monitor B850, GE Healthcare, Chicago, Illinois). Both sensors will be used to record peripheral oxygen saturation, respiratory rate, heart rate, body temperature and blood pressure (systolic and diastolic). The main objective will be to assess the degree of agreement between the two systems during the patients' stay in the postanaesthesia care unit, both at the raw signal level and at the clinical parameter level. The secondary objectives will be to assess the same performance under anaesthesia, the frequency of missing data or artefacts, the diagnostic performance of the systems, the influence of patients' characteristics on agreement between the two systems, the adverse events and the acceptability of the patch to patients. Bland-Altman plots will be used in the main analysis to detect discrepancies and estimate the limits of agreement. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethical Committee (Toulouse, France) on 10 April 2020. We are not yet recruiting subjects for this study. The results will be submitted for publication in peer-reviewed journals. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT04344093.

Low tidal volume mechanical ventilation against no ventilation during cardiopulmonary bypass heart surgery (MECANO): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pulmonary complications are a leading cause of morbidity and mortality after cardiac surgery. There are no recommendations on mechanical ventilation associated with cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) during surgery and anesthesiologists perform either no ventilation (noV) at all during CPB or maintain low tidal volume (LTV) ventilation. Indirect evidence points towards better pulmonary outcomes when LTV is performed but no large-scale prospective trial has yet been published in cardiac surgery. DESIGN: The MECANO trial is a single-center, double-blind, randomized, controlled trial comparing two mechanical ventilation strategies, noV and LTV, during cardiac surgery with CPB. In total, 1500 patients are expected to be included, without any restrictions. They will be randomized between noV and LTV on a 1:1 ratio. The noV group will receive no ventilation during CPB. The LTV group will receive 5 breaths/minute with a tidal volume of 3 mL/kg and positive end-expiratory pressure of 5 cmH2O. The primary endpoint will be a composite of all-cause mortality, early respiratory failure defined as a ratio of partial pressure of oxygen/fraction of inspired oxygen <200 mmHg at 1 hour after arrival in the ICU, heavy oxygenation support (defined as a patient requiring either non-invasive ventilation, mechanical ventilation or high-flow oxygen) at 2 days after arrival in the ICU or ventilator-acquired pneumonia defined by the Center of Disease Control. Lung recruitment maneuvers will be performed in the noV and LTV groups at the end of surgery and at arrival in ICU with an insufflation at +30 cmH20 for 5 seconds. Secondary endpoints are those composing the primary endpoint with the addition of pneumothorax, CPB duration, quantity of postoperative bleeding, red blood cell transfusions, revision surgery requirements, length of stay in the ICU and in the hospital and total hospitalization costs. Patients will be followed until hospital discharge. DISCUSSION: The MECANO trial is the first of its kind to compare in a double-blind design, a no-ventilation to a low-tidal volume strategy for mechanical ventilation during cardiac surgery with CPB, with a primary composite outcome including death, respiratory failure and postoperative pneumonia. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03098524 . Registered on 27 February 2017.