Timing of Major Postoperative Bleeding Among Patients Undergoing Surgery.

Importance: Although major bleeding is among the most common and prognostically important perioperative complications, the relative timing of bleeding events is not well established. This information is critical for preventing bleeding complications and for informing the timing of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis. Objective: To determine the timing of postoperative bleeding among patients undergoing surgery for up to 30 days after surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: This is a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study. Patients aged 45 years or older who underwent inpatient noncardiac surgery were recruited in 14 countries between 2007 and 2013, with follow-up until December 2014. Data analysis was performed from June to July 2023. Exposure: Noncardiac surgery requiring overnight hospital admission. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary outcome (postoperative major bleeding) was a composite of the timing of the following bleeding outcomes: (1) bleeding leading to transfusion, (2) bleeding leading to a postoperative hemoglobin level less than 7 g/dL, (3) bleeding leading to death, and (4) bleeding associated with reintervention. Each of the components of the composite primary outcome (1-4) and bleeding independently associated with mortality after noncardiac surgery, which was defined as a composite of outcomes 1 to 3, were secondary outcomes. Results: Among 39 813 patients (median [IQR] age, 63.0 [54.8-72.5] years; 19 793 women [49.7%]), there were 5340 major bleeding events (primary outcome) in 4638 patients (11.6%) within the first 30 days after surgery. Of these events, 42.7% (95% CI, 40.9%-44.6%) occurred within 24 hours after surgery, 77.7% (95% CI, 75.8%-79.5%) by postoperative day 7, 88.3% (95% CI, 86.5%-90.2%) by postoperative day 14, and 94.6% (95% CI, 92.7%-96.5%) by postoperative day 21. Within 48 hours of surgery, 56.2% of major bleeding events, 56.2% of bleeding leading to transfusion, 56.1% of bleeding independently associated with mortality after noncardiac surgery, 51.8% of bleeding associated with hemoglobin less than 7 g/dL, and 51.8% of bleeding associated with reintervention had occurred. Conclusions and Relevance: In this cohort study, of the major postoperative bleeding events in the first 30 days, more than three-quarters occurred during the first postoperative week. These findings are useful for researchers for the planning future clinical research and for clinicians in prevention of bleeding-related surgical complications and in decision-making regarding starting of pharmacologic thromboprophylaxis after surgery.

Canadian Anatomic Kidney Score: Quantitative Macroscopic Assessment of Donor Kidney Quality for Transplantation.

Background: The Canadian Anatomic Kidney Score (CAKS) is a novel 6-point grading system that standardizes the gross description of a donor kidney across 3 components-vessels, anatomy, and sticky fat. We hypothesized that the CAKS predicts allograft functional outcomes and provides additional information to the Kidney Donor Profile Index (KDPI) and histologic assessment of the donor kidney. Methods: Single-center cohort of 145 patients who underwent renal transplantation with CAKS analysis between 2018 and 2021. CAKS was prospectively determined before transplantation. Preimplantation core biopsies were assessed according to the Remuzzi score (RS). The primary outcome was 1-y allograft function represented by an estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR). Results: Linear regression without adjustment for KDPI or RS showed a significant association between the CAKS and 1-y eGFR (-8.7 mL/min/1.73 m2 per point increase in CAKS; 95% CI, -13.0 to -4.4; P < 0.001). Most of that association was attributed to the vessel component (-12.1; -19.4 to -4.8; P = 0.002). Adjustment for KDPI and RS attenuated the relationship between 1-y function and CAKS (-4.6; -9.5 to 0.3; P = 0.065) and vessel component (-7.4; -15.2 to 0.5; P = 0.068). Conclusions: Anatomic assessment of donor kidneys at the time of transplantation associates with allograft function at 1 y. Vascular assessment appears to make the dominant contribution.

Kidney disease in trials of perioperative tranexamic acid.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess how kidney disease is handled in randomized trials evaluating the safety and efficacy of perioperative tranexamic acid, and to evaluate its effects across levels of kidney function. DESIGN: Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. SETTING: We screened studies from a previous comprehensive systematic review, and updated its search of PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane CENTRAL to July 31, 2023. PATIENTS: Patients undergoing non-obstetric surgery. INTERVENTIONS: Intravenous tranexamic acid compared to placebo or usual care without tranexamic acid. MEASUREMENT: We summarized the handling of kidney disease in eligibility criteria, dose adjustments for kidney function, and effects of tranexamic acid on thrombotic events, seizures, and bleeding by subgroups of kidney function. MAIN RESULTS: We evaluated 300 trials with 53,085 participants; 45,958 participants (86.6%) were enrolled in 228 trials (76.0%) that explicitly excluded patients with kidney disease. Definitions of kidney diseased used for exclusion varied widely. Most were non-specific and some corresponded to mild disease. Only 5 trials adjusted dosing for kidney function. Meta-analysis of two large trials found tranexamic acid unlikely to substantially increase or decrease the occurrence of thrombotic events in patients with eGFR <60 mL/min/1.73m2 (RR, 0.95; 95% CI: 0.83 to 1.07) or ≥ 60 mL/min/1.73m2 (RR, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.91 to 1.11; P for subgroup difference = 0.47), but both trials excluded patients with severe kidney disease. No analysis could be performed regarding seizure risk. One large trial in noncardiac surgery reported similar reduction in bleeding across subgroups of kidney function but excluded patients with creatinine clearance <30 mL/min. CONCLUSIONS: The large evidence base supporting perioperative tranexamic acid suffers from broad and unjustified exclusion of patients with kidney disease. Typical perioperative dosing of tranexamic acid is likely safe and effective in patients with creatinine clearance >30 mL/min, but effects in more severe kidney disease are unknown.

Desmopressin to reduce periprocedural bleeding and transfusion: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

We systematically reviewed the literature to investigate the effects of peri-procedural desmopressin in patients without known inherited bleeding disorders undergoing surgery or other invasive procedures. We included 63 randomized trials (4163 participants) published up to February 1, 2023. Seven trials were published after a 2017 Cochrane systematic review on this topic. There were 38 trials in cardiac surgery, 22 in noncardiac surgery, and 3 in non-surgical procedures. Meta-analyses demonstrated that desmopressin likely does not reduce the risk of receiving a red blood cell transfusion (25 trials, risk ratio [RR] 0.95, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.86 to 1.05) and may not reduce the risk of reoperation due to bleeding (22 trials, RR 0.75, 95% CI 0.47 to 1.19) when compared to placebo or usual care. However, we demonstrated significant reductions in number of units of red blood cells transfused (25 trials, mean difference -0.55 units, 95% CI - 0.94 to - 0.15), total volume of blood loss (33 trials, standardized mean difference - 0.40 standard deviations; 95% CI - 0.56 to - 0.23), and the risk of bleeding events (2 trials, RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.24 to 0.84). The certainty of evidence of these findings was generally low. Desmopressin increased the risk of clinically significant hypotension that required intervention (19 trials, RR 2.15, 95% CI 1.36 to 3.41). Limited evidence suggests that tranexamic acid is more effective than desmopressin in reducing transfusion risk (3 trials, RR 2.38 favoring tranexamic acid, 95% CI 1.06 to 5.39) and total volume of blood loss (3 trials, mean difference 391.7 mL favoring tranexamic acid, 95% CI - 93.3 to 876.7 mL). No trials directly informed the safety and hemostatic efficacy of desmopressin in advanced kidney disease. In conclusion, desmopressin likely reduces periprocedural blood loss and the number of units of blood transfused in small trials with methodologic limitations. However, the risk of hypotension needs to be mitigated. Large trials should evaluate desmopressin alongside tranexamic acid and enroll patients with advanced kidney disease.

The Use of Placebo in Clinical Trials of Inflammatory Bowel Disease.

We review concerns regarding use of placebo in clinical trials of inflammatory bowel disease. We propose alternate designs to overcome ethical issues, while providing data that are clinically relevant.

One-year Outcomes after Discharge from Noncardiac Surgery and Association between Predischarge Complications and Death after Discharge: Analysis of the VISION Prospective Cohort Study.

BACKGROUND: In previous analyses, myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, major bleeding, and sepsis were independently associated with most deaths in the 30 days after noncardiac surgery, but most of these deaths occurred during the index hospitalization for surgery. The authors set out to describe outcomes after discharge from hospital up to 1 yr after inpatient noncardiac surgery and associations between predischarge complications and postdischarge death up to 1 yr after surgery. METHODS: This study was an analysis of patients discharged after inpatient noncardiac surgery in a large international prospective cohort study across 28 centers from 2007 to 2013 of patients aged 45 yr or older followed to 1 yr after surgery. The study estimated (1) the cumulative postdischarge incidence of death and other outcomes up to a year after surgery and (2) the adjusted time-varying associations between postdischarge death and predischarge complications including myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery, major bleeding, sepsis, infection without sepsis, stroke, congestive heart failure, clinically important atrial fibrillation or flutter, amputation, venous thromboembolism, and acute kidney injury managed with dialysis. RESULTS: Among 38,898 patients discharged after surgery, the cumulative 1-yr incidence was 5.8% (95% CI, 5.5 to 6.0%) for all-cause death and 24.7% (95% CI, 24.2 to 25.1%) for all-cause hospital readmission. Predischarge complications were associated with 33.7% (95% CI, 27.2 to 40.2%) of deaths up to 30 days after discharge and 15.0% (95% CI, 12.0 to 17.9%) up to 1 yr. Most of the association with death was due to myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (15.6% [95% CI, 9.3 to 21.9%] of deaths within 30 days, 6.4% [95% CI, 4.1 to 8.7%] within 1 yr), major bleeding (15.0% [95% CI, 8.3 to 21.7%] within 30 days, 4.7% [95% CI, 2.2 to 7.2%] within 1 yr), and sepsis (5.4% [95% CI, 2.2 to 8.6%] within 30 days, 2.1% [95% CI, 1.0 to 3.1%] within 1 yr). CONCLUSIONS: One in 18 patients 45 yr old or older discharged after inpatient noncardiac surgery died within 1 yr, and one quarter were readmitted to the hospital. The risk of death associated with predischarge perioperative complications persists for weeks to months after discharge.

The Clinical Interpretation of Noninferiority Trials.

Noninferiority trials are designed to demonstrate that a new treatment is not unacceptably worse than a standard treatment, considering an allowable difference termed the noninferiority margin. We highlight that selection of noninferiority margins at the time of study design can be biased toward wider margins that favor noninferiority claims. We discuss a clinically oriented approach to interpretation of results with a focus on confidence intervals and recommend that readers base their judgments regarding noninferiority on margins reflecting patient values and preferences rather than those set by investigators. We provide examples from trials in inflammatory bowel diseases.

Risk and Timing of Major Bleeding Complications Requiring Intervention of the Percutaneous Kidney Biopsy With a Short Observation Protocol: A Retrospective Chart Review.

Background: We previously published a retrospective study of kidney biopsies performed in a tertiary care hospital in London, Ontario from 2012 to 2017. This study resulted in a change of practice in our institution to shorter postbiopsy monitoring for outpatients as well as the development of a risk calculator to predict serious bleeding complications. Objective: The primary objective of this study was to determine whether this shorter monitoring time is adequate in the outpatient setting. A secondary objective was to validate the bleeding risk calculator in both inpatients and outpatients. Design: This was a retrospective chart review. Setting: This study was performed at a tertiary academic hospital in London, Ontario, Canada. Participants: This was a retrospective study of 400 adult patients who underwent kidney biopsy between April 30, 2018 and February 25, 2022 at a tertiary academic hospital in London, Canada. Methods: We retrospectively assessed frequency and timing of major bleeding complications in patients who underwent kidney biopsy. In secondary analyses, we examined the prediction performance of the risk calculator in discrimination and calibration. Results: Major bleeding occurred in 7 patients (1.8%). Five of these patients required blood transfusions (1.3%) and 2 required embolization (0.5%). In the outpatient setting, any major bleeding events were identified immediately (1 patient) or on the routine 2-hour ultrasounds (1 patient). The risk calculator showed good discrimination (C-statistic, 0.91, 95% confidence interval [CI] = [0.84 to 0.95]) and calibration (slope, 1.10, 95% CI = [0.47 to 1.74]; intercept, 95% CI = -0.02 [-0.79 to 0.75]), but with much uncertainty in the estimates. Limitations: The occurrence of only a few major bleeding events limits the reliability of our assessment of our risk calculator. Conclusions: There appears to be little yield in extending observation beyond 2 hours after an outpatient kidney biopsy with the use of immediate and 2-hour postbiopsy ultrasounds. The bleeding risk calculator (http://perioperativerisk.com/kbrc) warrants further validation.

Contexte: Nous avons publié précédemment une étude rétrospective des biopsies rénales effectuées entre 2012 et 2017 dans un hôpital de soins tertiaires de London, en Ontario. Les résultats de cette précédente étude ont entraîné un changement de pratique dans notre établissement, soit une réduction de la durée de la surveillance post-biopsie pour les patients ambulatoires, et la mise au point d'un calculateur de risque permettant de prédire les complications hémorragiques graves. Objectifs: L'objectif principal de l'étude en cours était de vérifier si ce temps de surveillance plus court est adéquat pour les patients ambulatoires. Un deuxième objectif était de valider le calculateur de risque d'hémorragie chez les patients hospitalisés et les patients ambulatoires. Conception: Étude rétrospective des dossiers médicaux. Cadre: Étude réalisée dans un hôpital de soins tertiaires de London, en Ontario (Canada). Sujets: Cette étude rétrospective portait sur 400 patients adultes ayant subi une biopsie rénale entre le 30 avril 2018 et le 25 février 2022 dans un centre hospitalier universitaire de soins tertiaires de London, au Canada. Méthodes: Nous avons procédé à un examen rétrospectif de la fréquence des complications hémorragiques graves, et du moment où celles-ci surviennent, chez les patients ayant subi une biopsie rénale. Dans les analyses secondaires, nous avons examiné la puissance prédictive du calculateur de risque en matière de discrimination et d'étalonnage. Résultats: Sept patients (1,75 %) ont subi une hémorragie majeure; de ces patients, cinq ont eu besoin de transfusions sanguines (1,3 %) et deux, d'une embolisation (0,5 %). En contexte ambulatoire, tous les événements hémorragiques graves ont été détectés immédiatement (un patient) ou lors de l'échographie de routine à deux heures (un patient). Le calculateur de risque a montré une bonne discrimination (statistique C : 0,91 [IC 95 % : 0,84 à 0,95]) et un bon étalonnage (pente : 1,10 [0,47 à 1,74]; point d'intersection : -0,02 [-0,79 à 0,75]), mais une grande incertitude dans les estimations. Limitations: La fiabilité de l'évaluation de notre calculateur de risque est limitée par le très faible échantillon d'événements hémorragiques graves étant survenus. Conclusion: Il semble y avoir peu d'intérêt à prolonger la surveillance au-delà de deux heures après une biopsie rénale chez les patients ambulatoires lorsqu'une échographie est pratiquée immédiatement après la procédure et deux heures plus tard. Le calculateur de risque d'hémorragie (http://perioperativerisk.com/kbrc) nécessite une validation plus approfondie.

Effect of Colchicine on the Risk of Perioperative Acute Kidney Injury: Clinical Protocol of a Substudy of the Colchicine for the Prevention of Perioperative Atrial Fibrillation Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Inflammation during and after surgery can lead to organ damage including acute kidney injury. Colchicine, an established inexpensive anti-inflammatory medication, may help to protect the organs from pro-inflammatory damage. This protocol describes a kidney substudy of the colchicine for the prevention of perioperative atrial fibrillation (COP-AF) study, which is testing the effect of colchicine versus placebo on the risk of atrial fibrillation and myocardial injury among patients undergoing thoracic surgery. Objective: Our kidney substudy of COP-AF will determine whether colchicine reduces the risk of perioperative acute kidney injury compared with a placebo. We will also examine whether colchicine has a larger absolute benefit in patients with pre-existing chronic kidney disease, the most prominent risk factor for acute kidney injury. Design and Setting: Randomized, superiority clinical trial conducted in 40 centers in 11 countries from 2018 to 2023. Patients: Patients (~3200) aged 55 years and older having major thoracic surgery. Intervention: Patients are randomized 1:1 to receive oral colchicine (0.5 mg tablet) or a matching placebo, given twice daily starting 2 to 4 hours before surgery for a total of 10 days. Patients, health care providers, data collectors, and outcome adjudicators will be blinded to the randomized treatment allocation. Methods: Serum creatinine concentrations will be measured before surgery and on postoperative days 1, 2, and 3 (or until hospital discharge). The primary outcome of the substudy is perioperative acute kidney injury, defined as an increase (from the prerandomization value) in serum creatinine concentration of either ≥26.5 µmol/L (≥0.3 mg/dL) within 48 hours of surgery or ≥50% within 7 days of surgery. The primary analysis (intention-to-treat) will examine the relative risk of acute kidney injury in patients allocated to receive colchicine versus placebo. We will repeat the primary analysis using alternative definitions of acute kidney injury and examine effect modification by pre-existing chronic kidney disease, defined as a prerandomization estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) <60 mL/min per 1.73 m2. Limitations: The substudy will be underpowered to detect small effects on more severe forms of acute kidney injury treated with dialysis. Results: Substudy results will be reported in 2024. Conclusions: This substudy will estimate the effect of colchicine on the risk of perioperative acute kidney injury in older adults undergoing major thoracic surgery. Clinical trial registration number: NCT03310125.

Contexte: L'inflammation pendant et après une intervention chirurgicale peut causer des lésions aux organes, notamment de l'insuffisance rénale aiguë (IRA). La colchicine, un médicament anti-inflammatoire reconnu et bon marché, peut contribuer à protéger les organes contre les lésions pro-inflammatoires. Le présent protocole décrit une sous-étude rénale de l'essai Colchicine for the Prevention of Perioperative atrial fibrillation (COP-AF), qui examine l'effet de la colchicine, par rapport à un placebo, sur le risque de fibrillation auriculaire et de lésion myocardique chez les patients qui subissent une chirurgie thoracique. Objectif: Notre sous-étude rénale de l'essai COP-AF permettra de vérifier si la colchicine réduit le risque d'IRA périopératoire par rapport à un placebo. Nous tenterons également de déterminer si la colchicine présente un plus grand bénéfice absolu pour les patients atteints d'une insuffisance rénale chronique préexistante, laquelle constitue le plus important facteur de risque pour l'IRA. Cadre et type d'étude: Essai clinique à répartition aléatoire visant à démontrer une supériorité. L'étude, qui s'étend de 2018 à 2023, est menée dans 40 centers situés dans 11 pays. Sujets: Des patients (~3200) âgés de 55 ans et plus subissant une chirurgie thoracique majeure. Interventions: Les patients sont répartis 1:1 de façon aléatoire pour recevoir de la colchicine par voie orale (comprimé de 0.5 mg), ou un placebo correspondant, deux fois par jour à partir de 2 à 4 heures avant l'intervention chirurgicale, pour un total de 10 jours. Les patients, les prestataires de soins de santé, les personnes qui collectent les données et celles qui évaluent les résultats ne seront pas informés de l'attribution du traitement. Méthodologie: Les concentrations sériques de créatinine seront mesurées avant l'intervention et aux jours postopératoires 1, 2, et 3 (ou jusqu'au congé de l'hôpital). Le principal critère d'évaluation de cette sous-étude est une IRA périopératoires définie par une hausse (par rapport à la valeur mesurée avant la répartition aléatoire) d'au moins 26.5 µmol/L (≥0.3 mg/dL) de la créatinine sérique dans les 48 heures suivant l'intervention ou d'au moins 50% dans les 7 jours suivants. L'analyze primaire (intention de traiter) examinera le risque relatif d'IRA chez les patients recevant de la colchicine par rapport au placebo. L'analyze primaire sera répétée en utilisant d'autres définitions de l'IRA et nous examinerons la modification de l'effet en présence d'une insuffisance rénale préexistante, définie par un débit de filtration glomérulaire estimé (DFGe) inférieur à 60 mL/min/1.73 m2 avant la répartition aléatoire. Limites: Cette sous-étude ne sera pas assez puissante pour détecter de petits effets sur les formes plus graves d'insuffisance rénale aiguë traitées par dialyze. Résultats: Les résultats de cette sous-étude feront l'objet d'un rapport en 2024. Conclusion: Cette sous-étude permettra d'estimer l'effet de la colchicine sur le risque d'insuffisance rénale aiguë périopératoire chez les adultes âgés qui subissent une chirurgie thoracique majeure. Numéro d'enregistrement de l'essai clinique: NCT03310125.

Conversion between B-type natriuretic peptide and N-terminal pro B-type natriuretic peptide in perioperative risk assessment: protocol for a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Both B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and N-terminal pro-BNP (NT-pro-BNP) are used to identify patients at risk of perioperative vascular events, but prognostic thresholds have been established in a large prospective cohort for NT-pro-BNP only. We designed this study to inform perioperative risk interpretation of BNP values. Our primary objective is to validate a formula to convert BNP to NT-pro-BNP concentrations before non-cardiac surgery. The secondary objective is to determine the association between BNP categories (established based on conversion from NT-pro-BNP categories) and a composite outcome of myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) and vascular death. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a single-centre, prospective cohort study in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery who are >65 years old, Revised Cardiac Risk Index ≥1 or >45 years old with significant cardiovascular disease. BNP and NT-pro-BNP will be measured preoperatively, and troponin measurements will be analysed on postoperative days 1, 2 and 3. MINS and vascular death will be ascertained up to 30 days after surgery. The primary analyses will compare measured NT-pro-BNP values to those predicted by an existing formula (from a non-surgical population) based on BNP concentrations and patient characteristics, and recalibrate and update the formula with additional variables. Secondary analyses will estimate the relationship between categories of measured BNP (corresponding to established NT-pro-BNP thresholds) and the composite of MINS and vascular death. The target sample size of 431 patients is based on our primary analysis (assessing the conversion formula). ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethics approval has been obtained by the Queen's University Health Sciences Research Ethics Board, and all participants will provide informed consent for participation in the study. The results will be submitted for publication in conferences and in a peer-reviewed journal, and will inform perioperative vascular risk interpretation of preoperative BNP. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT05352698.

TIPS to decide whether to prescribe aspirin for the primary prevention of cardiovascular events in chronic kidney disease.

Aspirin effectively prevents subsequent cardiovascular events. A post hoc subgroup analysis of the International Polycap Study 3 (TIPS-3) trial suggests that patients with chronic kidney disease might also benefit from aspirin for primary prevention. We consider the merits of doing so in practice.

Rationale and design of the PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3): a randomized controlled trial evaluating tranexamic acid and a strategy to minimize hypotension in noncardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: For patients undergoing noncardiac surgery, bleeding and hypotension are frequent and associated with increased mortality and cardiovascular complications. Tranexamic acid (TXA) is an antifibrinolytic agent with the potential to reduce surgical bleeding; however, there is uncertainty about its efficacy and safety in noncardiac surgery. Although usual perioperative care is commonly consistent with a hypertension-avoidance strategy (i.e., most patients continue their antihypertensive medications throughout the perioperative period and intraoperative mean arterial pressures of 60 mmHg are commonly accepted), a hypotension-avoidance strategy may improve perioperative outcomes. METHODS: The PeriOperative Ischemic Evaluation (POISE)-3 Trial is a large international randomized controlled trial designed to determine if TXA is superior to placebo for the composite outcome of life-threatening, major, and critical organ bleeding, and non-inferior to placebo for the occurrence of major arterial and venous thrombotic events, at 30 days after randomization. Using a partial factorial design, POISE-3 will additionally determine the effect of a hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy on the risk of major cardiovascular events, at 30 days after randomization. The target sample size is 10,000 participants. Patients ≥45 years of age undergoing noncardiac surgery, with or at risk of cardiovascular and bleeding complications, are randomized to receive a TXA 1 g intravenous bolus or matching placebo at the start and at the end of surgery. Patients, health care providers, data collectors, outcome adjudicators, and investigators are blinded to the treatment allocation. Patients on ≥ 1 chronic antihypertensive medication are also randomized to either of the two blood pressure management strategies, which differ in the management of patient antihypertensive medications on the morning of surgery and on the first 2 days after surgery, and in the target mean arterial pressure during surgery. Outcome adjudicators are blinded to the blood pressure treatment allocation. Patients are followed up at 30 days and 1 year after randomization. DISCUSSION: Bleeding and hypotension in noncardiac surgery are common and have a substantial impact on patient prognosis. The POISE-3 trial will evaluate two interventions to determine their impact on bleeding, cardiovascular complications, and mortality. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03505723. Registered on 23 April 2018.

Effect of a Perioperative Hypotension-Avoidance Strategy Versus a Hypertension-Avoidance Strategy on the Risk of Acute Kidney Injury: A Clinical Research Protocol for a Substudy of the POISE-3 Randomized Clinical Trial.

BACKGROUND: Most patients who take antihypertensive medications continue taking them on the morning of surgery and during the perioperative period. However, growing evidence suggests this practice may contribute to perioperative hypotension and a higher risk of complications. This protocol describes an acute kidney injury substudy of the Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3) trial, which is testing the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy versus a hypertension-avoidance strategy in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. OBJECTIVE: To conduct a substudy of POISE-3 to determine whether a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy reduces the risk of acute kidney injury compared with a hypertension-avoidance strategy. DESIGN: Randomized clinical trial with 1:1 randomization to the intervention (a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy) or control (a hypertension-avoidance strategy). INTERVENTION: If the presurgery systolic blood pressure (SBP) is <130 mmHg, all antihypertensive medications are withheld on the morning of surgery. If the SBP is ≥130 mmHg, some medications (but not angiotensin receptor blockers [ACEIs], angiotensin receptor blockers [ARBs], or renin inhibitors) may be continued in a stepwise manner. During surgery, the patients' mean arterial pressure (MAP) is maintained at ≥80 mmHg. During the first 48 hours after surgery, some antihypertensive medications (but not ACEIs, ARBs, or renin inhibitors) may be restarted in a stepwise manner if the SBP is ≥130 mmHg. CONTROL: Patients receive their usual antihypertensive medications before and after surgery. The patients' MAP is maintained at ≥60 mmHg from anesthetic induction until the end of surgery. SETTING: Recruitment from 108 centers in 22 countries from 2018 to 2021. PATIENTS: Patients (~6800) aged ≥45 years having noncardiac surgery who have or are at risk of atherosclerotic disease and who routinely take antihypertensive medications. MEASUREMENTS: The primary outcome of the substudy is postoperative acute kidney injury, defined as an increase in serum creatinine concentration of either ≥26.5 µmol/L (≥0.3 mg/dL) within 48 hours of randomization or ≥50% within 7 days of randomization. METHODS: The primary analysis (intention-to-treat) will examine the relative risk and 95% confidence interval of acute kidney injury in the intervention versus control group. We will repeat the primary analysis using alternative definitions of acute kidney injury and examine effect modification by preexisting chronic kidney disease, defined as a prerandomization estimated glomerular filtration rate <60 mL/min/1.73 m2. RESULTS: Substudy results will be analyzed in 2022. LIMITATIONS: It is not possible to mask patients or providers to the intervention; however, objective measures will be used to assess acute kidney injury. CONCLUSIONS: This substudy will provide generalizable estimates of the effect of a perioperative hypotension-avoidance strategy on the risk of acute kidney injury.

CONTEXTE: La plupart des patients qui prennent des médicaments antihypertenseurs continuent de les prendre le matin d'une intervention chirurgicale et pendant la période périopératoire. De plus en plus de preuves suggèrent que cette pratique pourrait entraîner l'hypotension périopératoire et augmenter le risque de complications. Ce protocole décrit une sous-étude sur l'insuffisance rénale aiguë (IRA) découlant de l'essai Perioperative Ischemic Evaluation-3 (POISE-3). Cet essai teste l'effet d'une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire par rapport à une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension chez des patients qui subissent une chirurgie non cardiaque. OBJECTIFS: Cette sous-étude de l'essai POISE-3 vise à déterminer si une stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire réduit le risque d'IRA comparativement à la stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension. TYPE D'ÉTUDE: Essai clinique randomisé à répartition 1:1 au groupe intervention (stratégie d'évitement de l'hypotension périopératoire) ou au groupe témoin (stratégie d'évitement de l'hypertension). GROUPE INTERVENTION: Si la pression artérielle systolique (PAS) avant l'opération est <130 mmHg, tous les médicaments antihypertenseurs sont suspendus le matin de la chirurgie. Si la PAS est ≥130 mmHg, certains médicaments (excluant les inhibiteurs de l'enzyme de conversion de l'angiotensine [IECA], les antagonistes du récepteur de l'angiotensine [ARA] ou les inhibiteurs de la rénine) peuvent être poursuivis de façon graduelle. Pendant la chirurgie, la pression artérielle moyenne (PAM) du patient est maintenue à ≥80 mmHg. Dans les 48 heures suivant l'intervention chirurgicale, certains médicaments antihypertenseurs (excluant les IECA, les ARA ou les inhibiteurs de la rénine) peuvent être réintroduits par étapes si la PAS est ≥130 mmHg. GROUPE TÉMOIN: Les patients reçoivent leurs médicaments antihypertenseurs habituels avant et après la chirurgie. La PAM du patient est maintenue à ≥60 mmHg de l'induction de l'anesthésie à la fin de l'intervention chirurgicale. CADRE: Recrutement à partir de 108 centres dans 22 pays entre 2018 à 2021. SUJETS: Des patients (~6 800) âgés de 45 ans et plus atteints d'athérosclérose, ou présentant un risque de l'être, devant subir une chirurgie non cardiaque et prenant des médicaments antihypertenseurs sur une base régulière. MESURES: Le principal critère d'évaluation de cette sous-étude est une IRA postopératoire définie par une hausse d'au moins 26,5 µmol/L (≥0,3 mg/dL) de la créatinine sérique dans les 48 heures suivant la randomisation ou d'au moins 50 % dans les 7 jours suivant la randomisation. MÉTHODOLOGIE: L'analyse primaire (par intention de traiter) examinera le risque relatif d'une IRA et l'intervalle de confiance à 95 % dans le groupe intervention par rapport au groupe témoin. Nous répéterons l'analyse primaire en utilisant d'autres définitions de l'IRA et nous examinerons la modification de l'effet en présence d'une insuffisance rénale préexistante (définie par un DFGe prérandomisation <60 ml/min/1,73 m2). RÉSULTATS: Les résultats de cette sous-étude seront analysés en 2022. LIMITES: Il n'est pas possible de procéder à l'insu des patients ou des prestataires de soins pour cette intervention; des mesures objectives seront toutefois utilisées pour évaluer l'IRA. CONCLUSION: Cette sous-étude fournira des estimations généralisables de l'effet d'une stratégie visant à éviter l'hypotension périopératoire sur le risque d'insuffisance rénale aiguë.

GRADE concept paper 2: Concepts for judging certainty on the calibration of prognostic models in a body of validation studies.

BACKGROUND: Prognostic models combine several prognostic factors to provide an estimate of the likelihood (or risk) of future events in individual patients, conditional on their prognostic factor values. A fundamental part of evaluating prognostic models is undertaking studies to determine whether their predictive performance, such as calibration and discrimination, is reproduced across settings. Systematic reviews and meta-analyses of studies evaluating prognostic models' performance are a necessary step for selection of models for clinical practice and for testing the underlying assumption that their use will improve outcomes, including patient's reassurance and optimal future planning. METHODS: In this paper, we highlight key concepts in evaluating the certainty of evidence regarding the calibration of prognostic models. RESULTS AND CONCLUSION: Four concepts are key to evaluating the certainty of evidence on prognostic models' performance regarding calibration. The first concept is that the inference regarding calibration may take one of two forms: deciding whether one is rating certainty that a model's performance is satisfactory or, instead, unsatisfactory, in either case defining the threshold for satisfactory (or unsatisfactory) model performance. Second, inconsistency is the critical GRADE domain to deciding whether we are rating certainty in the model performance being satisfactory or unsatisfactory. Third, depending on whether one is rating certainty in satisfactory or unsatisfactory performance, different patterns of inconsistency of results across studies will inform ratings of certainty of evidence. Fourth, exploring the distribution of point estimates of observed to expected ratio across individual studies, and its determinants, will bear on the need for and direction of future research.

Post-discharge after surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring-1 (PVC-RAM-1) technology versus standard care: randomised controlled trial.

OBJECTIVE: To determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) technology versus standard care increases days alive at home among adults discharged after non-elective surgery during the covid-19 pandemic. DESIGN: Multicentre randomised controlled trial. SETTING: 8 acute care hospitals in Canada. PARTICIPANTS: 905 adults (≥40 years) who resided in areas with mobile phone coverage and were to be discharged from hospital after non-elective surgery were randomised either to virtual care and RAM (n=451) or to standard care (n=454). 903 participants (99.8%) completed the 31 day follow-up. INTERVENTION: Participants in the experimental group received a tablet computer and RAM technology that measured blood pressure, heart rate, respiratory rate, oxygen saturation, temperature, and body weight. For 30 days the participants took daily biophysical measurements and photographs of their wound and interacted with nurses virtually. Participants in the standard care group received post-hospital discharge management according to the centre's usual care. Patients, healthcare providers, and data collectors were aware of patients' group allocations. Outcome adjudicators were blinded to group allocation. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up. The 12 secondary outcomes included acute hospital care, detection and correction of drug errors, and pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation. RESULTS: All 905 participants (mean age 63.1 years) were analysed in the groups to which they were randomised. Days alive at home during 31 days of follow-up were 29.7 in the virtual care group and 29.5 in the standard care group: relative risk 1.01 (95% confidence interval 0.99 to 1.02); absolute difference 0.2% (95% confidence interval -0.5% to 0.9%). 99 participants (22.0%) in the virtual care group and 124 (27.3%) in the standard care group required acute hospital care: relative risk 0.80 (0.64 to 1.01); absolute difference 5.3% (-0.3% to 10.9%). More participants in the virtual care group than standard care group had a drug error detected (134 (29.7%) v 25 (5.5%); absolute difference 24.2%, 19.5% to 28.9%) and a drug error corrected (absolute difference 24.4%, 19.9% to 28.9%). Fewer participants in the virtual care group than standard care group reported pain at 7, 15, and 30 days after randomisation: absolute differences 13.9% (7.4% to 20.4%), 11.9% (5.1% to 18.7%), and 9.6% (2.9% to 16.3%), respectively. Beneficial effects proved substantially larger in centres with a higher rate of care escalation. CONCLUSION: Virtual care with RAM shows promise in improving outcomes important to patients and to optimal health system function. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT04344665.

Derivation and External Validation of a Risk Index for Predicting Acute Kidney Injury Requiring Kidney Replacement Therapy After Noncardiac Surgery.

Importance: Severe acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious postoperative complication. A tool for predicting the risk of AKI requiring kidney replacement therapy (KRT) after major noncardiac surgery might assist with patient counseling and targeted use of measures to reduce this risk. Objective: To derive and validate a predictive model for AKI requiring KRT after major noncardiac surgery. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this prognostic study, 5 risk prediction models were derived and internally validated in a population-based cohort of adults without preexisting kidney failure who underwent noncardiac surgery in Alberta, Canada, between January 1, 2004, and December 31, 2013. The best performing model and corresponding risk index were externally validated in a population-based cohort of adults without preexisting kidney failure who underwent noncardiac surgery in Ontario, Canada, between January 1, 2007, and December 31, 2017. Data analysis was conducted from September 1, 2019, to May 31, 2021. Exposures: Demographic characteristics, surgery type, laboratory measures, and comorbidities before surgery. Main Outcomes and Measures: Acute kidney injury requiring KRT within 14 days after surgery. Discrimination was assessed using the C statistic; calibration was assessed using calibration intercept and slope. Logistic recalibration was used to optimize model calibration in the external validation cohort. Results: The derivation cohort included 92 114 patients (52.2% female; mean [SD] age, 62.3 [18.0] years), and the external validation cohort included 709 086 patients (50.8% female; mean [SD] age, 61.0 [16.0] years). A total of 529 patients (0.6%) developed postoperative AKI requiring KRT in the derivation cohort, and 2956 (0.4%) developed postoperative AKI requiring KRT in the external validation cohort. The following factors were consistently associated with the risk of AKI requiring KRT: younger age (40-69 years: odds ratio [OR], 2.07 [95% CI, 1.69-2.53]; <40 years: OR, 3.73 [95% CI, 2.61-5.33]), male sex (OR, 1.55; 95% CI, 1.28-1.87), surgery type (colorectal: OR, 4.86 [95% CI, 3.28-7.18]; liver or pancreatic: OR, 6.46 [95% CI, 3.85-10.83]; other abdominal: OR, 2.19 [95% CI, 1.66-2.89]; abdominal aortic aneurysm repair: OR, 19.34 [95% CI, 14.31-26.14]; other vascular: OR, 7.30 [95% CI, 5.48-9.73]; thoracic: OR, 3.41 [95% CI, 2.07-5.59]), lower estimated glomerular filtration rate (OR, 0.97; 95% CI, 0.97-0.97 per 1 mL/min/1.73 m2 increase), lower hemoglobin concentration (OR, 0.99; 95% CI, 0.98-0.99 per 0.1 g/dL increase), albuminuria (mild: OR, 1.88 [95% CI, 1.52-2.33]; heavy: OR, 3.74 [95% CI, 2.98-4.69]), history of myocardial infarction (OR, 1.63; 95% CI, 1.32-2.03), and liver disease (mild: OR, 2.32 [95% CI, 1.66-3.24]; moderate or severe: OR, 4.96 [95% CI, 3.58-6.85]). In external validation, a final model including these variables showed excellent discrimination (C statistic, 0.95; 95% CI, 0.95-0.96), with sensitivity of 21.2%, specificity of 99.9%, positive predictive value of 38.1%, and negative predictive value of 99.7% at a predicted risk threshold of 10% or greater. Conclusions and Relevance: The findings suggest that this risk model can predict AKI requiring KRT after noncardiac surgery using routine preoperative data. The model may be feasible for implementation in clinical perioperative risk stratification for severe AKI.

Association of Preeclampsia With Myocardial Injury Among Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery: The PREECLAMPSIA-VISION Study.

BACKGROUND: In women, preeclampsia has a known association with increased long-term cardiovascular morbidity and mortality. However, it is unknown whether it is associated with increased postoperative cardiovascular morbidity and mortality in women. We aimed to determine if preeclampsia is an independent risk factor for myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS) and postoperative 30-day mortality. METHODS: This study was a large international multicentre cohort study of a representative sample of 40,004 patients recruited from August 2007 to November 2013. Participants were ≥ 45 years of age and underwent inpatient noncardiac surgery. Within this cohort, our study examined women with a history of pregnancy. Using multivariable models, we explored the association between a history of pregnancy affected by preeclampsia and our primary outcome of MINS and secondary outcome of postoperative mortality within 30 days. MINS was defined as prognostically relevant myocardial injury due to ischemia that occurred during or within 30 days after noncardiac surgery. RESULTS: Analyses were restricted to the 13,902 participants with a history of pregnancy. Among these women, 976 (7.0%) had a history of preeclampsia. A history of preeclampsia was associated with an increased risk of MINS, with an adjusted hazard ratio of 1.26 (95% confidence interval 1.03-1.53; P = 0.02). Preeclampsia was not significantly associated with 30-day mortality. CONCLUSIONS: Preeclampsia is a risk factor for MINS and should be considered in the preoperative cardiovascular risk assessment of women.

Post Discharge after Surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring Technology (PVC-RAM): protocol for a randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: After nonelective (i.e., semiurgent, urgent and emergent) surgeries, patients discharged from hospitals are at risk of readmissions, emergency department visits or death. During the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, we are undertaking the Post Discharge after Surgery Virtual Care with Remote Automated Monitoring Technology (PVC-RAM) trial to determine if virtual care with remote automated monitoring (RAM) compared with standard care will increase the number of days adult patients remain alive at home after being discharged following nonelective surgery. METHODS: We are conducting a randomized controlled trial in which 900 adults who are being discharged after nonelective surgery from 8 Canadian hospitals are randomly assigned to receive virtual care with RAM or standard care. Outcome adjudicators are masked to group allocations. Patients in the experimental group learn how to use the study's tablet computer and RAM technology, which will measure their vital signs. For 30 days, patients take daily biophysical measurements and complete a recovery survey. Patients interact with nurses via the cellular modem-enabled tablet, who escalate care to preassigned and available physicians if RAM measurements exceed predetermined thresholds, patients report symptoms, a medication error is identified or the nurses have concerns they cannot resolve. The primary outcome is number of days alive at home during the 30 days after randomization. INTERPRETATION: This trial will inform management of patients after discharge following surgery in the COVID-19 pandemic and offer insights for management of patients who undergo nonelective surgery in a nonpandemic setting. Knowledge dissemination will be supported through an online multimedia resource centre, policy briefs, presentations, peer-reviewed journal publications and media engagement. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, no. NCT04344665.

Predicting Myocardial Injury and Other Cardiac Complications After Elective Noncardiac Surgery with the Revised Cardiac Risk Index: The VISION Study.

BACKGROUND: The Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) is widely used to estimate risk of cardiac complications after noncardiac surgery; its estimates do not capture myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery (MINS). We evaluated the incidence of cardiac complications including MINS across RCRI risk classes and the RCRI's ability to discriminate, before surgery, between patients who will experience these complications and those who will not. METHODS: This was a secondary analysis of a prospective cohort study of 35,815 patients ≥ 45 years old who had elective inpatient noncardiac surgery from 2007 to 2013 at 28 centres in 14 countries. The primary outcome was a composite of MINS, myocardial infarction, nonfatal cardiac arrest, or cardiac death within 30 days after surgery. The secondary outcome was this composite without MINS. RESULTS: The primary outcome occurred in 4725 patients (13.2%); its incidences across RCRI classes I (no risk factors), II (1 risk factor), III (2 risk factors), and IV (≥ 3 risk factors) were, respectively, 8.2%, 15.4%, 26.6%, and 40.2% (C-statistic for discrimination 0.65 [95% confidence interval 0.62-0.68]). The secondary outcome occurred in 1174 patients (3.3%) with incidences of 1.6%, 4.0%, 7.9%, and 12.9%, respectively (C-statistic 0.69 [0.65-0.72]). Thirty-five percent of primary outcome events and 26.9% of secondary outcome events occurred in patients with no RCRI risk factors. CONCLUSION: The RCRI alone is not sufficient to guide postoperative cardiac monitoring because 1 in 12 patients ≥ 45 years of age without any RCRI risk factors have a cardiac complication after major noncardiac surgery, and most of them would be missed without systematic troponin testing.