Defining indications for selective chest radiography in the first 24 hours after cardiac surgery.

OBJECTIVE: In the intensive-care unit (ICU), chest radiographs (CXRs) are frequently obtained routinely for postoperative cardiac surgery patients, despite the fact that the efficacy of routine CXRs is known to be low. We investigated the efficacy and safety of CXRs performed after cardiac surgery for specified indications only. METHODS: In this observational cohort study, we prospectively included all patients who underwent conventional major cardiac surgery by median sternotomy in the year 2012. On-demand CXRs could be obtained during the first postoperative period for specified indications only. A routine control CXR was performed on the morning of the first postoperative day for all patients who had not undergone a CXR before that time. The diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy values were calculated for all CXRs. Differences were tested using Fisher's exact test or χ(2) analysis. RESULTS: A total of 1102 consecutive cardiac surgery patients were included in this study. The diagnostic efficacy of CXRs for major abnormalities was higher for the postoperative on-demand CXRs (n = 301; 27%) than for the routine CXRs taken the morning after surgery (n = 801; 73%) (6.6% vs 2.7%, P = .004). The therapeutic efficacy was higher for the on-demand CXRs, whereas the need for intervention after the next-morning, routine CXRs was limited to 5 patients (4.0% vs 0.6%, P < .001). None of these patients experienced a major adverse event. CONCLUSIONS: Defining clear indications for selective CXRs after cardiac surgery is effective and seems to be safe. This approach may significantly reduce the total number of CXRs performed, and will increase their efficacy.

The value of routine chest radiographs after minimally invasive cardiac surgery: an observational cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Chest radiographs (CXRs) are obtained frequently in postoperative cardiac surgery patients. The diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy of routine CXRs is known to be low and the discussion regarding the safety of abandoning these CXRs after cardiac surgery is still ongoing. We investigated the value of routine CXRs directly after minimally invasive cardiac surgery. METHODS: We prospectively included all patients who underwent minimally invasive cardiac surgery by port access, ministernotomy or bilateral video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS) in the year 2012. A direct postoperative CXR was performed on all patients at ICU arrival. All CXR findings were noted, including whether they led to an intervention or not. The results were compared to the postoperative CXR results in patients who underwent conventional cardiac surgery by full median sternotomy over the same period. MAIN RESULTS: A total of 249 consecutive patients were included. Most of these patients underwent valve surgery, rhythm surgery or a combination of both. The diagnostic efficacy for minor findings was highest in the port access and bilateral VATS groups (56% and 63% versus 28% and 45%) (p < 0.005). The diagnostic efficacy for major findings was also higher in these groups (8.9% and 11% versus 4.3% and 3.8%) (p = 0.010). The need for an intervention was most common after minimally invasive surgery by port access, although this difference was not statistically significant (p = 0.056). CONCLUSIONS: The diagnostic efficacy of routine CXRs performed after minimally invasive cardiac surgery by port access or bilateral VATS is higher than the efficacy of CXRs performed after conventional cardiac surgery. A routine CXR after these procedures should still be considered.

Significant changes in the practice of chest radiography in Dutch intensive care units: a web-based survey.

BACKGROUND: ICU patients frequently undergo chest radiographs (CXRs). The diagnostic and therapeutic efficacy of routine CXRs are now known to be low, but the discussion regarding specific indications for CXRs in critically ill patients and the safety of abandoning routine CXRs is still ongoing. We performed a survey of Dutch intensivists on the current practice of chest radiography in their departments. METHODS: Web-based questionnaires, containing questions regarding ICU characteristics, ICU patients, daily CXR strategies, indications for routine CXRs and the practice of radiologic evaluation, were sent to the medical directors of all adult ICUs in the Netherlands. CXR strategies were compared between all academic and non-academic hospitals and between ICUs of different sizes. A comparison was made between the survey results obtained in 2006 and 2013. RESULTS: Of the 83 ICUs that were contacted, 69 (83%) responded to the survey. Only 7% of responding ICUs were currently performing daily routine CXRs for all patients, and 61% of the responding ICUs were said never to perform CXRs on a routine basis. A daily meeting with a radiologist is an established practice in 72% of the responding ICUs and is judged to be important or even essential by those ICUs. The therapeutic efficacy of routine CXRs was assumed by intensivists to be lower than 10% or to be between 10 and 20%. The efficacy of 'on-demand' CXRs was assumed to be between 10 and 60%. There is a consensus between intensivists to perform a routine CXR after endotracheal intubation, chest tube placement or central venous catheterization. CONCLUSION: The strategy of daily routine CXRs for critically ill and mechanically ventilated patients has turned from being a common practice in 2006 to a rare current practice. Other routine strategies and an 'on-demand only' strategy have become more popular. Intensivists still assume the value of CXRs to be higher than the efficacy that is reported in the literature.

The clinical value of routine chest radiographs in the first 24 hours after cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Chest radiographs (CXRs) are obtained frequently in the intensive care unit (ICU). Whether these CXRs should be performed routinely or on clinical indication only is often debated. The aim of our study was to investigate the incidence and clinical significance of abnormalities found on routine postoperative CXRs in cardiac surgery patients and whether a restricted use of CXRs would influence the number of significant findings. METHODS: We prospectively included all consecutive patients who underwent cardiac surgery during a 2-month period. Two or three CXRs were performed in the first 24 hours of ICU stay. After ICU admission and after drain removal, a clinical assessment was performed before a CXR was obtained. All CXR abnormalities were noted and it was also noted whether they led to an intervention. For the admission CXR and the drain removal CXR, a comparison was made between CXRs clinically indicated by the physician and those not clinically indicated. RESULTS: Two hundred fourteen patients were included. The majority of patients underwent coronary arterial bypass grafting (60%), heart valve surgery (21%), or a combination of these (14%). In total, 534 CXRs were performed (2.5 per patient). Abnormalities were found on 179 CXRs (33.5%) and 13 CXR results led to an intervention (2.4%). The association between clinically indicated CXRs and the presence of CXR abnormalities was poor. For 32 (10%) of the 321 admission and drain removal CXRs, clinical indications were stated by the physician beforehand. If these CXRs would not have been performed routinely, 68 abnormalities would have been missed, of which 5 led to an intervention. CONCLUSIONS: Partial elimination of routine CXRs in the first 24 hours after cardiac surgery seems possible for the majority of patients, but it is limited by the insensitivity of clinical assessment in predicting clinically important abnormalities detectable by CXRs.