Peri-operative tobacco cessation interventions: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Tobacco smoking is associated with a substantially increased risk of postoperative complications. The peri-operative period offers a unique opportunity to support patients to stop tobacco smoking, avoid complications and improve long-term health. This systematic review provides an up-to-date summary of the evidence for tobacco cessation interventions in surgical patients. We conducted a systematic search of randomised controlled trials of tobacco cessation interventions in the peri-operative period. Quantitative synthesis of the abstinence outcomes data was by random-effects meta-analysis. The primary outcome of the meta-analysis was abstinence at the time of surgery, and the secondary outcome was abstinence at 12 months. Thirty-eight studies are included in the review (7310 randomised participants) and 26 studies are included in the meta-analysis (5969 randomised participants). Studies were pooled for subgroup analysis in two ways: by the timing of intervention delivery within the peri-operative period and by the intensity of the intervention protocol. We judged the quality of evidence as moderate, reflecting the degree of heterogeneity and the high risk of bias. Overall, peri-operative tobacco cessation interventions increased successful abstinence both at the time of surgery, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.48 (1.20-1.83), number needed to treat 7; and 12 months after surgery, risk ratio (95%CI) 1.62 (1.29-2.03), number needed to treat 9. More work is needed to inform the design and optimal delivery of interventions that are acceptable to patients and that can be incorporated into contemporary elective and urgent surgical pathways. Future trials should use standardised outcome measures.

Peripheral arterial disease (PAD) - A challenging manifestation of atherosclerosis.

The diagnosis of peripheral arterial disease (PAD) is not always evident as symptoms and signs may show great variation. As all grades of PAD are linked to both an increased risk for cardiovascular complications and adverse limb events, awareness of the condition and knowledge about diagnostic measures, prevention and treatment is crucial. This article presents in a condensed form information on PAD and its management.

Effectiveness of emergency surgery for five common acute conditions: an instrumental variable analysis of a national routine database.

The effectiveness of emergency surgery vs. non-emergency surgery strategies for emergency admissions with acute appendicitis, gallstone disease, diverticular disease, abdominal wall hernia or intestinal obstruction is unknown. Data on emergency admissions for adult patients from 2010 to 2019 at 175 acute National Health Service hospitals in England were extracted from the Hospital Episode Statistics database. Cohort sizes were: 268,144 (appendicitis); 240,977 (gallstone disease); 138,869 (diverticular disease); 106,432 (hernia); and 133,073 (intestinal obstruction). The primary outcome was number of days alive and out of hospital at 90 days. The effectiveness of emergency surgery vs. non-emergency surgery strategies was estimated using an instrumental variable design and is reported for the cohort and pre-specified sub-groups (age, sex, number of comorbidities and frailty level). Average days alive and out of hospital at 90 days for all five cohorts were similar, with the following mean differences (95%CI) for emergency surgery minus non-emergency surgery after adjusting for confounding: -0.73 days (-2.10-0.64) for appendicitis; 0.60 (-0.10-1.30) for gallstone disease; -2.66 (-15.7-10.4) for diverticular disease; -0.07 (-2.40-2.25) for hernia; and 3.32 (-3.13-9.76) for intestinal obstruction. For patients with 'severe frailty', mean differences (95%CI) in days alive and out of hospital for emergency surgery were lower than for non-emergency surgery strategies: -21.0 (-27.4 to -14.6) for appendicitis; -5.72 (-11.3 to -0.2) for gallstone disease, -38.9 (-63.3 to -14.6) for diverticular disease; -19.5 (-26.6 to -12.3) for hernia; and - 34.5 (-46.7 to -22.4) for intestinal obstruction. For patients without frailty, the mean differences (95%CI) in days alive and out of hospital were: -0.18 (-1.56-1.20) for appendicitis; 0.93 (0.48-1.39) for gallstone disease; 5.35 (-2.56-13.28) for diverticular disease; 2.26 (0.37-4.15) for hernia; and 18.2 (14.8-22.47) for intestinal obstruction. Emergency surgery and non-emergency surgery strategies led to similar average days alive and out of hospital at 90 days for five acute conditions. The comparative effectiveness of emergency surgery and non-emergency surgery strategies for these conditions may be modified by patient factors.

Routinely collected data and patient-centred research in anaesthesia and peri-operative care: a narrative review.

Randomised controlled trials are the gold standard in clinical research, but remain rare due to their expense and a perceived lack of 'real-world' applicability. At the same time, there has been an exponential increase in routinely collected data which presents opportunities for audit, quality improvement, adverse event reporting and more efficient clinical research. Registry-based research benefits from reduced cost, large sample size and real-world applicability, with methodological developments, particularly registry-based randomised controlled trials and causal inference techniques, showing promise. Limitations include data quality and validity, the need for data linkage, the restrictions of fixed data fields, regulatory barriers, and privacy and security concerns. However, the principal factor hampering current efforts is a lack of anaesthesia-specific datasets in the UK and the fact that most surgical registries do not collect any anaesthetic data. This presents an opportunity for anaesthetists, through enhanced engagement and collaboration, to influence and improve the design of these datasets and increase the value and volume of data collected. Better datasets, coupled with a growing appreciation of new analysis methodologies, would allow significant progress towards realising the potential of routinely collected data for patient benefit. At the same time, work should begin on the development of a minimum dataset for anaesthesia to underpin new data sharing networks and, ideally, a national registry of anaesthesia.

A systematic review of reporting quality for anaesthetic interventions in randomised controlled trials.

Interventions from randomised controlled trials can only be replicated if they are reported in sufficient detail. The results of trials can only be confidently interpreted if the delivery of the intervention was systematic and the protocol adhered to. We systematically reviewed trials of anaesthetic interventions published in 12 journals from January 2016 to September 2019. We assessed the detail with which interventions were reported, using the Consolidated Standards of Reporting Trials statement for non-pharmacological treatments. We analysed 162 interventions reported by 78 trials in 18,675 participants. Detail sufficiently precise to replicate the intervention was reported for 111 (69%) interventions. Intervention standardisation was reported for 135 (83%) out of the 162 interventions, and protocol adherence was reported for 20 (12%) interventions. Sixty (77%) out of the 78 trials reported the administrative context in which interventions were delivered and 36 (46%) trials detailed the expertise of the practitioners. We conclude that bespoke reporting tools should be developed for anaesthetic interventions and interventions in other areas such as critical care.

Regional anaesthesia practice for arteriovenous fistula formation surgery.

We conducted a survey and semi-structured qualitative interviews to investigate current anaesthetic practice for arteriovenous fistula formation surgery in the UK. Responses were received from 39 out of 59 vascular centres where arteriovenous access surgery is performed, a response rate of 66%. Thirty-five centres reported routine use of brachial plexus blocks, but variation in anaesthetic skill-mix and practice were observed. Interviews were conducted with 19 clinicians from 10 NHS Trusts including anaesthetists, vascular access and renal nurses, surgeons and nephrologists. Thematic analysis identified five key findings: (1) current anaesthetic practice showed that centres could be classified as 'regional anaesthesia dominant' or 'local anaesthesia/mixed'; (2) decision making around mode of anaesthesia highlighted the key role of surgeons as frontline decision makers across both centre types; (3) perceived barriers and facilitators of regional block use included clinicians' beliefs and preferences, resource considerations and patients' treatment preferences; (4) anaesthetists' preference for supraclavicular blocks emerged, alongside acknowledgement of varied practice; (5) there was widespread support for a future randomised controlled trial, although clinician equipoise issues and logistical/resource-related concerns were viewed as potential challenges. The use of regional anaesthesia for arteriovenous fistula formation in the UK is varied and influenced by a multitude of factors. Despite the availability of anaesthetists capable of performing regional blocks, there are other limiting factors that influence the routine use of this technique. The study also highlighted the perceived need for a large multicentre, randomised controlled trial to provide an evidence base to inform current practice.

Scoping review of mode of anaesthesia in emergency surgery.

BACKGROUND: Emergency surgery encompasses more than 50 per cent of the surgical workload; however, research efforts are disproportionally low. The mode of anaesthesia used during emergency surgery may affect outcomes, but the extent of research and the impact of the different modes of anaesthesia used are unclear. METHODS: MEDLINE and Embase were searched using scoping review methodology with a rapid systematic search strategy, identifying any study comparing locoregional (local, nerve block, subarachnoid, epidural) anaesthesia with general anaesthesia. All studies describing outcomes of emergency surgery with differing modes of anaesthesia were identified. Excluded were: studies published before 2003, studies enrolling patients aged less than 18 years and studies using sedation only. RESULTS: Forty-two studies were identified, describing 11 surgical procedures. Most publications were retrospective cohort studies (32). A very broad range of clinical and patient-reported outcomes were described, with wide variation in the outcomes reported in different studies. CONCLUSION: Reporting of mode of anaesthesia is inconsistent across different procedures and is often absent. There is a need for directed research efforts to improve the reporting standards of anaesthesia interventions, to understand the role of different modes of anaesthesia in specific emergency surgical procedures, and to standardize outcome reporting using core outcome sets.

ANTECEDENTES: La cirugía de urgencias constituye > 50% de la carga de trabajo quirúrgico, aunque los esfuerzos realizados en investigación en este ámbito son desproporcionadamente bajos. La modalidad de anestesia utilizada durante la cirugía de urgencias puede afectar a los resultados, sin embargo, la investigación realizada y el impacto de los diferentes tipos de anestesia utilizados no están claros. MÉTODOS: Se realizaron búsquedas en Medline y Embase utilizando una metodología enfocada a la recuperación de revisiones, con una estrategia de búsqueda sistemática rápida, identificando cualquier estudio que comparara la anestesia locorregional (local, bloqueo nervioso, subaracnoidea, epidural) con la anestesia general. Se identificaron todos los estudios que describían los resultados de la cirugía de urgencias con diferentes tipos de anestesia. Se excluyeron los estudios publicados antes del 2003, los estudios que reclutaron pacientes < 18 años y los estudios que solo usaron sedación. RESULTADOS: Se identificaron 42 estudios que describían 11 procedimientos quirúrgicos. La mayoría de publicaciones fueron estudios de cohortes retrospectivos (n = 32). Se describió una gama muy amplia de resultados clínicos y resultados aportados por los pacientes, con una amplia variación en los resultados de los diferentes estudios. CONCLUSIÓN: Los resultados publicados respecto a la modalidad de anestesia empleada en diferentes procedimientos quirúrgicos son inconsistentes, a menudo esta información está ausente y no se pueden establecer conclusiones sobre el impacto del tipo de anestesia en los resultados. Es necesario realizar esfuerzos dirigidos a la investigación para mejorar la notificación de los estándares de los procedimientos de anestesia, comprender el papel de los diferentes tipos de anestesia en los procedimientos quirúrgicos específicos de urgencias, y estandarizar la presentación de los resultados obtenidos utilizando un conjunto de datos principales.

Qualitative study of clinician and patient perspectives on the mode of anaesthesia for emergency surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although delivering a chosen mode of anaesthesia for certain emergency surgery procedures is potentially beneficial to patients, it is a complex intervention to evaluate. This qualitative study explored clinician and patient perspectives about mode of anaesthesia for emergency surgery. METHODS: Snowball sampling was used to recruit participants from eight National Health Service Trusts that cover the following three emergency surgery settings: ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms, hip fractures and inguinal hernias. A qualitative researcher conducted interviews with clinicians and patients. Thematic analysis was applied to the interview transcripts. RESULTS: Interviews were conducted with 21 anaesthetists, 21 surgeons, 14 operating theatre staff and 23 patients. There were two main themes. The first, impact of mode of anaesthesia in emergency surgery, had four subthemes assessing clinician and patient ideas about: context and the 'best' mode of anaesthesia; balance in choosing it over others; change and developments in anaesthesia; and the importance of mode of anaesthesia in emergency surgery. The second, tensions in decision-making about mode of anaesthesia, comprised four subthemes: clinical autonomy and guidelines in anaesthesia; conforming to norms in mode of anaesthesia; the relationship between expertise, preference and patient involvement; and team dynamics in emergency surgery. The results highlight several interlinking factors affecting decision-making, including expertise, preference, habit, practicalities, norms and policies. CONCLUSION: There is variation in practice in choosing the mode of anaesthesia for surgery, alongside debate as to whether anaesthetic autonomy is necessary or results in a lack of willingness to change.

ANTECEDENTES: Si bien determinados tipos de anestesia en ciertos procedimientos quirúrgicos de urgencia pueden ser potencialmente beneficiosos para los pacientes, la decisión de su utilización es difícil de evaluar. Este estudio cualitativo exploró las perspectivas del clínico y del paciente sobre sobre el tipo de anestesia en cirugía de urgencia. MÉTODOS: Se utilizó un muestreo de bola de nieve para reclutar participantes de 8 corporaciones del National Health Service (NHS) que cubrían tres entornos de cirugía de urgencia: rotura de aneurismas aórticos abdominales, fracturas de cadera y hernias inguinales. Un investigador cualitativo realizó 79 entrevistas a 21 anestesistas, 21 cirujanos, 14 técnicos de quirófano y 23 pacientes. Se realizó un análisis de las transcripciones de la entrevista por temas. RESULTADOS: Dos fueron los temas principales. El primero era el impacto del tipo de anestesia en la cirugía de urgencia y tenía 4 subtemas que evaluaban las ideas del clínico y del paciente sobre: el contexto y el mejor tipo de anestesia, las ventajas e inconvenientes de la elección de un tipo sobre los otros, los cambios y avances en anestesia, y la importancia de la anestesia en cirugía de urgencias. El segundo era las dificultades en la toma de decisiones sobre el tipo de anestesia y comprendía 4 subtemas: la autonomía clínica y las guías de anestesia, el seguimiento de las normas en el tipo de anestesia, la relación entre experiencia, preferencia y opinión del paciente, así como las dinámicas del equipo en cirugía de urgencia. Los resultados resaltaron varios factores interconectados que afectan la toma de decisiones, incluyen la experiencia, las preferencias, los hábitos, algunos aspectos prácticos, las normas y las políticas. CONCLUSIÓN: En la práctica, existen variaciones en la elección del tipo de anestesia para la cirugía, junto con el debate sobre si la autonomía anestésica es necesaria o si resulta en una falta de voluntad para el cambio.

Umbrella review and meta-analysis of antiplatelet therapy for peripheral artery disease.

BACKGROUND: The literature on antiplatelet therapy for peripheral artery disease has historically been summarized inconsistently, leading to conflict between international guidelines. An umbrella review and meta-analysis was performed to summarize the literature, allow assessment of competing safety risks and clinical benefits, and identify weak areas for future research. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, DARE, PROSPERO and Cochrane databases were searched from inception until January 2019. All meta-analyses of antiplatelet therapy in peripheral artery disease were included. Quality was assessed using AMSTAR scores, and GRADE analysis was used to quantify the strength of evidence. Data were pooled using random-effects models. RESULTS: Twenty-eight meta-analyses were included. Thirty-three clinical outcomes and 41 antiplatelet comparisons in 72 181 patients were analysed. High-quality evidence showed that antiplatelet monotherapy reduced non-fatal strokes (3 (95 per cent c.i. 0 to 6) fewer per 1000 patients), In symptomatic patients, it reduced cardiovascular deaths (8 (0 to 16) fewer per 1000 patients), but increased the risk of major bleeding (7 (3 to 14) more events per 1000). In asymptomatic patients, monotherapy reduced non-fatal strokes (5 (0 to 8) fewer per 1000), but had no other clinical benefit. Dual antiplatelet therapy caused more major bleeding after intervention than monotherapy (37 (8 to 102) more events per 1000), with very low-quality evidence of improved endovascular patency (risk ratio 4·00, 95 per cent c.i. 0·91 to 17·68). CONCLUSION: Antiplatelet monotherapy has minimal clinical benefit for asymptomatic peripheral artery disease, and limited benefit for symptomatic disease, with a clear risk of major bleeding. There is a lack of evidence to guide antiplatelet prescribing after peripheral endovascular intervention.

ANTECEDENTES: Históricamente, la literatura del tratamiento antiplaquetario en la enfermedad arterial periférica se ha sintetizado inconsistentemente, lo que ha dado lugar a divergencias entre las guías internacionales. Se efectuó una amplia revision con metaanálisis para sintetizar claramente la literatura, permitiendo evaluar los riesgos competitivos de seguridad y los beneficios clínicos, e identificar áreas poco claras susceptibles de futuras investigaciones. MÉTODOS: La búsqueda se realizó en las bases de datos MEDLINE, EMBASE, DARE, PROSPERO y Cochrane desde su inicio hasta enero de 2019. Se incluyeron todos los metaanálisis del tratamiento antiplaquetario en la enfermedad arterial periférica. Se estimó su calidad utilizando la puntuación Amstar y la consistencia de su evidencia mediante el sistema GRADE. Los datos se agruparon utilizando modelos de efectos aleatorios. RESULTADOS: Se incluyeron 28 metaanálisis. Se analizaron 33 resultados clínicos y 41 comparaciones antiplaquetarias en 72.181 pacientes. Una evidencia de alta calidad demostró que la monoterapia antiplaquetaria reducía los accidentes cerebrovasculares no mortales y la muerte cardiovascular en pacientes sintomáticos (3 y 8 veces menos por 1.000 pacientes, respectivamente, i.c. del 95% 0-6 y 0-16), pero aumentó el riesgo de hemorragia grave (7 veces más por 1.000, i.c. del 95% 3-14). En pacientes asintomáticos, la monoterapia redujo los accidentes cerebrovasculares no mortales (5 veces menos por 1.000, i.c. del 95% 0-8) sin otro beneficio clínico. El doble tratamiento antiplaquetario causó más hemorragias graves después de cualquier intervención que la monoterapia (37 veces más por 1.000, i.c. del 95% 8-102), con una evidencia de muy baja calidad acerca de la mejoría de la permeabilidad endovascular (riesgo relativo 4,00, i.c. del 95% 0,91-17,68). CONCLUSIÓN: La monoterapia antiplaquetaria tiene un beneficio clínico mínimo en la enfermedad arterial periférica asintomática y un beneficio limitado en la sintomática, con un claro riesgo de hemorragia grave. No existe evidencia para recomendar la prescripción de antiagregantes plaquetarios después de una intervención endovascular periférica, situación que debería abordarse en ensayos aleatorizados con una potencia estadística adecuada.

Local anaesthesia for endovascular repair of ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: Case series and a post hoc subgroup analysis of a large randomized trial have suggested a potential benefit in treating ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysms (rAAAs) using endovascular aneurysm repair (EVAR) with local anaesthesia (LA) rather than general anaesthesia (GA). The uptake and outcomes of LA in clinical practice remain unknown. METHODS: The UK National Vascular Registry was interrogated for patients presenting with rAAA managed with EVAR under different modes of anaesthesia between 1 January 2014 and 31 December 2016. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality. Secondary outcomes included: the number of centres performing EVAR under LA; the proportion of patients receiving this technique; duration of hospital stay; and postoperative complications. RESULTS: Some 3101 patients with rAAA were treated in 72 hospitals during the study: 2306 underwent on open procedure and 795 had EVAR (LA, 319; GA, 435; regional anaesthesia, 41). Overall, 56 of 72 hospitals (78 per cent) offered LA for EVAR of rAAA. Baseline characteristics and morphology were similar across the three EVAR subgroups. Patients who had surgery under LA had a lower in-hospital mortality rate than patients who received GA (59 of 319 (18·5 per cent) versus 122 of 435 (28·0 per cent)), and this was unchanged after adjustment for factors known to influence survival (adjusted hazard ratio 0·62, 95 per cent c.i. 0·45 to 0·85; P = 0·003). Median hospital stay and postoperative morbidity from other complications were similar. CONCLUSION: The use of LA for EVAR of rAAA has been adopted widely in the UK. Mortality rates appear lower than in patients undergoing EVAR with GA.

Value of risk scores in the decision to palliate patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm.

BACKGROUND: The aim of this study was to develop a 48-h mortality risk score, which included morphology data, for patients with ruptured abdominal aortic aneurysm presenting to an emergency department, and to assess its predictive accuracy and clinical effectiveness in triaging patients to immediate aneurysm repair, transfer or palliative care. METHODS: Data from patients in the IMPROVE (Immediate Management of the Patient With Ruptured Aneurysm: Open Versus Endovascular Repair) randomized trial were used to develop the risk score. Variables considered included age, sex, haemodynamic markers and aortic morphology. Backwards selection was used to identify relevant predictors. Predictive performance was assessed using calibration plots and the C-statistic. Validation of the newly developed and other previously published scores was conducted in four external populations. The net benefit of treating patients based on a risk threshold compared with treating none was quantified. RESULTS: Data from 536 patients in the IMPROVE trial were included. The final variables retained were age, sex, haemoglobin level, serum creatinine level, systolic BP, aortic neck length and angle, and acute myocardial ischaemia. The discrimination of the score for 48-h mortality in the IMPROVE data was reasonable (C-statistic 0·710, 95 per cent c.i. 0·659 to 0·760), but varied in external populations (from 0·652 to 0·761). The new score outperformed other published risk scores in some, but not all, populations. An 8 (95 per cent c.i. 5 to 11) per cent improvement in the C-statistic was estimated compared with using age alone. CONCLUSION: The assessed risk scores did not have sufficient accuracy to enable potentially life-saving decisions to be made regarding intervention. Focus should therefore shift to offering repair to more patients and reducing non-intervention rates, while respecting the wishes of the patient and family.

Clinical examination and non-invasive screening tests in the diagnosis of peripheral artery disease in people with diabetes-related foot ulceration.

AIM: Peripheral artery disease is common in people with diabetes-related foot ulceration and is a risk factor for amputation. The best method for the detection or exclusion of peripheral artery disease is unknown. This study investigated the utility of clinical examination and non-invasive bedside tests in screening for peripheral artery disease in diabetes-related foot ulceration. METHODS: Some 60 people presenting with new-onset ulceration participated. Accuracy of pulses, ankle pressure, toe pressure, toe-brachial index (TBI), ankle-brachial pressure index (ABPI), pole test at ankle, transcutaneous oxygen pressure and distal tibial waveform on ultrasound were examined. The gold standard diagnostic test used was > 50% stenosis in any artery or monophasic flow distal to calcification in any ipsilateral vessel on duplex ultrasound. RESULTS: The negative and positive likelihood ratios of pedal pulse assessment (0.75, 1.38) and the other clinical assessment tools were poor. The negative and positive likelihood ratios of ABPI (0.53, 1.69), transcutaneous oxygen pressure (1.10, 0.81) and ankle pressure (0.67, 2.25) were unsatisfactory. The lowest negative likelihood ratios were for tibial waveform assessment (0.15) and TBI (0.24). The highest positive likelihood ratios were for toe pressure (17.55) and pole test at the ankle (10.29) but the negative likelihood ratios were poor at 0.56 and 0.74. CONCLUSIONS: Pulse assessment and ABPI have limited utility in the detection of peripheral artery disease in people with diabetes foot ulceration. TBI and distal tibial waveforms are useful for selecting those needing diagnostic testing.