A Clinical Comparison of 2 Bronchial Blockers Versus Double-Lumen Tubes for One-Lung Ventilation.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the quality of lung collapse, time, and number of attempts required to achieve lung isolation, and incidence of intraoperative malpositioning between the EZ blocker (EZB), Fuji Uniblocker (UB), and the left-sided double lumen tube (DLT). DESIGN: Prospective, randomized clinical trial. SETTING: Single tertiary-level, university-affiliated hospital. PARTICIPANTS: Eighty-nine patients undergoing elective open thoracotomies or video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery. INTERVENTIONS: The 89 patients were randomized to receive a DLT, UB, or EZB for one-lung ventilation. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The quality of lung collapse at the time of pleural opening and 10 and 20 minutes thereafter were assessed by the surgeon using the Lung Collapse Score (LCS; 0 = no lung collapse to 10 = best lung collapse). The time and number of attempts required to achieve lung isolation and the number of repositions required during surgery were measured. Tracheobronchial tree measurements were performed by radiologists from preoperative computed tomography imaging. The surgeon remained blinded to the type of device used. Twenty-nine patients were randomized to the DLT group and 30 patients to each of the EZB and UB groups. The LCSs among the groups at pleural opening and 10 minutes after pleural opening were not significantly different (p = 0.34 and p = 0.08, respectively). However, at 20 minutes after the pleural opening, the LCSs were significantly different among groups (p = 0.02), with median scores being significantly lower for DLT (9 [IQR 8-9]) than for EZB (9 [IQR 9-10]; p = 0.04) and UB (9.5 [IQR 9-10]; p = 0.02). Lung isolation was achieved fastest in the DLT group (p < 0.01). The frequency of difficult placement did not significantly differ among groups, although it occurred most frequently in UB (n = 7; 23.3%). Intraoperative repositioning also occurred most often with the UB (n = 15; 50.0%). The EZB had the greatest number of cases requiring >2 repositions (n = 4, 13.3%). There were no differences between preoperative airway measurements and time to isolation or incidence of intraoperative repositioning among the groups. CONCLUSIONS: The LCS was comparable among the 3 devices until 20 minutes after pleural opening, when better scores were obtained in the bronchial blocker groups. Lung isolation was achieved fastest with the DLT. The EZB had the highest incidence of cases requiring >2 intraoperative repositions, mostly occurring in R-sided surgery. For L-sided surgery, the EZB performed equally to the UB. This suggests that using the EZB for R-sided video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery may be suboptimal. Preoperative airway dimensions did not correlate with time to achieve isolation or incidence of intraoperative malpositioning.

Thoracic anaesthetic research: 90 years of sustained progress.

Over the 90 years since the first description of one-lung ventilation, the practice of thoracic surgery and anaesthesia continues to develop. Minimally invasive surgical techniques are increasingly being used to minimise the surgical insult and facilitate improved outcomes. Challenging these outcomes, however, are parallel changes in patient characteristics with more older and sicker patients undergoing surgery. Thoracic anaesthesia as a speciality continues to respond to these challenges with evolution of practice and strong academic performance.

Tidal volume during 1-lung ventilation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The selection of tidal volumes for 1-lung ventilation remains unclear, because there exists a trade-off between oxygenation and risk of lung injury. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis to determine how oxygenation, compliance, and clinical outcomes are affected by tidal volume during 1-lung ventilation. METHODS: A systematic search of MEDLINE and EMBASE was performed. A systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis was conducted. Pooled mean difference estimated arterial oxygen tension, compliance, and length of stay; pooled odds ratio was calculated for composite postoperative pulmonary complications. Risk of bias was determined using the Cochrane risk of bias and Newcastle-Ottawa tools. RESULTS: Eighteen studies were identified, comprising 3693 total patients. Low tidal volumes (5.6 [±0.9] mL/kg) were not associated with significant differences in partial pressure of oxygen (-15.64 [-88.53-57.26] mm Hg; P = .67), arterial oxygen tension to fractional intake of oxygen ratio (14.71 [-7.83-37.24]; P = .20), or compliance (2.03 [-5.22-9.27] mL/cmH2O; P = .58) versus conventional tidal volume ventilation (8.1 [±3.1] mL/kg). Low versus conventional tidal volume ventilation had no significant impact on hospital length of stay (-0.42 [-1.60-0.77] days; P = .49). Low tidal volumes are associated with significantly decreased odds of pulmonary complications (pooled odds ratio, 0.40 [0.29-0.57]; P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Low tidal volumes during 1-lung ventilation do not worsen oxygenation or compliance. A low tidal volume ventilation strategy during 1-lung ventilation was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative pulmonary complications.

"Fit for Surgery? What's New in Preoperative Assessment of the High-Risk Patient Undergoing Pulmonary Resection".

Advances in perioperative assessment and diagnostics, together with developments in anesthetic and surgical techniques, have considerably expanded the pool of patients who may be suitable for pulmonary resection. Thoracic surgical patients frequently are perceived to be at high perioperative risk due to advanced age, level of comorbidity, and the risks associated with pulmonary resection, which predispose them to a significantly increased risk of perioperative complications, increased healthcare resource use, and costs. The definition of what is considered "fit for surgery" in thoracic surgery continually is being challenged. However, no internationally standardized definition of prohibitive risk exists. Perioperative assessment traditionally concentrates on the "three-legged stool" of pulmonary mechanical function, parenchymal function, and cardiopulmonary reserve. However, no single criterion should exclude a patient from surgery, and there are other perioperative factors in addition to the tripartite assessment that need to be considered in order to more accurately assess functional capacity and predict individual perioperative risk. In this review, the authors aim to address some of the more erudite concepts that are important in preoperative risk assessment of the patient at potentially prohibitive risk undergoing pulmonary resection for malignancy.

Positive end-expiratory pressure and recruitment maneuvers during one-lung ventilation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: It is unclear how positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) and recruitment maneuvers impact patients during one-lung ventilation (OLV). We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the effect of lung recruitment and PEEP on ventilation and oxygenation during OLV. METHODS: A systematic review and random-effects meta-analysis were performed. Mean difference with standard deviation was calculated. Included studies were evaluated for quality and risk of bias using the Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the modified Newcastle-Ottawa Score where appropriate. RESULTS: In total, 926 articles were identified, of which 16 were included in meta-analysis. Recruitment maneuvers increased arterial oxygen tension (PaO2) by 82 mm Hg [20, 144 mm Hg] and reduced dead-space by 5.9% [3.8, 8.0%]. PEEP increased PaO2 by 30.3 mm Hg [11.9, 48.6 mm Hg]. Subgroup analysis showed a significant increase in PaO2 (P = .0003; +35.4 mm Hg [16.2, 54.5 mm Hg]) with PEEP compared with no PEEP but no such difference in comparisons with PEEP-treated controls. No significant difference in PaO2 was observed between "high" and "low" PEEP-treated subgroups (P = .29). No significant improvement in PaO2 was observed for subgroups coadministered PEEP, lung recruitment, and low tidal volumes. PEEP was associated with a modest but statistically significant increase in compliance (P = .03; 4.33 mL/cmH2O [0.33, 8.32]). High risk of bias was identified in the majority of studies. Considerable heterogeneity was observed. CONCLUSIONS: Recruitment maneuvers and PEEP have physiologic advantages during OLV. The optimal use of PEEP is yet to be determined. The evidence is limited by heavy use of surrogate outcomes. Future studies with clinical outcomes are necessary to determine the impact of recruitment maneuvers and PEEP during OLV.

Preoperative Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation and Plasmapheresis for Urgent Pulmonary Endarterectomy in Heparin-Induced Thrombocytopenia-Positive Patient.

Pulmonary endarterectomy is the treatment of choice for chronic thromboembolic pulmonary hypertension. This case report outlines the importance of venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation and plasmapheresis as two important options in the management of heparin-induced thrombocytopenia-positive patients requiring urgent pulmonary endarterectomy.

Intraoperative and Early Postoperative Management of Heart Transplantation: Anesthetic Implications.

The gold standard treatment for end-stage heart failure, with 50% mortality within 5 years of diagnosis, is considered heart transplantation. Despite the improvements in immunosuppression, the period of highest mortality risk in the heart transplantation population is during the first year post-transplantation, with primary graft dysfunction being the leading cause of mortality. After adequate preoperative assessment of the recipient, including patients on mechanical support, the intraoperative care of heart transplantation patients requires extensive monitoring followed by proficient management of anesthesia induction and maintenance, ventilation, and fluid therapy. The focus on weaning from cardiopulmonary bypass should be on preventing right ventricular failure and high pulmonary vascular resistances, with protocolized blood conservation strategies and transfusion protocols. The early postoperative care of a heart transplantation patient is focused on the post-cardiopulmonary bypass and transplantation status, with particular attention to the presence of primary graft dysfunction, right ventricular performance, pulmonary pressures, and vasoplegia. The aim is early extubation, inotropic and chronotropic support weaning, and chest tube removal to facilitate discharge of the patient from the intensive care unit. The increased complexity of heart transplantation recipients, including the incremental use of pre- transplantation mechanical circulatory support and extended criteria donor hearts, requires extensive and sophisticated preparation of the cardiac anesthesiologist. This article aims to provide an overview of the intraoperative and early postoperative anesthesia management of heart transplantation patients.

The Evolving Role of Extracorporeal Membrane Oxygenation in Lung Transplantation: Implications for Anesthetic Management.

Lung transplantation has become an accepted therapy for most causes of end-stage lung disease. Between 30 to 50% of lung transplants require extracorporeal life support (ECLS). In many lung transplantation centers, extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is replacing cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) as the primary choice for intraoperative ECLS. This review will discuss the evolving role of ECMO in lung transplantation and its implications for anesthetic management.

Guidelines for enhanced recovery after lung surgery: recommendations of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society and the European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS).

Enhanced recovery after surgery is well established in specialties such as colorectal surgery. It is achieved through the introduction of multiple evidence-based perioperative measures that aim to diminish postoperative organ dysfunction while facilitating recovery. This review aims to present consensus recommendations for the optimal perioperative management of patients undergoing thoracic surgery (principally lung resection). A systematic review of meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, large non-randomized studies and reviews was conducted for each protocol element. Smaller prospective and retrospective cohort studies were considered only when higher-level evidence was unavailable. The quality of the evidence base was graded by the authors and used to form consensus recommendations for each topic. Development of these recommendations was endorsed by the Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Society and the European Society for Thoracic Surgery. Recommendations were developed for a total of 45 enhanced recovery items covering topics related to preadmission, admission, intraoperative care and postoperative care. Most are based on good-quality studies. In some instances, good-quality data were not available, and subsequent recommendations are generic or based on data extrapolated from other specialties. In other cases, no recommendation can currently be made because either equipoise exists or there is a lack of available evidence. Recommendations are based not only on the quality of the evidence but also on the balance between desirable and undesirable effects. Key recommendations include preoperative counselling, nutritional screening, smoking cessation, prehabilitation for high-risk patients, avoidance of fasting, carbohydrate loading, avoidance of preoperative sedatives, venous thromboembolism prophylaxis, prevention of hypothermia, short-acting anaesthetics to facilitate early emergence, regional anaesthesia, nausea and vomiting control, opioid-sparing analgesia, euvolemic fluid management, minimally invasive surgery, early chest drain removal, avoidance of urinary catheters and early mobilization after surgery. These guidelines outline recommendations for the perioperative management of patients undergoing lung surgery based on the best available evidence. As the recommendation grade for most of the elements is strong, the use of a systematic perioperative care pathway has the potential to improve outcomes after surgery.

Use of lung-protective strategies during one-lung ventilation surgery: a multi-institutional survey.

BACKGROUND: Limited evidence suggests that intraoperative lung-protective ventilation (LPV) during one-lung ventilation (OLV) may reduce respiratory complications after thoracic surgery. Little is known about LPV practices during OLV. Our purpose was to assess the state of practice/perspectives of anesthesiologists regarding LPV during elective OLV. METHODS: We conducted a multi-institutional cross-sectional survey of anesthesiologists performing OLV at high-volume Canadian tertiary/university centers. The survey was designed, refined and distributed by a multi-disciplinary team using the Dillman method. Univariable and multivariable analyses were used. RESULTS: Seventy-five (63%) of 120 eligible respondents completed the survey. Although the critical care literature focuses on minimizing tidal volume (TV) as the central strategy of LPV, most respondents (89%, n=50/56) focused on minimizing peak airway pressure (PAP) as their primary strategy of intraoperative LPV. Only 64% (n=37/58) reported actively trying to minimize TV. While 32% (n=17/54) were unsure about the current evidence regarding LPV, 67% (n=36/54) believed that the evidence favoured their use during OLV. Perceived clinical and institutional barriers were the only predictors of reduced attempts to minimize TV on univariate analyses. In multivariable/adjusted analyses, perceived institutional barriers were the only predictors of reduced attempts to minimize TV with adjusted odds ratio of 0.1 (95% CI: 0.03-0.6). CONCLUSIONS: Most anesthesiologists defined low PAP as the primary strategy of LPV during OLV and attempted to minimize it. This study is the first to assess the practice/perspectives of anesthesiologists regarding LPV during OLV and also the first to explore predictors of LPV use. Randomized trials are currently ongoing. However, this study suggests that institutional barriers may subvert future knowledge translation and need to be addressed.

Survey of Postoperative Regional Analgesia for Thoracoscopic Surgeries in Canada.

OBJECTIVES: To determine the preferences and perceptions regarding analgesic options for video-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS) among thoracic anesthesiologists in Canada. DESIGN: A cross-sectional survey of thoracic anesthesiologists with 30 multiple choice questions was e-mailed through an online survey tool called FluidSurveys was performed to members of the Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society. SETTING: A nationwide survey. PARTICIPANTS: Members of Canadian Anesthesiologists' Society who provide thoracic anesthesia INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Participant characteristics and outcomes are described using counts and percentages. The frequency of use of each technique for each surgical category is described in percentages and 95% confidence intervals. Based on the responses obtained from individual centers, approximately 469 anesthesiologists provided thoracic care in Canada at the time of the survey. The response rate to the survey was 19% (n = 89). Epidural analgesia was preferred by 93.42% (95% CI 85-98) for open surgeries compared with 41% (30-52) for VATS lobectomies. The difference was statistically significant-52% (37-67). Patient-controlled analgesia was preferred by 27% (19-39) for VATS lobectomies and 46% (35-57) for VATS minor resections. Only 14% preferred paravertebral block for any VATS surgeries. CONCLUSIONS: The use of analgesic techniques for VATS surgeries is variable and largely dictated by provider preferences. The majority still prefer epidural analgesia compared with paravertebral catheter (placed either by the anesthesiologist or surgeon). A broadly acceptable choice that is effective, safe, and technically less demanding requires comparative effectiveness studies and more uniform training for physicians.

Intraoperative Anesthetic Management of Lung Transplantation: Center-Specific Practices and Geographic and Centers Size Differences.

OBJECTIVE: Although increasing evidence in lung transplantation (LTx) suggests that intraoperative management could influence outcomes, there are no guidelines available regarding intraoperative management of LTx. The overall goal of the study was to assess geographic and center volume-specific clinical practices in perioperative management. DESIGN: Prospective data analysis. SETTING: Online survey from a single-center university hospital. PARTICIPANTS: European and non-European LTx centers. INTERVENTIONS: An online survey was sent to 176 centers currently performing LTx procedures. It covered organizational data, general anesthesia considerations, fluid therapy and coagulation, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory therapies, and ventilation strategies. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The response rates were 57.5% (n = 42) from European and 32% (n = 33) from non-European countries. Significant differences between European and non-European countries were use of volatile hypnotics (p = 0.016), use of sufentanil (p < 0.001), inotropic agents (p = 0.001) and colloid infusion (p < 0.001), use of calibrated pulse contour analysis (p = 0.004), use of intraoperative traditional laboratory-based coagulation tests (p = 0.001) and platelet function analysis (p = 0.005), and use of higher peak inspiratory pressure (p = 0.009). Center volume-specific differences were use of fentanyl (p = 0.03) and the use of higher peak inspiratory pressure (p = 0.005) for ventilation. Induction of anesthesia and use of advanced hemodynamic monitoring, therapy for pulmonary hypertension, antioxidant and anti-inflammatory therapies, and ventilation strategies were not different among the centers. CONCLUSIONS: This survey demonstrated for the first time statistically significant differences among European and non-European centers and among low- versus high-volume centers regarding intraoperative management during LTx. These observations will be of some guidance for the LTx community and may trigger more extensive studies.