[Organ protective intensive care treatment and simulation-based training]

[Anaesthesiological management of postmortem organ donors - What Evidence is Out There?]

The transplantation of organs from postmortem organ donors has been a lifesaving and quality-of-life-improving therapy for patients with irreversible organ failure for many years. In Germany, however, there has been an imbalance between the number of organs donated postmortem and the number of patients on the waiting list for years. The anesthesiological management of multiple organ harvesting (MOE) in postmortem organ donors is not an everyday challenge for various reasons: A lack of practical expertise due to the small number of MOE, even at university hospitals (usually < 20 per year), complex pathophysiological changes in the cardiovascular system and other organ functions of the postmortem organ donor and the lack of guidelines complicate anesthesiological management. This paper compiles the existing literature and reviews whether evidence-based recommendations can be derived for anesthesiologic management for MOE.

Medical Management of Brain-Dead Organ Donors

With improving healthcare services, the demand for organ transplants has been increasing daily worldwide. Deceased organ donors serve as a good alternative option to meet this demand. The first step in this process is identifying potential organ donors. Specifically, brain-dead patients require aggressive and intensive care from the declaration of brain death until organ retrieval. Currently, there are no specific protocols in place for this, and there are notable variations in the management strategies implemented across different transplant centers. Some transplant centers follow their own treatment protocols, whereas other countries, such as Bangladesh, do not have any protocols for potential organ donor care. In this review, we discuss how to identify brain-dead donors and describe the physiological changes that occur following brain death. We then summarize the management of brain-dead organ donors and, on the basis of a review of the literature, we propose recommendations for a treatment protocol to be developed in the future.

Brain Death and Organ Donation in Paediatric Intensive Care Unit

Objective

The purpose of the present study was to retrospectively analyse the brain death (BD) cases that were specified within the last 8 years in the paediatric intensive care unit of our hospital.

Methods

Archive files and computer records of 23 paediatric cases were analysed. Data on age, gender, conditions that caused BD, paediatric risk of mortality (PRISM III) scores, time between suspicion of BD and issuing of BD report, confirmatory tests used, complications that occurred following the diagnosis of BD and time to cardiac arrest development after diagnosis of BD were recorded.

Results

The average age of the patients was 6.8±5.5 years. The most frequent cause of BD was intracranial haemorrhage (30.4%). The mean time to diagnosis after BD suspicion was 5.9±6.2 days. Electroencephalography was performed in 61% of the patients in addition to the apnoea test. Radiological imaging methods were used in 39% of the patients (n=9). Of the cases, 34.7% developed hypothermia, and 4.3% developed diabetes insipidus (DI). Among them, 43.4% had both DI and hypothermia. The mean PRISM score was calculated as 22±9.2. The donation rate of the families was 17%. The mean time to cardiac arrest development after diagnosis of BD was 6.9±7.4 days in non-donor cases where medical support had been reduced.

Conclusion

Any patient with a neurologically poor prognosis in the intensive care unit should be considered to develop BD and diagnosed with BD without delay. The donation rate will increase if family interviews are done by an experienced and educated coordinator.

[Critical care management of the potential organ donor : Current recommendation for adults]

The shortage of donor organs has not improved in recent years. To increase the number and success of transplantation it is crucial to optimize the processes of early identification of potential organ donors and structured critical care management. The therapy starts long before brain death is diagnosed. Structured in-house organ donor management protocols ensure a highly qualified critical care that has a direct impact on the transplantation outcome. The therapy is based on the established standards. The main focus is on differentiated catecholamine and volume therapy. Vasopressin, in combination with norepinephrine, is effective for both treating vasoplegia and electrolyte disturbances. Despite poor evidence, steroids are useful for stabilizing hemodynamics and treating the consequences of neuroendocrine dysfunction. Overall, prospective studies are required to give general recommendations for critical care.

Organ-Protective Intensive Care in Organ Donors

BACKGROUND

The ascertainment of brain death (the irreversible, total loss of brain function) gives the physician the opportunity to limit or stop further treatment. Alternatively, if the brain-dead individual is an organ donor, the mode of treatment can be changed from patient-centered to donationcentered. Consensus-derived recommendations for the organ-protective treatment of brain-dead organ donors are not yet available in Germany.

METHODS

This review is based on pertinent publications retrieved by a selective search in PubMed, and on the authors' clinical experience.

RESULTS

Brain death causes major pathophysiological changes, including an increase in catecholamine levels and a sudden drop in the concentration of multiple hormones, among them antidiuretic hormone, cortisol, insulin, and triand tetraiodothyronine. These changes affect the function of all organ systems, as well as the hemodynamic state and the regulation of body temperature. The use of standardized donor management protocols might well increase the rate of transplanted organs per donor and improve the quality of the transplanted organs. In addition, the administration of methylprednisolone, desmopressin, and vasopressin could be a useful supplement to treatment in some cases. Randomized controlled trials have not yet demonstrated either improved organ function or prolonged survival of the transplant recipients.

CONCLUSION

The evidence base for organ-protective intensive care is weak; most of the available evidence is on the level of expert opinion. There is good reason to believe, however, that the continuation of intensive care, in the sense of early donor management, can make organ transplantation more successful both by increasing the number of transplantable organs and by improving organ quality.

[Simulation-based training and OR apprenticeship for medical students : A prospective, randomized, single-blind study of clinical skills]

BACKGROUND

Simulation-based training (SBT) has developed into an established method of medical training. Studies focusing on the education of medical students have used simulation as an evaluation tool for defined skills. A small number of studies provide evidence that SBT improves medical students' skills in the clinical setting. Moreover, they were strictly limited to a few areas, such as the diagnosis of heart murmurs or the correct application of cricoid pressure. Other studies could not prove adequate transferability from the skills gained in SBT to the patient site. Whether SBT has an effect on medical students' skills in anesthesiology in the clinical setting is controversial. To explore this issue, we designed a prospective, randomized, single-blind trial that was integrated into the undergraduate anesthesiology curriculum of our department during the second year of the clinical phase of medical school.

OBJECTIVES

This study intended to explore the effect of SBT on medical students within the mandatory undergraduate anesthesiology curriculum of our department in the operating room with respect to basic skills in anesthesiology.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After obtaining ethical approval, the participating students of the third clinical semester were randomized into two groups: the SIM-OR group was trained by a 225 min long SBT in basic skills in anesthesiology before attending the operating room (OR) apprenticeship. The OR-SIM group was trained after the operating room apprenticeship by SBT. During SBT the students were trained in five clinical skills detailed below. Further, two clinical scenarios were simulated using a full-scale simulator. The students had to prepare the patient and perform induction of anesthesia, including bag-mask ventilation after induction in scenario 1 and rapid sequence induction in scenario 2. Using the five-point Likert scale, five defined skills were evaluated at defined time points during the study period. 1) application of the safety checklist, 2) application of basic patient monitoring, 3) establishment of intravenous access, 4) bag-and-mask ventilation, and 5) adjustment of ventilatory parameters after the patients' airways were secured. A cumulative score of 5 points was defined as the best and a cumulative score of 25 as the worst rating for a defined time point. The primary endpoint was the cumulative score after day 1 in the operating room apprenticeship and the difference in cumulative scores from days 1 to 4. Our hypothesis was that the SIM-OR group would achieve a better score after day 1 in the operating room apprenticeship and would gain a larger increase in score from day 1 to day 4 than the OR-SIM group.

RESULTS

73 students were allocated to the OR-SIM group and 70 students to the SIM-OR group. There was no significant difference between the two groups after day 1 of the operating room apprenticeship and no difference in increase of the cumulative score from day 1 to day 4 (median of cumulative score on day 1: 'SIM-OR' 11.2 points vs. 'OR-SIM' 14.6 points; p = 0.067; median of difference from day 1 to day 4: 'SIM-OR' -3.7 vs. 'OR-SIM' -6.4; p = 0.110).

CONCLUSION

With the methods applied, this study could not prove that 225 min of SBT before the operating room apprenticeship increased the medical students' clinical skills as evaluated in the operating room. Secondary endpoints indicate that medical students have better clinical skills at the end of the entire curriculum when they have been trained through SBT before the operating room apprenticeship. However, the authors believe that simulator training has a positive impact on students' acquisition of procedural and patient safety skills, even if the methods applied in this study may not mirror this aspect sufficiently.