1
|
Lele AV, Moreton EO, Sundararajan J, Blacker SN. Perioperative care of patients with recent stroke undergoing nonemergent, nonneurological, noncardiac, nonvascular surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol 2024; 37:460-469. [PMID: 39011660 DOI: 10.1097/aco.0000000000001403] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 07/17/2024]
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW To systematically review and perform a meta-analysis of published literature regarding postoperative stroke and mortality in patients with a history of stroke and to provide a framework for preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative care in an elective setting. RECENT FINDINGS Patients with nonneurological, noncardiac, and nonvascular surgery within three months after stroke have a 153-fold risk, those within 6 months have a 50-fold risk, and those within 12 months have a 20-fold risk of postoperative stroke. There is a 12-fold risk of in-hospital mortality within three months and a three-to-four-fold risk of mortality for more than 12 months after stroke. The risk of stroke and mortality continues to persist years after stroke. Recurrent stroke is common in patients in whom anticoagulation/antiplatelet therapy is discontinued. Stroke and time elapsed after stroke should be included in the preoperative assessment questionnaire, and a stroke-specific risk assessment should be performed before surgical planning is pursued. SUMMARY In patients with a history of a recent stroke, anesthesiology, surgery, and neurology experts should create a shared mental model in which the patient/surrogate decision-maker is informed about the risks and benefits of the proposed surgical procedure; secondary-stroke-prevention medications are reviewed; plans are made for interruptions and resumption; and intraoperative care is individualized to reduce the likelihood of postoperative stroke or death.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Abhijit V Lele
- Department of Anesthesiology and Pain Medicine, University of Washington, Harborview Medical Center, Seattle, Washington
| | | | | | - Samuel Neal Blacker
- Department of Anesthesiology, University of North Carolina, Chapel Hill, North Carolina, USA
| |
Collapse
|
2
|
Sidhu R, Turnbull D, Haboubi H, Leeds JS, Healey C, Hebbar S, Collins P, Jones W, Peerally MF, Brogden S, Neilson LJ, Nayar M, Gath J, Foulkes G, Trudgill NJ, Penman I. British Society of Gastroenterology guidelines on sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy. Gut 2024; 73:219-245. [PMID: 37816587 PMCID: PMC10850688 DOI: 10.1136/gutjnl-2023-330396] [Citation(s) in RCA: 29] [Impact Index Per Article: 29.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [MESH Headings] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 05/31/2023] [Accepted: 09/06/2023] [Indexed: 10/12/2023]
Abstract
Over 2.5 million gastrointestinal endoscopic procedures are carried out in the United Kingdom (UK) every year. Procedures are carried out with local anaesthetic r with sedation. Sedation is commonly used for gastrointestinal endoscopy, but the type and amount of sedation administered is influenced by the complexity and nature of the procedure and patient factors. The elective and emergency nature of endoscopy procedures and local resources also have a significant impact on the delivery of sedation. In the UK, the vast majority of sedated procedures are carried out using benzodiazepines, with or without opiates, whereas deeper sedation using propofol or general anaesthetic requires the involvement of an anaesthetic team. Patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy need to have good understanding of the options for sedation, including the option for no sedation and alternatives, balancing the intended aims of the procedure and reducing the risk of complications. These guidelines were commissioned by the British Society of Gastroenterology (BSG) Endoscopy Committee with input from major stakeholders, to provide a detailed update, incorporating recent advances in sedation for gastrointestinal endoscopy.This guideline covers aspects from pre-assessment of the elective 'well' patient to patients with significant comorbidity requiring emergency procedures. Types of sedation are discussed, procedure and room requirements and the recovery period, providing guidance to enhance safety and minimise complications. These guidelines are intended to inform practising clinicians and all staff involved in the delivery of gastrointestinal endoscopy with an expectation that this guideline will be revised in 5-years' time.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Reena Sidhu
- Academic Department of Gastroenterology, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
- Department of Infection, Immunity & Cardiovascular Disease, The University of Sheffield, Sheffield, UK
| | - David Turnbull
- Department of Anaesthetics, Royal Hallamshire Hospital, Sheffield, UK
| | - Hasan Haboubi
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital Llandough, Llandough, South Glamorgan, UK
- Institute of Life Sciences, Swansea University, Swansea, UK
| | - John S Leeds
- Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Newcastle University Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Chris Healey
- Airedale NHS Foundation Trust, Keighley, West Yorkshire, UK
| | - Srisha Hebbar
- Department of Gastroenterology, University Hospital of North Midlands, Stoke-on-Trent, Staffordshire, UK
| | - Paul Collins
- Department of Gastroenterology, Liverpool University Hospitals NHS Foundation Trust, Liverpool, UK
| | - Wendy Jones
- Specialist Pharmacist Breastfeeding and Medication, Portsmouth, UK
| | - Mohammad Farhad Peerally
- Digestive Diseases Unit, Kettering General Hospital; Kettering, Kettering, Northamptonshire, UK
- Department of Population Health Sciences, College of Life Science, University of Leicester, Leicester, UK
| | - Sara Brogden
- Department of Gastroenterology, University College London, UK, London, London, UK
| | - Laura J Neilson
- Department of Gastroenterology, South Tyneside District Hospital, South Shields, Tyne and Wear, UK
| | - Manu Nayar
- Hepato-Pancreato-Biliary Unit, Freeman Hospital, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
- Newcastle University Population Health Sciences Institute, Newcastle upon Tyne, UK
| | - Jacqui Gath
- Patient Representative on Guideline Development Group and member of Independent Cancer Patients' Voice, Sheffield, UK
| | - Graham Foulkes
- Patient Representative on Guideline Development Group, Manchester, UK
| | - Nigel J Trudgill
- Department of Gastroenterology, Sandwell General Hospital, West Bromwich, UK
| | - Ian Penman
- Centre for Liver and Digestive Disorders, Royal Infirmary Edinburgh, Edinburgh, Midlothian, UK
| |
Collapse
|
3
|
Takahashi K, Ohyama H, Takiguchi Y, Kan M, Ouchi M, Nagashima H, Ohno I, Kato N. Endoscopic Transpapillary Stenting for Malignant Hilar Biliary Stricture: Side-by-Side Placement versus Partial Stent-in-Stent Placement. J Pers Med 2023; 13:jpm13050831. [PMID: 37241001 DOI: 10.3390/jpm13050831] [Citation(s) in RCA: 0] [Impact Index Per Article: 0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 04/01/2023] [Revised: 05/08/2023] [Accepted: 05/12/2023] [Indexed: 05/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND/AIMS Endoscopic uncovered metal stent (UMS) placement has been widely performed for unresectable hilar malignant biliary stricture (UHMBS). Two stenting methods are used for the two bile duct branches: side-by-side placement (SBS) and partial stent-in-stent placement (PSIS). However, it remains controversial whether SBS or PSIS is superior. This study aimed to compare SBS and PSIS in UHMBS cases with UMS placement in two branches of the IHD. METHODS This retrospective study included 89 cases of UHMBS treated with UMS placement through the SBS or PSIS technique using endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography at our institution. Patients were divided into two groups, SBS (n = 64) and PSIS (n = 25), and compared. RESULTS Clinical success was achieved in 79.7% and 80.0% in the SBS and PSIS groups, respectively (p = 0.97). The adverse event rate was 20.3% and 12.0% in the SBS and PSIS groups, respectively (p = 0.36). The recurrent biliary obstruction (RBO) rate was 32.8% and 28.0% in the SBS and PSIS groups, respectively (p = 0.66). The median cumulative time to RBO was 224 and 178 days in the SBS and PSIS groups, respectively (p = 0.52). The median procedure time was 43 and 62 min in the SBS and PSIS groups, respectively, which was significantly longer in the PSIS group (p = 0.014). CONCLUSIONS No significant differences were noted in the clinical success rate, adverse event rate, time to RBO, or overall survival between the SBS and PSIS groups, other than the significantly longer procedure time in the PSIS group.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Koji Takahashi
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| | - Hiroshi Ohyama
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| | - Yuichi Takiguchi
- Department of Medical Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| | - Motoyasu Kan
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| | - Mayu Ouchi
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| | - Hiroki Nagashima
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| | - Izumi Ohno
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
- Department of Medical Oncology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| | - Naoya Kato
- Department of Gastroenterology, Graduate School of Medicine, Chiba University, Chiba 260-8670, Japan
| |
Collapse
|
4
|
Abstract
PURPOSE OF REVIEW Nonoperating room anesthesia for digestive tract endoscopy has its own specificities and requires practical training. Monitoring devices, anesthetic drugs, understanding of procedures and management of complications are critical aspects. RECENT FINDINGS New data are available regarding risk factors for intra- and postoperative complications (based on anesthesia registries), airway management, new anesthetic drugs, techniques of administration and management of advances in interventional endoscopy procedures. SUMMARY Digestive tract endoscopy is a common procedure that takes place outside the operating room most of the time and has become more and more complex due to advanced invasive procedures. Prior evaluation of the patient's comorbidities and a good understanding of the objectives and constraints of the endoscopic procedures are required. Assessing the risk of gastric content aspiration is critical for determining appropriate anesthetic protocols. The availability of adequate monitoring (capnographs adapted to spontaneous ventilation, bispectral index), devices for administration of anesthetic/sedative agents (target-controlled infusion) and oxygenation (high flow nasal oxygenation) guarantees the quality of sedation and patient' safety during endoscopic procedures. Knowledge of the specificities of each interventional endoscopic procedure (endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography, submucosal dissection) allows preventing complications during anesthesia.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Emmanuel Pardo
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Hôpital Saint-Antoine and Sorbonne University, GRC 29, DMU DREAM, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris
| | - Marine Camus
- Sorbonne University, INSERM, Centre de Recherche Saint-Antoine (CRSA) & Endoscopy Center, AP-HP, Hôpital Saint-Antoine, Paris, France
| | - Franck Verdonk
- Department of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care, Hôpital Saint-Antoine and Sorbonne University, GRC 29, DMU DREAM, Assistance Publique-Hôpitaux de Paris
| |
Collapse
|
5
|
Ally SA, Foy M, Sood A, Gonzalez M. Preoperative risk factors for postoperative pneumonia following primary Total Hip and Knee Arthroplasty. J Orthop 2021; 27:17-22. [PMID: 34456526 PMCID: PMC8379351 DOI: 10.1016/j.jor.2021.08.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 1] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.3] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 06/22/2021] [Accepted: 08/15/2021] [Indexed: 01/28/2023] Open
Abstract
BACKGROUND The purpose of this study is to evaluate risk factors for pneumonia following THA and TKA. METHODS Patients were identified from the American College of Surgeons National Quality Improvement Database (NSQIP) who experienced postoperative pneumonia after undergoing primary THA and TKA. RESULTS Many characteristics including old age, anemia, diabetes, cardiac comorbidities, dialysis, and smoking were independent risk factors for postoperative pneumonia after THA or TKA. CONCLUSION This analysis offers new evidence on risk factors associated with the development of pneumonia after THA and TKA. These risk factors can help guide clinicians in preventing postoperative pneumonia after THA and TKA.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Syeda Akila Ally
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Illinois, 835 S. Wolcott Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60612, United States
| | - Michael Foy
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Illinois, 835 S. Wolcott Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60612, United States
| | - Anshum Sood
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Illinois, 835 S. Wolcott Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60612, United States
| | - Mark Gonzalez
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, University of Illinois, 835 S. Wolcott Avenue, Chicago, IL, 60612, United States
| |
Collapse
|
6
|
Wang CH, Li CH, Hsieh R, Fan CY, Hsu TC, Chang WC, Hsu WT, Lin YY, Lee CC. Proton pump inhibitors therapy and the risk of pneumonia: a systematic review and meta‐analysis of randomized controlled trials and observational studies. Expert Opin Drug Saf 2019; 18:163-172. [DOI: 10.1080/14740338.2019.1577820] [Citation(s) in RCA: 30] [Impact Index Per Article: 5.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 02/07/2023]
Affiliation(s)
- Chih-Hung Wang
- Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Emergency Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Cheng-Han Li
- College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Ronan Hsieh
- Department of Medicine, Albert Einstein Medical Center, Philadelphia, PA, USA
| | - Cheng-Yi Fan
- College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Tze-Chun Hsu
- Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Wei-Che Chang
- College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
| | - Wan-Ting Hsu
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
| | - Yu-Ya Lin
- Department of Pharmacy, E-Da hospital, Kaohsiung, Taiwan
| | - Chien-Chang Lee
- Department of Emergency Medicine, National Taiwan University Hospital, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Emergency Medicine, College of Medicine, National Taiwan University, Taipei, Taiwan
- Department of Epidemiology, Harvard School of Public Health, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
7
|
Green SM, Mason KP, Krauss BS. Pulmonary aspiration during procedural sedation: a comprehensive systematic review. Br J Anaesth 2018; 118:344-354. [PMID: 28186265 DOI: 10.1093/bja/aex004] [Citation(s) in RCA: 63] [Impact Index Per Article: 9.0] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Indexed: 12/28/2022] Open
Abstract
Background Although pulmonary aspiration complicating operative general anaesthesia has been extensively studied, little is known regarding aspiration during procedural sedation. Methods We performed a comprehensive, systematic review to identify and catalogue published instances of aspiration involving procedural sedation in patients of all ages. We sought to report descriptively the circumstances, nature, and outcomes of these events. Results Of 1249 records identified by our search, we found 35 articles describing one or more occurrences of pulmonary aspiration during procedural sedation. Of the 292 occurrences during gastrointestinal endoscopy, there were eight deaths. Of the 34 unique occurrences for procedures other than endoscopy, there was a single death in a moribund patient, full recovery in 31, and unknown recovery status in two. We found no occurrences of aspiration in non-fasted patients receiving procedures other than endoscopy. Conclusions This first systematic review of pulmonary aspiration during procedural sedation identified few occurrences outside of gastrointestinal endoscopy, with full recovery typical. Although diligent caution remains warranted, our data indicate that aspiration during procedural sedation appears rare, idiosyncratic, and typically benign.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- S M Green
- Department of Emergency Medicine, Loma Linda University Medical Center and Children's Hospital, Loma Linda, CA, USA
| | - K P Mason
- Department of Anesthesia, Harvard Medical School, Boston Children's Hospital, Boston, MA, USA
| | - B S Krauss
- Division of Emergency Medicine, Boston Children's Hospital and the Department of Pediatrics, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA
| |
Collapse
|
8
|
Association of prophylactic endotracheal intubation in critically ill patients with upper GI bleeding and cardiopulmonary unplanned events. Gastrointest Endosc 2017; 86:500-509.e1. [PMID: 28011279 DOI: 10.1016/j.gie.2016.12.008] [Citation(s) in RCA: 25] [Impact Index Per Article: 3.1] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Journal Information] [Submit a Manuscript] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 09/14/2016] [Accepted: 12/04/2016] [Indexed: 12/11/2022]
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND AIMS Prophylactic endotracheal intubation (PEI) is often advocated to mitigate the risk of cardiopulmonary adverse events in patients presenting with brisk upper GI bleeding (UGIB). However, the benefit of such a measure remains controversial. Our study aimed to compare the incidence of cardiopulmonary unplanned events between critically ill patients with brisk UGIB who underwent endotracheal intubation versus those who did not. METHODS Patients aged 18 years or older who presented at Cleveland Clinic between 2011 and 2014 with hematemesis and/or patients with melena with consequential hypovolemic shock were included. The primary outcome was a composite of several cardiopulmonary unplanned events (pneumonia, pulmonary edema, acute respiratory distress syndrome, persistent shock/hypotension after the procedure, arrhythmia, myocardial infarction, and cardiac arrest) occurring within 48 hours of the endoscopic procedure. Propensity score matching was used to match each patient 1:1 in variables that could influence the decision to intubate. These included Glasgow Blatchford Score, Charleston Comorbidity Index, and Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation scores. RESULTS Two hundred patients were included in the final analysis. The baseline characteristics, comorbidity scores, and prognostic scores were similar between the 2 groups. The overall cardiopulmonary unplanned event rates were significantly higher in the intubated group compared with the nonintubated group (20% vs 6%, P = .008), which remained significant (P = .012) after adjusting for the presence of esophageal varices. CONCLUSIONS PEI before an EGD for brisk UGIB in critically ill patients is associated with an increased risk of unplanned cardiopulmonary events. The benefits and risks of intubation should be carefully weighed when considering airway protection before an EGD in this group of patients.
Collapse
|
9
|
Appendectomy as a Risk Factor for Bacteremic Biliary Tract Infection Caused by Antibiotic-Resistant Pathogens. BIOMED RESEARCH INTERNATIONAL 2017; 2017:3276120. [PMID: 28589138 PMCID: PMC5447260 DOI: 10.1155/2017/3276120] [Citation(s) in RCA: 7] [Impact Index Per Article: 0.9] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Received: 03/28/2017] [Accepted: 04/20/2017] [Indexed: 12/13/2022]
Abstract
Background/Aims Recent evidence has suggested that appendix plays a pivotal role in the development and preservation of intestinal immune system. The aim of this study is to examine whether prior appendectomy is associated with an increased risk for the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in bacteremia from biliary tract infection (BTI). Methods Charts from 174 consecutive cases of bacteremia derived from BTI were retrospectively reviewed. Using multivariate analysis, independent risk factors for development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria were identified among the clinical parameters, including a history of appendectomy. Results In total, 221 bacteria strains were identified from 174 BTI events. Of those, 42 antibiotic-resistant bacteria were identified in 34 patients. Multivariate analysis revealed that prior appendectomy (Odds ratio (OR), 3.02; 95% confidence interval (CI), 1.15–7.87; p = 0.026), antibiotic use within the preceding three months (OR, 3.06; 95% CI, 1.26–7.64; p = 0.013), and bilioenteric anastomosis or sphincterotomy (OR, 3.77; 95% CI, 1.51–9.66; p = 0.0046) were independent risk factors for antibiotic-resistant bacteria. Conclusions Prior appendectomy was an independent risk factor for the development of antibiotic-resistant bacteria in bacteremia from BTI.
Collapse
|
10
|
Chughtai M, Gwam CU, Mohamed N, Khlopas A, Newman JM, Khan R, Nadhim A, Shaffiy S, Mont MA. The Epidemiology and Risk Factors for Postoperative Pneumonia. J Clin Med Res 2017; 9:466-475. [PMID: 28496546 PMCID: PMC5412519 DOI: 10.14740/jocmr3002w] [Citation(s) in RCA: 93] [Impact Index Per Article: 11.6] [Reference Citation Analysis] [Abstract] [Key Words] [Track Full Text] [Download PDF] [Journal Information] [Subscribe] [Scholar Register] [Accepted: 03/21/2017] [Indexed: 12/19/2022] Open
Abstract
Postoperative pneumonia is a common complication of surgery, and is associated with marked morbidity and mortality. Despite advances in surgical and anesthetic technique, it persists as a frequent postoperative complication. Many studies have aimed to assess its burden, as well as associated risk factors. However, this complication varies among the different surgical specialties, and there is a paucity of reports that comprehensively evaluate this complication. Therefore, the purpose of this study was to review the epidemiology and risk factors of postoperative pneumonia in the setting of: 1) general surgery; 2) cardiothoracic surgery; 3) orthopedic and spine surgery; and 4) head and neck surgery.
Collapse
Affiliation(s)
- Morad Chughtai
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Chukwuweike U Gwam
- Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopaedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Nequesha Mohamed
- Rubin Institute for Advanced Orthopaedics, Sinai Hospital of Baltimore, Baltimore, MD, USA
| | - Anton Khlopas
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Jared M Newman
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| | - Rafay Khan
- Raritan Bay Medical Center, Perth Amboy, NJ, USA
| | - Ali Nadhim
- Raritan Bay Medical Center, Perth Amboy, NJ, USA
| | - Shervin Shaffiy
- St. Georges University School of Medicine, True Blue, Grenada, West Indies
| | - Michael A Mont
- Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Cleveland Clinic, Cleveland, OH, USA
| |
Collapse
|