Frequency of Appropriate and Low-Risk Noncardiac Preoperative Stress Testing Across Medical Specialties

Patient, provider, and system-level factors associated with preoperative cardiac testing: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Overuse of preoperative cardiac testing contributes to high healthcare costs and delayed surgeries. A large body of research has evaluated factors associated with variation in preoperative cardiac testing. However, patient, provider, and system-level factors associated with variation in testing have not been systematically studied.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review to better delineate the patient, provider, and system-level factors associated with variation in preoperative cardiac testing.

METHODS

We included studies of an adult US population evaluating a patient, provider, or system-level factor associated with variation in preoperative cardiac testing for noncardiac surgery since 2012. Our search strategy used terms related to preoperative testing, diagnostic cardiac tests, and care variation with Ovid MEDLINE and Embase from inception through January 2023. We extracted study characteristics and factors associated with variation and qualitatively analyzed them. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Evidence Project Risk of Bias tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight articles met inclusion criteria. Older age and higher comorbidity were strongly associated with higher-intensity testing. The evidence for provider and system-level covariates was weaker. However, there was strong evidence that a focus on primary care and away from preoperative clinic and cardiac consultations was associated with less testing and that interventions to reduce low-value testing can be successful.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant interprovider and interhospital variation in preoperative cardiac testing, the correlates of which are not well-defined. Further work should aim to better understand these factors.

Frequency and Predictors of Preoperative Cardiac Testing Overuse in Low-Risk Patients Before Laparoscopic Bariatric Surgery

Adverse cardiac events after laparoscopic bariatric surgery are rare, yet preoperative cardiology evaluation and testing remain common, resulting in the overuse of cardiac testing in low-risk patients. Our objective was to assess the frequency of, and factors associated with, overuse of preoperative cardiac testing in patients at low cardiac risk before laparoscopic bariatric surgery. We retrospectively reviewed data from 1,094 adult patients who underwent laparoscopic bariatric surgery at our institution from January 1, 2015, through December 31, 2019. The cardiac risk was determined using the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) and the National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Myocardial Infarction and Cardiac Arrest (NSQIP MICA) risk model. Multivariate logistic regression was used to evaluate risk factors associated with the overuse of cardiac testing in low-risk patients. Overall, 1,059 patients (96.8%) were estimated to be at low cardiac risk by the RCRI, and 1,094 (100%) were at low cardiac risk by NSQIP MICA. A total of 587 patients (51.8%) were referred to cardiology for preoperative evaluation, and 643 patients (56.7%) underwent one or more preoperative cardiac tests. Factors associated with overuse of preoperative cardiac testing in low-risk patients included preoperative cardiology referral (adjusted odds ratio 37.2, 95% confidence interval 25.3 to 54.7) and patient age (adjusted odds ratio 1.05, 95% confidence interval 1.03 to 1.07). Overuse of preoperative cardiac testing was common in patients at low cardiac risk before laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Preoperative referral to cardiology was the most significant risk factor associated with the overuse of preoperative cardiac testing. Application of risk models such as the RCRI or NSQIP MICA at the time of bariatric program enrollment may reduce unnecessary preoperative cardiac testing in low-risk patients.

The inductor role of cardiac consultation in the pre-anesthetic evaluation of asymptomatic patients submitted to non-cardiac minor and intermediate-risk surgery: a cross-sectional study

INTRODUCTION

Asymptomatic patients with moderate functional capacity do not require Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) workup in the preoperative period of non-cardiac surgeries, especially when scheduled for minor and intermediate-risk surgeries. The workup is inappropriate because it promotes over diagnosing and pointless treatments. Moreover, those patients usually undergo cardiology assessment, in addition to pre-anesthetic evaluation.

OBJECTIVE

Investigate the role of cardiology consultation as mediator in inappropriate assessment of CAD for preoperative of non-cardiac surgeries.

METHOD

Retrospective study performed in a private anesthesia service using medical charts of asymptomatic patients with a history of controlled systemic disease and moderate functional capacity, submitted to pre-anesthetic consultation for minor and intermediate risk surgeries. Cardiology consultations were identified by the presence of a consultation report by a cardiologist. CAD workup was defined as undergoing cardiac stress tests.

RESULTS

We included 390 medical charts of patients with mean age of 48.6 ± 15.4 years, 67% women and 69% intermediate risk surgeries. CAD workup was infrequent and performed in 3.9% of patients. Besides, pre-anesthetic evaluation, 93 (24%) patients had a cardiology consultation. Among those patients, 15.1% were submitted to CAD workup, compared to 0.34% of patients without cardiology assessment (p < 0.001; RR = 4.4; 95% CI: 3.5-5.6).

CONCLUSIONS

Inappropriate testing for CAD investigation is infrequent for asymptomatic individuals submitted to minor and intermediate risk surgeries. However, cardiology consultation increases substantially the likelihood of a patient undergoing CAD workup, suggesting that, unlike the anesthesiologist, the cardiologist is a major mediator of this kind of management.

Inappropriate screening of obstructive coronary artery disease during pre-anesthesia assessment of candidates for non-cardiac surgery

Preoperative evaluation in elective surgeries has been associated with successful surgical treatment. However, there is no solid scientific evidence that screening for coronary artery disease (CAD) reduces surgical risk. The aims of this study were to describe the frequency of inappropriate investigation of obstructive CAD induced by pre-anesthetic assessment in individuals without cardiovascular symptoms (candidates for low- to intermediate-risk surgeries) and to evaluate predictors of this conduct. We performed a retrospective evaluation of medical records of anesthesiology services from patients undergoing pre-anesthesia assessment between May 2015 and May 2016, including those with functional capacity ≥4 metabolic equivalents without a diagnosis of heart disease. A total of 778 medical records (47±16 years of age, 62.6% female) were studied. A private hospital performed 50.1% of the surgeries and 60.4% were of intermediate risk. Only 2.7% (95%CI: 1.7-4.1%) were screened for CAD, and 91% of these requests were mediated by cardiology consultations performed during pre-anesthetic testing visits. Factors associated with screening for CAD were hypertension, diabetes, moderate systemic disease (ASA III), cardiac consultation, previous diagnosis of CAD, and admission to a private hospital. Independent predictors were private hospitals (OR: 3.9; 95%CI: 1.3-11.0), ASA III (OR: 5.3; 95%CI: 1.7-16.2), and hypertension (OR: 3.8; 95%CI: 1.5-9.8). The frequency of inappropriate requests for CAD screening in asymptomatic individuals without untreated systemic diseases was low in pre-anesthetic visits. Although infrequent, screening for CAD is more common in the private setting, in patients with poorer health status, and is usually prescribed during cardiology consultation.

Preoperative laboratory testing: Implications of "Choosing Wisely" guidelines

Preoperative laboratory testing is often necessary and can be invaluable for diagnosis, assessment, and treatment. However, performing routine laboratory tests for patients who are considered otherwise healthy is not usually beneficial and is costly. It is estimated that $18 billion (U.S.) is spent annually on preoperative testing, although how much is wasteful remains unknown. Ideally, a targeted and comprehensive patient history and physical exam should largely determine whether preprocedure laboratory studies should be obtained. Healthcare providers, primarily anesthesiologists, should remain cost-conscious when ordering specific laboratory or imaging tests prior to surgery based on available literature. We review the overall evidence and key points from the Choosing Wisely guidelines, the identification of potential wasteful practices, possible harms of testing, and key clinical findings associated with preoperative laboratory testing.

Peri-operative cardiac biomarker screening: a narrative review

Peri-operative risk estimation has traditionally focused on assessing the likelihood of postoperative morbidity and mortality using pre-operative functional assessment. Although this strategy is currently recommended by most major society guidelines, contemporary evidence suggests that cardiac biomarker measurement has important advantages over pre-operative functional assessment. These advantages include superior predictive discrimination and inclusion of the postoperative course in risk estimation. In this review, we provide an overview of the evidence supporting the peri-operative utilisation, compare risk estimation methods and discuss which patients may benefit most from cardiac biomarker screening. We also discuss protocols for biomarker screening and management of patients with abnormal results.