Effectiveness of non-cardiac preoperative testing in non-cardiac elective surgery: a systematic review

Targets for De-implementation of Unnecessary Testing Before Low-Risk Surgery: A Qualitative Study

INTRODUCTION

Despite multispecialty recommendations to avoid routine preoperative testing before low-risk surgery, the practice remains common and de-implementation has proven difficult. The goal of this study as to elicit determinants of unnecessary testing before low-risk surgery to inform de-implementation efforts.

METHODS

We conducted focused ethnography at a large academic institution, including semi-structured interviews and direct observations at two preoperative evaluation clinics and one outpatient surgery center. Themes were identified through narrative thematic analysis and mapped to a comprehensive and integrated checklist of determinants of practice, the Tailored Implementation for Chronic Diseases framework (TICD).

RESULTS

Thirty individuals participated (surgeons, anesthesiologists, primary care physicians, physician assistants, nurses, and medical assistants). Three themes were identified: (1) Shared Values (TICD Social, Political, and Legal Factors), (2) Gaps in Knowledge (TICD Individual Health Professional Factors, Guideline Factors), and (3) Communication Breakdown (TICD Professional Interactions, Incentives and Resources, Capacity for Organizational Change). Shared Values describe core tenets expressed by all groups of clinicians, namely prioritizing patient safety and utilizing evidence-based medicine. Clinicians had Gaps in Knowledge related to existing data and preoperative testing recommendations. Communication Breakdowns within interdisciplinary teams resulted in unnecessary testing ordered to meet perceived expectations of other providers.

CONCLUSIONS

Clinicians have knowledge gaps related to preoperative testing recommendations and may be amenable to de-implementation efforts and educational interventions. Consensus guidelines may streamline interdisciplinary communication by clarifying interdisciplinary needs and reducing testing ordered to meet perceived expectations of other clinicians.

Alternatives to the in-person anaesthetist-led preoperative assessment in adults undergoing low-risk or intermediate-risk surgery: A scoping review

BACKGROUND

The design of the optimal preoperative evaluation is a much debated topic, with the anaesthetist-led in-person evaluation being most widely used. This approach is possibly leading to overuse of a valuable resource, especially in low-risk patients. Without compromising patient safety, we hypothesised that not all patients would require this type of elaborate evaluation.

OBJECTIVE

The current scoping review aims to critically appraise the range and nature of the existing literature investigating alternatives to the anaesthetist-led preoperative evaluation and their impact on outcomes, to inform future knowledge translation and ultimately improve perioperative clinical practice.

DESIGN

A scoping review of the available literature.

DATA SOURCES

Embase, Medline, Web-of-Science, Cochrane Library and Google Scholar. No date restriction was used.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Studies in patients scheduled for elective low-risk or intermediate-risk surgery, which compared anaesthetist-led in-person preoperative evaluation with non-anaesthetist-led preoperative evaluation or no outpatient evaluation. The focus was on outcomes, including surgical cancellation, perioperative complications, patient satisfaction and costs.

RESULTS

Twenty-six studies with a total of 361 719 patients were included, reporting on various interventions: telephone evaluation, telemedicine evaluation, evaluation by questionnaire, surgeon-led evaluation, nurse-led evaluation, other types of evaluation and no evaluation up to the day of surgery. Most studies were conducted in the United States and were either pre/post or one group post-test-only studies, with only two randomised controlled trials. Studies differed largely in outcome measures and were of moderate quality overall.

CONCLUSIONS

A number of alternatives to the anaesthetists-led in-person preoperative evaluation have already been researched: that is telephone evaluation, telemedicine evaluation, evaluation by questionnaire and nurse-led evaluation. However, more high-quality research is needed to assess viability in terms of intraoperative or early postoperative complications, surgical cancellation, costs, and patient satisfaction in the form of Patient-Reported Outcome Measures and Patient-Reported Experience Measures.

Preoperative evaluations for ophthalmic surgery: A systematic review of 48,869 eyes

Eliminating low-yield testing can reduce the burden on modern health care systems. Our purpose is to determine whether routine preoperative assessment impacts the incidence of perioperative complications in ophthalmic surgery. We conducted a comprehensive search of Ovid MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Cochrane Library databases to identify studies investigating the incidence of perioperative complications following any preoperative assessment for patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery (PROSPERO ID#164008). Four randomized controlled trials (RCTs) and 5 observational studies were selected for inclusion. Risk of bias assessment revealed a lack of masking and insufficient statistical power in RCTs, and confounding in observational studies. Routine preoperative testing-including laboratory tests, electrocardiogram, and imaging studiesdid not decrease the incidence of adverse events or risk of perioperative ocular and systemic complications in most studies. Two cohort studies (1 retrospective, 1 prospective) suggestd that patients with certain preexisting health conditions were at increased risk for adverse events perioperatively. Another retrospective study found a lower risk of complications in high-risk patients who underwent evaluation. While patients with comorbidities may be at increased risk of adverse events, the role of preoperative assessment is not well delineated in this population. Further study is required to determine the comparative safety, effectiveness, and implementation of alternative assessment tools.

Barriers to reducing preoperative testing for low-risk surgical procedures: A qualitative assessment guided by the Theoretical Domains Framework

INTRODUCTION

While numerous guidelines do not recommend preoperative tests for low risk patients undergoing low risk surgeries, they are often routinely performed. Canadian data suggests preoperative tests (e.g. ECGs and chest x-rays) preceded 17.9%-35.5% of low-risk procedures. Translating guidelines into clinical practice can be challenging and it is important to understand what is driving behaviour when developing interventions to change it.

AIM

Thus, we completed a theory-based investigation of the perceived barriers and enablers to reducing unnecessary preoperative tests for low-risk surgical procedures in Newfoundland, Canada.

METHOD

We used snowball sampling to recruit surgeons, anaesthesiologists, or preoperative clinic nurses. Interviews were conducted by two researchers using an interview guide with 31 questions based on the theoretical domains framework. Data was transcribed and coded into the 14 theoretical domains and then themes were identified for each domain.

RESULTS

We interviewed 17 surgeons, anaesthesiologists, or preoperative clinic nurses with 1 to 34 years' experience. Overall, while respondents agreed with the guidelines they described several factors, across seven relevant theoretical domains, that influence whether tests are ordered. The most common included uncertainty about who is responsible for test ordering, inability to access patient records or to consult/communicate with colleagues about ordering decisions and worry about surgery delays/cancellation if tests are not ordered. Other factors included workplace norms that conflicted with guidelines and concerns about missing something serious or litigation. In terms of enablers, respondents believed that clear institutional guidelines including who is responsible for test ordering and information about the risk of missing something serious, supported by improved communication between those involved in the ordering process and periodic evaluation will reduce any unnecessary preoperative testing.

CONCLUSION

These findings suggest that both health system and health provider factors need to be addressed in an intervention to reduce pre-operative testing.

Is there variation in utilization of preoperative tests among patients undergoing total hip and knee replacement in the US, and does it affect outcomes? A population-based analysis

Study objective

To describe recent practice patterns of preoperative tests and to examine their association with 90-day all-cause readmissions and length of stay.

Design

Retrospective cohort study using the New York Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System (SPARCS).

Setting

SPARCS from March 1, 2016, to July 1, 2017.

Participants

Adults undergoing Total Hip Replacement (THR) or Total Knee Replacement (TKR) had a preoperative screening outpatient visit within two months before their surgery.

Interventions

Electrocardiogram (EKG), chest X-ray, and seven preoperative laboratory tests (RBCs antibody screen, Prothrombin time (PT) and Thromboplastin time, Metabolic Panel, Complete Blood Count (CBC), Methicillin Resistance Staphylococcus Aureus (MRSA) Nasal DNA probe, Urinalysis, Urine culture) were identified.

Primary and secondary outcome measures

Regression analyses were utilized to determine the association between each preoperative test and two postoperative outcomes (90-day all-cause readmission and length of stay). Regression models adjusted for hospital-level random effects, patient demographics, insurance, hospital TKR, THR surgical volume, and comorbidities. Sensitivity analysis was conducted using the subset of patients with no comorbidities.

Results

Fifty-five thousand ninety-nine patients (60% Female, mean age 66.1+/− 9.8 SD) were included. The most common tests were metabolic panel (74.5%), CBC (66.8%), and RBC antibody screen (58.8%). The least common tests were MRSA Nasal DNA probe (13.0%), EKG (11.7%), urine culture (10.7%), and chest X-ray (7.9%). Carrying out MRSA testing, urine culture, and EKG was associated with a lower likelihood of 90-day all-cause readmissions. The length of hospital stay was not associated with carrying out any preoperative tests. Results were similar in the subset with no comorbidities.

Conclusions

Wide variation exists in preoperative tests before THR and TKR. We identified three preoperative tests that may play a role in reducing readmissions. Further investigation is needed to evaluate these findings using more granular clinical data.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12891-022-05945-y.

Preoperative investigations for elective surgical patients in a resource limited setting: Systematic review

Background

Methods

Results

Conclusion

•

Ordering preoperative investigation is a common practice.

•

Routine laboratory tests has significant burden on health care costs.

•

Preoperative tests should be guided by the patient's clinical history, co-morbidities, and physical examination.

•

Ordering preoperative investigations based on recommendation of guidelines is very essential.

Exploration of a quality improvement process to standardised preoperative tests for a surgical procedure to reduce waste

BACKGROUND

Preoperative tests are done to determine a patient's fitness for anaesthesia and surgery.

LOCAL PROBLEM

Although routine tests before surgery in the absence of specific clinical indications are not recommended, we observed high volumes of routine preoperative tests were performed in our institution. We describe a process to implement a standardised preoperative investigational approach to reduce unnecessary testing before surgeries.

METHODS

A series of six Plan-Do-Study-Act (PDSA) cycles was conducted for root cause analysis and process mapping, development of standardised tool (GRID), collection of baseline data, education and feedback, pilot testing and implementation and uptake of GRID.Root cause analysis revealed a lack of awareness of guidelines and a lack of a standardised tool to guide preoperative testing. We undertook a pilot quality improvement project to reduce unnecessary testing before knee and hip arthroplasty by developing and implementing a standardised tool (GRID) and engaging all stakeholders.

INTERVENTIONS

A clinical development team (CDT) was formed, including all the stakeholders. Our CDT focused on a continuous rapid cycle improvement strategy.

RESULTS

After implementation of the tool in a subgroup of patients undergoing elective hip or knee arthroplasty, unnecessary coagulation tests (activated partial thromboplastin time and the international normalised ratio), electrolyte/renal panel tests and electrocardiograms were reduced by 81% (91%-17%), 81% (41%-7%) and 68% (35%-11%), respectively. No surgery was delayed or cancelled due to tests not performed before surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

A standardised preoperative investigational approach based on patients' medical conditions rather than routine testing can reduce unnecessary tests before surgery. Further, implementing guidelines is more complex than developing guidelines. Hence, continuous PDSA cycles are essential to evaluate the processes in a quality improvement project. It can take time to build teams and have shared goals; however, once this is achieved, the success of a quality improvement project is certain.

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.

Preoperative Functional Platelet Number Is Inversely Associated With 30-Day Mortality After Cardiac Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

Background. We hypothesize that preoperative functional platelet number (platelet count multiplied by platelet aggregation percentage) are associated with 30-day mortality after cardiac surgery. Methods. We linked our preoperative testing database with the STS (Society of Thoracic Surgeon) database to form a study cohort of 1390 patients who had cardiac surgeries between January 2008 and December 2013. Preoperative tests of platelet count and platelet aggregation were routinely performed on all cardiac surgical patients within 24 hours before entering the operating room. Multiple logistic regression models were used to determine whether functional platelet number are associated with 30-day mortality, modified composite major adverse cardiocerebral events, postoperative renal failure or requirement for new renal replacement therapy, and reoperation for bleeding. Log-linear models were used to examine whether functional platelet numbers are associated with hospital length of stay and intensive care unit length of stay. Results. Functional platelet number had an inverse association with 30-day mortality, and each 50 × 10⁹/L increase in functional platelet number resulted in decreased 30-day mortality (odds ratio of 0.767 with 95% confidence interval = 0.591-0.996). For secondary outcomes, functional platelet number was neither associated with major adverse cardiocerebral event nor length of stay. However, we found that each 50 × 10⁹/L increase in functional platelet number was associated with decreased reoperations for bleeding (odds ratio of 0.778 with 95% confidence interval = 0.636-0.951). Conclusions. The preoperative functional platelet number had significant associations with 30-day mortality after cardiac surgery. Functional platelet number could be used to guide timing of cardiac surgery, especially as more and more patients are receiving antiplatelet medications nowadays.

The quality of clinical practice guidelines for preoperative care using the AGREE II instrument: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

Our aim was to summarize and compare relevant recommendations from evidence-based CPGs (EB-CPGs).

METHODS

Systematic review of clinical practice guidelines.

DATA SOURCES

PubMed, EMBase, Cochrane Library, LILACS, Tripdatabase, and additional sources. In July 2017, we searched CPGs that were published in the last 10 years, without language restrictions, in electronic databases, and also searched specific CPG sources, reference lists, and consulted experts. Pairs of independent reviewers selected EB-CPGs and rated their methodological quality using the AGREE-II instrument. We summarized recommendations, its supporting evidence, and strength of recommendations according to the GRADE methodology.

RESULTS

We included 16 EB-CPGs out of 2262 references identified. Only nine of them had searches within the last 5 years and seven used GRADE. The median (percentile 25-75) AGREE-II scores for rigor of development was 49% (35-76%) and the domain "applicability" obtained the worst score 16% (9-31%). We summarized 31 risk stratification recommendations, 21.6% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (41% of them were strong recommendations), and 16 therapeutic/preventive recommendations, 59% of which were supported by high/moderate quality of evidence (75.7% strong). We found inconsistency in ratings of evidence level. "Guidelines' applicability" and "monitoring" were the most deficient domains. Only half of the EB-CPGs were updated in the past 5 years.

CONCLUSIONS

We present many strong recommendations that are ready to be considered for implementation as well as others to be interrupted, and we reveal opportunities to improve guidelines' quality.

"Too much information with little meaning," relevance of preoperative laboratory testing in elective oral and maxillofacial surgeries: A systematic integrative review

Aim:

In the recent times due to accessibility of tools and advent of technology advising battery of laboratory tests prior to any electeve surgical procedure has become a norm. This review aims at investigating relevance of such tests in healthy patients undergoing routine elective oral and maxillofacial surgical procedures.

Methods:

Various search engines were thoroughly searched to identify relevant literature. The population of interest was asymptomatic adults above 18 years of age undergoing elective surgery.

Results:

The preoperative tests of interest for the current study included complete blood count, coagulation tests, biochemistry, and chest X-rays. An algorithm for preoperative tests has been proposed.

Conclusion:

We conclude that advising battery of routine tests in such patients leads to further delays and rise in overall cost of the surgery.

Protocol for assessing the determinants of preoperative test-ordering behaviour for low-risk surgical procedures using a theoretically driven, qualitative design

INTRODUCTION

Current evidence suggests that preoperative tests such as chest X-rays, electrocardiograms and baseline laboratory studies may not be useful for healthy patients undergoing low-risk surgical procedures. Routine preoperative testing for healthy patients having low-risk surgery is not a scientifically sound practice. In this study, we will interview healthcare providers working at medical facilities where low-risk surgical procedures are carried out. This will allow us to gain insight into the determinants of preoperative testing behaviours for healthy patients undergoing low-risk surgeries and their barriers and enablers to guideline adherence.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

We will use semistructured interviews with anaesthesiologists, surgeons and preadmission clinic nurses to assess the determinants of preoperative testing behaviours. The interview guide was designed around the Theoretical Domains Framework (TDF), developed specifically to determine the barriers and enablers to implementing evidence-based guidelines. Interviews will be audio-recorded, transcribed verbatim and coded according to the TDF. Key themes will be generated for each of the identified domains.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

We have received ethics approval from the Health Research Ethics Board in Newfoundland and Labrador (HREB #2018.190) for this study. The results of this work will be disseminated through a peer-reviewed publication, presentation at a healthcare forum and plain-language infographic summaries. Additionally, deidentified data collected and analysed for this study will be available for review from the corresponding author on reasonable request.

A Revised Estimate of Costs Associated With Routine Preoperative Testing in Medicare Cataract Patients With a Procedure-Specific Indicator

Importance

Routine preoperative medical testing is not recommended for patients undergoing low-risk surgery, but testing is common before surgery. A 30-day preoperative testing window is conventionally used for study purposes; however, the extent of routine testing that occurs prior to that point is unknown.

Objective

To improve on existing cost estimates by identifying all routine preoperative testing that takes place after the decision is made to perform cataract surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cross-sectional study assessed preoperative care in a 50% sample of Medicare beneficiaries older than 66 years who underwent ambulatory cataract surgery in 2011. Data analysis was completed from March 2016 to October 2017.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Using ocular biometry as a procedure-specific indicator to mark the start of the routine preoperative testing window, we measured testing rates in the interval between ocular biometry and cataract surgery and compared this with testing rates in the 6 months preceding biometry. We estimated the total cost of testing that occurred between biometry and cataract surgery.

Results

A total of 440 857 patients underwent cataract surgery. A total of 423 710 (96.1%) had an ocular biometry claim before index surgery, of whom 264 514 (60.0%) were female; the mean (SD) age of the cohort was 76.1 (6.2) years. A total of 111 998 (25.4%) underwent surgery more than 30 days after biometry. Among patients with a biometry claim, the mean number of tests/patient/month increased from 1.1 in the baseline period to 1.7 in the interval between biometry and cataract surgery. Although preoperative testing peaked in all patients in the 30 days preceding surgery (1.8 tests/patient/month), the subset of patients with no overlap between postbiometry and presurgery periods experienced increased testing rates to 1.8 tests per patient per month in the 30 days after biometry, regardless of the elapsed time between biometry and surgery. The total estimated cost of routine preoperative testing in the full cohort was $22.7 million; we estimate that routine preoperative testing costs Medicare up to $45.4 million annually.

Conclusions and Relevance

In this study of Medicare beneficiaries, routine preoperative medical testing occurs more often and is costlier than has been reported previously. Extra costs are attributable to testing that occurs prior to the 30-day window preceding surgery. As a cost-cutting measure, routine preoperative medical testing should be avoided in patients with cataracts throughout the interval between ocular biometry and cataract surgery.

Healthcare delivery cost and anesthesiologists: Time to have a greater role and responsibility

With the advancement of technology and health sciences, health care delivery costs are steadily increasing. This affects both households and governments. Unfortunately, the present truth is that health has become an essential but unaffordable commodity. This is very concerning. Quality, up-to-date, cost-effective health care delivery is one of the prime objectives, and focuses on administration and health care authority. As the per capita spent on health from public/government funds is very poor in developing countries, the responsibility of cost-effective health care delivery falls primarily on the shoulder of the treating physicians. Anesthesiologists are becoming an indispensable part of health care delivery, having a diverse role in the emergency, critical care, pain, and perioperative care of patients. As the population ages, the need for surgical care is also increasing. Therefore, the anesthesiologist can also play a more significant role in delivering cost-effective health care, and minimize the cost without affecting the quality. This brief narrative review analyzes the current practice of anesthesiologists in two prime areas in the context of cost-savings: Preoperative investigation and low/minimal flow anesthesia.

[Perioperative myocardial ischemia : Current aspects and concepts]

In the future an increasing number of older patients with significant comorbidities will have to undergo major surgical procedures. Perioperative cardiovascular events account for many major complications and even fatalities. While perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI) is a generally well-known and recognized complication, the less severe myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) has not gained widespread scientific attention until recently; however, two large observational trials (VISION 1 and VISION 2) have shown a significantly increased mortality after MINS with even subtle increases in troponin T being associated with an increased risk of death. This review summarizes the current knowledge pertaining to PMI and MINS and proposes a diagnostic and therapeutic framework for optimally guiding patients at risk through the perioperative period.

Recommendations on Testing Before Outpatient Dermatologic Surgery

INTRODUCTION

Short-duration ambulatory surgery for the removal of skin tumors under local anesthesia is increasingly common in dermatology. Preoperative assessment has traditionally targeted the identification of any unknown diseases or other health conditions that might lead to changes in plans for anesthesia or surgery. Hospitals and specialists differ greatly in the tests they order in patients about to undergo outpatient dermatologic surgery given that hardly any finding would be likely to contraindicate or lead to changes in the procedure. This study aimed to provide guidance for those ordering tests before outpatient dermatologic surgery.

METHODS

In 2017 our hospital developed a protocol to standardize preoperative testing for outpatient dermatologic surgery. We designed an observational, descriptive, retrospective analysis of tests ordered for patients scheduled for such surgery before and after the protocol was applied.

RESULTS

Fewer tests were ordered after the protocol was introduced. We detected no statistically significant differences in relation to type of surgery planned or postoperative complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Patients about to undergo outpatient dermatologic surgery under local anesthesia who have no unusual health risks may not require preoperative testing.

The evidence-based preoperative assessment for the otolaryngologist

There is a narrow window of opportunity between surgical scheduling and the operative date to optimize patients for an elective surgical procedure. Traditionally, preoperative care has involved extended routine testing batteries with intermittent referrals for medical clearance. These traditions are costly, inefficient, and yield no clear reduction in perioperative morbidity and mortality. Evidence, which has evolved over the past decade, suggests that optimal preoperative care requires a patient-centric, personalized, and often multidisciplinary approach. We present an up-to-date overview of this literature with a focus on the otolaryngologic surgical population. An algorithmic approach to preoperative patient assessment is also proposed in hopes of both optimizing patient outcome and streamlining routine clinical workflow. Laryngoscope, 130:38-44, 2020.

Preoperative Laboratory Testing

Obtaining routine preoperative laboratory tests increases health care costs and has been listed, by the Choosing Wisely Campaign, as one of the top 5 practices anesthesiologists should avoid. Routine testing without clinical indication is not cost-effective and could cause harm and unnecessary delays. Abnormal findings are more likely to be false positive and costly to pursue, introduce new risks, and increase anxiety for the patient. Preoperative testing need to be performed only following a targeted history and physical examination, factoring severity of surgery, and comorbidities such that the benefit of the test outweighs risk.

Validity time of normal results of preoperative tests for surgical reintervention and the impact on postoperative outcomes

Background and objective

There are few data defining the period of time in which preoperative tests can be considered valid. The purpose of this study was to determine the likelihood of changes in the results of preoperative tests previously normal in relation to time, and the impact of these changes on postoperative outcomes.

Methods

A total of 970 patients with normal preoperative tests before the first surgery and who required a new intervention were included. The preoperative tests performed for the first procedure were compared with those performed for the second procedure. The following variables were assessed regarding their potential to induce changes in test results: sex, age, surgical risk, previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy, and presence of comorbidities. In-hospital outcomes were analyzed.

Results

The median time between procedures was 27 months (6–84). The probability of change in at least one of the preoperative exams was 1.7% (95% CI: 0.5–2.9), 3.6% (95% CI: 1.8–5.4), and 6.4% (95% CI: 3.9–8.9) during the 12, 24, and 36-month intervals, respectively, for patients aged <50 years and 2.1% (95% CI: 0.7–3.5), 9.2% (95% CI: 5.9–12.5), and 13.4% (95% CI: 9.3–17.5), respectively, for patients ≥50 years of age. Age (p = 0.009), surgical risk (p < 0.001), chemotherapy (p = 0.001), radiotherapy (p = 0.012), and comorbidities (p < 0.001) were associated with the likelihood of changes in test results. Test changes were not significantly associated with in-hospital adverse outcomes (p = 0.426).

Conclusion

For patients undergoing a second surgical procedure, the probability of change in previously normal preoperative tests is low during the first years after the first surgical intervention, and when changes occurred, they did not adversely affect the in-hospital postoperative outcomes.

The Utility of Preoperative Laboratory Testing Before Urogynecologic Surgery

OBJECTIVES

National guidelines for preoperative laboratory testing are based on limited, low-quality evidence. The role of age as a risk factor for testing is unclear. We sought to compare the prevalence of abnormal preoperative laboratory results in older vs younger urogynecologic surgical patients.

METHODS

In this retrospective cohort study of women undergoing urogynecologic surgery, we compared older (age, ≥65 years) with younger (age, 50-64 years) women. Our primary outcome was the prevalence of an abnormal preoperative laboratory result.

RESULTS

We included 317 women, with 167 (52.7%) in the older cohort (ages, 65-91 years; mean, 73.3 ± 5.6 years) and 150 (47.3%) in the younger cohort (ages, 50-64 years; mean, 57.3 ± 4.1 years). Overall, 18.3% of participants had at least one abnormal preoperative laboratory, with older women more likely to have an abnormal result (28.7% vs 10.7%, P < 0.001). Compared with the younger cohort, older women had higher rates of abnormal hemoglobin (13.8% vs 6.0%, P = 0.02) and creatinine values (10.8% vs 2.7%, P = 0.005), with no significant differences for platelets (3.0% vs 1.3%, P = 0.53), sodium (3.0% vs 0.7%, P = 0.22), or potassium (6.0% vs 3.3%, P = 0.27). After adjusting for potential confounders, older age remained associated with an abnormal preoperative result (odds ratio, 3.6; 95% confidence interval, 1.9-7.1).

CONCLUSIONS

In our sample, women 65 years or older had a greater than 25% chance of having an abnormal preoperative laboratory result and were at higher risk compared with younger women. Age 65 years or greater should be considered as a criterion for preoperative laboratory testing in urogynecologic patients.

[Validity time of normal results of preoperative tests for surgical reintervention and the impact on postoperative outcomes]

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE

There are few data defining the period of time in which preoperative tests can be considered valid. The purpose of this study was to determine the likelihood of changes in the results of preoperative tests previously normal in relation to time, and the impact of these changes on postoperative outcomes.

METHODS

A total of 970 patients with normal preoperative tests before the first surgery and who required a new intervention were included. The preoperative tests performed for the first procedure were compared with those performed for the second procedure. The following variables were assessed regarding their potential to induce changes in test results: sex, age, surgical risk, previous chemotherapy or radiotherapy, and presence of comorbidities. In-hospital outcomes were analyzed.

RESULTS

The median time between procedures was 27 months (6-84). The probability of change in at least one of the preoperative exams was 1.7% (95% CI: 0.5-2.9), 3.6% (95% CI: 1.8-5.4), and 6.4% (95% CI: 3.9-8.9) during the 12, 24, and 36-month intervals, respectively, for patients aged <50 years and 2.1% (95% CI: 0.7-3.5), 9.2% (95% CI: 5.9-12.5), and 13.4% (95% CI: 9.3-17.5), respectively, for patients ≥ 50 years of age. Age (p=0.009), surgical risk (p <0.001), chemotherapy (p=0.001), radiotherapy (p=0.012), and comorbidities (p <0.001) were associated with the likelihood of changes in test results. Test changes were not significantly associated with in-hospital adverse outcomes (p=0.426).

CONCLUSION

For patients undergoing a second surgical procedure, the probability of change in previously normal preoperative tests is low during the first years after the first surgical intervention, and when changes occurred, they did not adversely affect the in-hospital postoperative outcomes.

Impact of using a local protocol in preoperative testing: blind randomized clinical trial

Objective

to evaluate the impact of the use of a local protocol of preoperative test requests in reducing the number of exams requested and in the occurrence of changes in surgical anesthetic management and perioperative complications.

Methods

we conducted a randomized, blinded clinical trial at the Gaffrée and Guinle University Hospital with 405 patients candidates for elective surgery randomly divided into two groups, according to the practice of requesting preoperative exams: a group with non-selectively requested exams and a protocol group with exams requested according to the study protocol. Studied exams: complete blood count, coagulogram, glycemia, electrolytes, urea and creatinine, ECG and chest X-ray. Primary outcomes: changes in surgical anesthetic management caused by abnormal exams, reduction of the number of exams requested after the use of the protocol and perioperative complications.

Results

there was a significant difference (p<0.001) in the number of exams with altered results between the two groups (14.9% vs. 29.1%) and a reduction of 57.3% in the number of exams requested between the two groups (p<0.001), which was more pronounced in patients of lower age groups, ASA I, without associated diseases and submitted to smaller procedures. There was no significant difference in the frequency of conduct changes motivated by the results of exams or complications between the two groups. In the multivariate analysis, complete blood count and coagulogram were the only exams capable of modifying the anesthetic-surgical management.

Conclusion

the proposed protocol was effective in eliminating a significant number of complementary exams without clinical indication, without an increase in perioperative morbidity and mortality.

Preoperative evaluation and preparation of the morbidly obese patient

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review aims to familiarize with the most current findings regarding preoperative evaluation and preparation of morbidly obese patients prior to elective, noncardiac surgery. In the light of the increasing number of surgical patients being morbidly obese, the knowledge of evidence-based preoperative evaluation strategies is profound for a rational approach.

RECENT FINDINGS

Preoperative evaluation should be carried out with sufficient time before the day of surgery to allow modification of the perioperative management. Medical history-taking and physical examination ought to be performed following a standardized scheme especially focussing on the presence of obstructive sleep apnea. Routine testing for fasting glucose and lipoprotein levels should be performed in order to diagnose a metabolic syndrome. ECG recording should be limited to those patients having one or more additional cardiac risk factors or presenting clinical signs of cardiovascular disease or were planned for intermediate or high-risk surgery. Spirometry should be limited to those patients with obstructive sleep apnea or other respiratory findings.

SUMMARY

Synthesis of proper medical history-taking and physical examination as well as detailed search for obstructive sleep apnea and metabolic syndrome are key components of preoperative evaluation. Further testing should be based on the findings of these steps and comprise the cardiac risk of the surgical procedure.

Monitoring high-risk patients: minimally invasive and non-invasive possibilities

Over the past decades, there has been considerable progress in the field of less invasive haemodynamic monitoring technologies. Substantial evidence has accumulated, which supports the continuous measurement and optimization of flow-based variables such as stroke volume, that is, cardiac output, in order to prevent occult hypoperfusion and consequently to improve patients' outcome in the perioperative setting. However, there is a striking gap between the developments in haemodynamic monitoring and the increasing evidence to implement defined treatment protocols based on the measured variables, and daily clinical routine. Recent trials have shown that perioperative morbidity and mortality is higher than anticipated. This emphasizes the need for the anaesthesia community to address this issue and promotes the implementation of proven concepts into clinical practice in order to improve patients' outcome, especially in high-risk patients. The advances in minimally invasive and non-invasive monitoring techniques can be seen as a driving force in this respect, as the degree of invasiveness of any monitoring tool determines the frequency of its application, especially in the operating room (OR). From this point of view, we are very confident that some of these minimally invasive and non-invasive haemodynamic monitoring technologies will become an inherent part of our monitoring armamentarium in the OR and in the intensive care unit (ICU).

Preoperative Laboratory Testing

Routine preoperative testing is not cost-effective, because it is unlikely to identify significant abnormalities. Abnormal findings from routine testing are more likely to be false positive, are costly to pursue, introduce a new risk, increase the patient's anxiety, and are inconvenient to the patient. Abnormal findings rarely alter the surgical or anesthetic plan, and there is usually no association between perioperative complications and abnormal laboratory results. Incidental findings and false positive results may lead to increased hospital visits and admissions. Preoperative testing needs to be done based on a targeted history and physical examination and the type of surgery.

How to rationalize preoperative tests? A method to implement local guidelines successfully

BACKGROUND

Preoperative screening includes clinical examination and tests. Systematic prescription leads to excessive tests. We conducted an observational retrospective study to assess the success of implementing a protocol-guided prescription procedure for preoperative tests (PTs). We compared the number of PTs prescribed for scheduled surgery before and after the implementation of local guidelines with a specific method.

METHODS

Local guidelines for prescribing PTs based on the French Society of Anaesthesia's recommendations were developed, validated by the anaesthesia team and actively implemented. The implementation procedure was complex and based on the application of sociologic concepts to facilitate PT prescriptions in accordance with the protocol. All PTs (except for children and emergency surgeries) prescribed over a one-week observation period were analysed before and after protocol implementation, respectively in 2011 and 2013.

RESULTS

Two hundred and ninety-two patient files were analysed: 157 in 2011 and 135 in 2013. Ninety-one percent of the prescriptions were in accordance with the recommendations in 2013. Excessive prescribing decreased significantly after the implementation of recommendations (7.1% versus 20.7%, P<0.0001), enabling us to reduce excess costs.

CONCLUSION

We observed excellent adherence to the prescription protocol for PTs. The method used to implement the protocol was successful. A future evaluation should be undertaken to confirm these results over the long-term.

The impact of preoperative testing for blood glucose concentration and haemoglobin A1c on mortality, changes in management and complications in noncardiac elective surgery: a systematic review

BACKGROUND

The risks associated with surgery are elevated in patients with diabetes mellitus. For this reason, preoperative diagnostics frequently include the measurement of blood glucose and haemoglobin A1c (HbA1c), but it is unclear whether these tests contribute to improved perioperative or postoperative outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

This systematic review aimed to evaluate the evidence that preoperative testing for blood glucose and HbA1c might influence the following outcome parameters: changes in clinical management; mortality; and the incidence of perioperative and postoperative complications in patients undergoing elective, noncardiac surgery.

DESIGN

We performed a systematic search of the literature from January 2001 to March 2013, thus updating a review carried out by the National Institute for Health and Clinical Excellence (NICE) up to the year 2001.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA

Controlled studies including cohort and case-control studies with a population of at least 60 patients were eligible.

RESULTS

The search retrieved 1346 records (including hand-search). Twenty-two studies met all inclusion criteria and were included in the review. Fifteen cohort and two case-control studies evaluated the effectiveness of preoperative blood glucose testing and nine studies the effectiveness of testing HbA1c. Four of the included studies evaluated both tests. There were no data derived from high-quality studies supporting routine preoperative testing for blood glucose or HbA1c in otherwise healthy adult patients undergoing elective noncardiac surgery. Only in vascular and orthopaedic surgery may screening identify patients at an increased risk.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative blood glucose testing and testing for HbA1c is not required in nondiabetic patients unless there are clinical sings arousing suspicion. Patients scheduled for vascular and orthopaedic surgery carry an elevated risk justifying preoperative testing for blood glucose or HbA1c as a screening tool.

Effect of screening abdominal ultrasound examination on the decision to pursue advanced diagnostic tests and treatment in dogs with neurologic disease

BACKGROUND

Abdominal ultrasound examinations (AUS) are commonly performed before advanced neurodiagnostics to screen for diseases that might affect diagnostic plans and prognosis.

OBJECTIVES

Describe the type and frequency of abnormalities found by AUS in dogs presenting with a neurological condition, identify risk factors associated with abnormalities, and evaluate treatment decisions based on findings.

ANIMALS

Seven hundred and fifty-nine hospitalized dogs.

METHODS

Retrospective study. Medical records of dogs presented from 2007 to 2009 for neurologic disease were searched for signalment, neuroanatomic localization, and AUS findings. Whether dogs had advanced neurodiagnostics and treatment was analyzed.

RESULTS

Fifty-eight percent of dogs had abnormal findings on AUS. Probability of abnormalities increased with age (P < 0.001). Nondachshund breeds had higher probability of abnormal AUS than dachshunds (odds ratio [OR] = 1.87). Eleven percent of dogs did not have advanced neurodiagnostics and in 1.3%, this was because of abnormal AUS. Dogs with ultrasonographic abnormalities were less likely than dogs without to have advanced neurodiagnostics (OR = 0.3 [95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.17, 0.52]), however, the probability of performing advanced diagnostics was high regardless of normal (OR = 0.95 [95% CI: 0.92, 0.97]) or abnormal (OR = 0.85 [95% CI: 0.81, 0.88]) AUS. Treatment was more often pursued in small dogs and less often in dogs with brain disease.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL IMPORTANCE

Findings from screening AUS had a small negative effect on the likelihood of pursuing advanced neurodiagnostics. Although it should be included in the extracranial diagnostic workup in dogs with significant history or physical examination abnormalities, AUS is considered a low-yield diagnostic test in young dogs and dachshunds.

Operative risk stratification in the older adult

As the population ages, the health care system must to adapt to the needs of the older population. Hospitalization risks are particularly significant in the frail geriatric patients, with costly and morbid consequences. Appropriate preoperative assessment can identify sources of increased risk and enable the surgical team to manage this risk, through "prehabilitation," intraoperative modification, and postoperative care. Geriatric preoperative assessment expands usual risk stratification and careful medication review to include screening for functional disability, cognitive impairment, nutritional deficiency, and frailty. The information gathered can also equip the surgeon to develop a patient-centered and realistic treatment plan.

Preoperative risk assessment--from routine tests to individualized investigation

BACKGROUND

Risk assessment in adults who are about to undergo elective surgery (other than cardiac and thoracic procedures) involves history-taking, physical examination, and ancillary studies performed for individual indications. Further testing beyond the history and physical examination is often of low predictive value for perioperative complications.

METHOD

This review is based on pertinent articles that were retrieved by a selective search in the Medline and Cochrane Library databases and on the consensus-derived recommendations of the German specialty societies.

RESULTS

The history and physical examination remain the central components of preoperative risk assessment. Advanced age is not, in itself, a reason for ancillary testing. Laboratory testing should be performed only if relevant organ disease is known or suspected, or to assess the potential side effects of pharmacotherapy. Electrocardiography as a screening test seems to add little relevant information, even in patients with stable heart disease. A chest X-ray should be obtained only if a disease is suspected whose detection would have clinical consequences in the perioperative period.

CONCLUSION

In preoperative risk assessment, the history and physical examination are the strongest predictors of perioperative complications. Ancillary tests are indicated on an individual basis if the history and physical examination reveal that significant disease may be present.