Safety and efficacy of office-based surgery with monitored anesthesia care/sedation in 4778 consecutive plastic surgery procedures

Safety of Outpatient Plastic Surgery: A Comparative Analysis Using the TOPS Registry with 286,826 Procedures

BACKGROUND

Outpatient plastic surgery at office-based surgery facilities (OBSFs) and ambulatory surgery centers (ASCs) has become increasingly prevalent over the past 30 years. Importantly, historical data are inconsistent regarding the safety outcomes of these venues, with advocates for both citing supporting studies. This investigation's purpose is to provide a more definitive comparative evaluation of outcomes and safety for outpatient surgery performed in these facilities.

METHODS

The most common outpatient procedures were identified using the Tracking Operations and Outcomes for Plastic Surgeons database between 2008 and 2016. Outcomes were analyzed for OBSFs and ASCs. Patient and perioperative information was also analyzed using regression analysis to identify risk factors for complications.

RESULTS

A total of 286,826 procedures were evaluated, of which 43.8% were performed at ASCs and 56.2% at OBSFs. Most patients were healthy, middle-aged women categorized as American Society of Anesthesiologists class I. The incidence of adverse events was 5.7%, and most commonly included antibiotic requirement (1.4%), dehiscence (1.3%), or seroma requiring drainage (1.1%). Overall, there was no significant difference in adverse events between ASCs and OBSFs. Age, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, body mass index, diabetes, smoking history, general anesthesia, certified registered nurse anesthetist involvement, operative duration, noncosmetic indications, and body region were associated with adverse events.

CONCLUSIONS

This study provides an extensive analysis of common plastic surgery procedures performed in an outpatient setting in a representative population. With appropriate patient selection, procedures are safely performed by board-certified plastic surgeons in ambulatory surgery centers and office-based settings, as evidenced by the low incidence of complications in both environments.

CLINICAL QUESTION/LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Therapeutic, III.

A 16-Year Review of Clinical Practice Patterns in Liposuction Based on Continuous Certification by the American Board of Plastic Surgery

BACKGROUND

The American Board of Plastic Surgery has collected data on cosmetic surgery tracers as part of the Continuous Certification process since 2005. The current study was performed to analyze evolving trends in liposuction from the American Board of Plastic Surgery database.

METHODS

Tracer data from 2005 through 2021 were reviewed and grouped into an early cohort (EC) (2005-2014) and a recent cohort (RC) (2015-2021). Fisher exact tests and two-sample t tests were used to compare patient demographics, techniques, and complications.

RESULTS

A total of 2810 suction-assisted liposuction cases were included (1150 EC, 1660 RC). In-office procedures increased (36% EC versus 41% RC). The use of general anesthesia remained the same (63% EC versus 62% RC). The use of power-assisted liposuction increased (24% EC versus 40% RC) and use of ultrasound-assisted liposuction decreased (5% versus 2%). With respect to body areas treated, liposuction of the abdomen (64% EC versus 69% RC), flanks (60% EC versus 64% RC), and back (22% EC versus 34% RC) increased; treatments of thighs (36% EC versus 23% RC), and knees (8% EC versus 5% RC) decreased. Intraoperative position changes are more common (30% EC versus 37% RC), as is liposuction of multiple areas in one case (28% EC versus 36% RC). The volume of lipoaspirate also increased (1150 cc EC versus 1660 cc RC).

CONCLUSIONS

This study highlights evolving trends in liposuction over 16 years. Liposuction is becoming more common as an outpatient procedure performed concomitantly with other procedures. Despite multiple emerging technologies, the popularity of power-assisted liposuction is increasing. Although adverse events have not significantly increased with these changes, the authors stress careful preoperative evaluation of patients to identify factors that increase the risk of complications.

Conscious Sedation Methods for Blepharoplasty in Day Surgery

Midazolam and fentanyl, in combination, are the most commonly used medications for conscious sedation in day aesthetic surgeries. Dexmedetomidine is popularly used in the sedation protocol of our hospital due to its reduced respiratory depression. However, its sedation benefits in facial aesthetic surgeries, like blepharoplasty, have not been well-evaluated. We retrospectively compared individuals sedated with midazolam and fentanyl bolus injection (N = 137) and those sedated with dexmedetomidine infusion (N = 113) to determine which is more suitable for blepharoplasty with a mid-cheek lift. The total amount of local anesthetic (p < 0.001), postoperative pain (p = 0.004), ketoprofen administration (p = 0.028), and the number of hypoxia episodes (p < 0.001) and intraoperative hypertension (p = 0.003) were significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group. Hypoxia severity (p < 0.001) and minor hematoma formation (p = 0.007) were also significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine group. Sedation with dexmedetomidine infusion is associated with less hematoma formation than sedation with midazolam and fentanyl bolus pattern due to hemodynamic stability and analgesic effects. Dexmedetomidine infusion may be a good alternate sedative for lower blepharoplasty.

Enhanced Recovery After Aesthetic Breast Surgery Under Sedation, Intercostal Block and Tumescent Anaesthesia: A Prospective Cohort Study of the Early Postoperative Phase

BACKGROUND

Comfort and recovery are major concerns of patients seeking aesthetic surgery. This study aimed to assess postoperative pain and recovery after outpatient breast surgery under sedation, intercostal block, and local anaesthesia.

METHODS

This prospective cohort study included all consecutive patients who underwent aesthetic breast surgery between April 2021 and August 2022. Epidemiological data, anaesthesia, pain, and patients' satisfaction were systematically assessed with standardized self-assessment questionnaires.

RESULTS

Altogether, 48 patients [median (IQR) age: 30 (36-25)] were included. The most frequent surgery was mastopexy. 69% of surgeries involved additional procedures. The mean intercostal block and local anaesthesia time was 15 min. Patients received a median (IQR) of 19 (34-2) mg/kg lidocaine and 2.3 (2.5-2.0) mg/kg ropivacaine. The median (IQR) consumption of propofol and alfentanil was, respectively, 4.89 (5.48-4.26) mg/kg/h and 0.27 (0.39-0.19) µg/kg/min. No conversion to general anaesthesia or unplanned hospital admission occurred. Patients were discharged after a median (IQR) of 2:40 (3:43-1:58) hours. Within the first 24 postoperative hours, 17% required once an antiemetic medication and 38% an opioid. Patients were very satisfied with the anaesthesia and 90% of the patients had not wished more analgesia in the first 24 h.

CONCLUSIONS

Aesthetic breast surgery under sedation, intercostal block, and tumescent anaesthesia can safely be performed as an ambulatory procedure and is associated with minimal intra- and postoperative opioid consumption and high patient satisfaction. These data may be used to inform patients and clinicians and improve the overall quality of care.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE IV

This journal requires that authors assign a level of evidence to each article. For a full description of these Evidence-Based Medicine ratings, please refer to the Table of Contents or the online Instructions to Authors www.springer.com/00266 .

Patient experiences of sialendoscopy with monitored anesthesia care versus general anesthesia

OBJECTIVE

To compare the experiences of patients who received sialendoscopy under general anesthesia (GA) with those who received monitored anesthesia care (MAC).

METHODS

Patients who underwent sialendoscopy for sialadenitis or sialolithiasis from July 1, 2020, to July 31, 2021, were offered inclusion to this prospective observational study. A survey was sent to consenting patients on post-operative day 1 to record aspects of their pre-, intra-, and post-operative experience. The primary outcome was overall satisfaction. Secondary outcomes included pain tolerability and preference for similar anesthetic modality in the future.

RESULTS

Seventy-five patients completed the post-operative survey (86% response rate), of which 39 patients received GA and 36 received MAC. Patient overall satisfaction was similar between groups (GA: "Poor/Average/Good" = 23%, "Excellent" = 77%; MAC: "Poor/Average/Good" = 25%, "Excellent" = 75%, p = 1.00). Tolerability of immediate post-operative pain was likewise similar between the GA (82%) and MAC (97%) groups (p = 0.058). Patients who received MAC reported intra-operative pain as "none/tolerable" 72% of the time and "uncomfortable" 28% of the time. Patients who received GA would prefer the same anesthetic in the future more often than in the MAC group (85% versus 61%, respectively, OR 3.50, 95% CI 1.17-10.50, p = 0.035).

CONCLUSION

In regard to patient satisfaction, both MAC and GA are acceptable anesthetic choices in sialendoscopy for appropriate cases. Patients report similar overall satisfaction and post-operative pain tolerance under either anesthetic modality. Patients who undergo GA report higher rates of preference for similar anesthetic modality in the future. Further study is needed to determine the most appropriate criteria for anesthesia modality selection.

Downstream Impact for Plastic Surgeons in the United States from the “No Surprises Act”

The No Surprises Act, signed into the US federal law in 2020, establishes a floor for reimbursement determined by insurance payors for out-of-network charges rendered by providers in emergency services. Physicians are not permitted to balance bill patients for the difference. An arbitration process is outlined for mediation between provider and payor if needed.

Quality of recovery and safety of deep intravenous sedation compared to general anesthesia in facial plastic surgery: A prospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Facial plastic surgical procedures are performed under either general anesthesia (GA) or sedation. GA is often associated with post-operative nausea and longer recovery, while deep sedation is thought to greatly facilitate perioperative patient comfort and expedite recovery. The objective of this study was to compare these two anesthetic techniques in a relatively healthy patient population undergoing facial plastic surgery and to discuss optimizing patient safety with a deep sedation technique.

METHODS

A non-randomized, prospective cohort study was conducted to evaluate patients undergoing facial plastic surgery with a focus on rhinoplasty under either deep intravenous sedation (DIVS) in an ambulatory surgery center or under GA in a community hospital. Patients were between ages 18-65 and agreed to participate in the study and complete a quality of recovery (QoR-40) survey. Two-tailed Student's t-test was done for numerical data and Chi-squared test for categorical data.

RESULTS

Twenty-three patients and 16 patients had surgery under DIVS and GA, respectively. Compared to the GA group, the DIVS group had less post-operative nausea and vomiting (21.7% vs 50%, P = 0.04; 4.3% vs 37.5%; P = 0.004, respectively), shorter emergence time (4 vs 13 min, P < 0.001), and higher QoR-40 scores for almost all the categories except for physical independence. There were no post-operative medical or surgical complications.

CONCLUSION

DIVS appeared to be safe in the office-based setting and provided a higher quality recovery after a predominantly rhinoplasty-based practice compared to the GA group. Vigilant monitoring of the patient is crucial for careful titration of sedation to avoid respiratory depression and possible compromise of the surgical result from having to rescue the airway.

Perception of Risk Among Aesthetic Plastic Surgeons

BACKGROUND

With continuous innovation in plastic surgery, new procedures are constantly being introduced. A number of these procedures are generally safe but have the potential for rare yet serious complications. Many surgeons steer clear of these procedures due to safety concerns.

OBJECTIVES

The aim of this paper was to survey the membership of The Aesthetic Society to elicit perception of risk of several novel or less mainstream procedures.

METHODS

A 24-item survey was sent out to members of The Aesthetic Society. The survey focused on surgeon experience and attitude towards 3 procedures: filler rhinoplasty, gluteal augmentation with fat grafting, and submandibular gland excision.

RESULTS

In total, 189 completed surveys were returned. Of the responders, 50%, 49%, and 89% of surgeons said they do not perform filler rhinoplasty, gluteal augmentation with fat grafting, or submandibular gland excision in their practices, respectively. The majority of those who do not perform the procedures selected "danger to the patient" as the primary concern for each of the 3 procedures. Surgeons overwhelmingly reported not learning these procedures in training. Additionally, surgeons perceive the risks of more common procedures such as abdominoplasty and breast augmentation-mastopexy to be significantly lower and more acceptable than those of the studied procedures.

CONCLUSIONS

When comparing the perceived complication rates with data published in the literature, particularly when looking at rates of serious or life-threatening complications, plastic surgeons overestimate the risks of procedures with which they are less familiar. This perception of risk, accompanied by the lack of exposure to novel techniques in training, may contribute to surgeons avoiding these procedures.

Update on Liposuction: What All Plastic Surgeons Should Know

LEARNING OBJECTIVES

After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Understand the types of tumescence available for liposuction. 2. Explain the various modalities available for liposuction. 3. Describe the patient selection, staging, and complications associated with debulking liposuction. 4. Describe ways to optimize outpatient liposuction.

SUMMARY

Liposuction is one of the most common procedures performed by board-certified plastic surgeons and is likely greatly underestimated, given underreporting of office procedures and the number of non-plastic surgeons performing these operations. With the ever-increasing popularity of liposuction, various methodologies and technology have been designed to make this task simpler and faster for the surgeon and hasten the recovery for the patient. In the past 10 years, over 50 devices or techniques have been released to assist, refine, or altogether replace liposuction. With the advent of these newer tools, a thorough Continuing Medical Education study was performed to review the available literature.

Second Generation Radiofrequency Body Contouring Device: Safety and Efficacy in 300 Local Anesthesia Liposuction Cases

BACKGROUND

Suction-assisted lipectomy has undergone significant improvements in technique, outcomes, and safety. The local anesthetic option has an excellent safety profile, and energy-based modalities such as radiofrequency-assisted liposuction (RFAL) devices were developed to enhance soft-tissue contraction. The purpose of this study was to report a single center's experience with two surgeons using the second-generation RFAL device compared with the first-generation device in terms of safety and efficacy.

METHODS

In total, 300 consecutive operations were performed under local anesthesia. Following tumescent injection, the RFAL device was used to heat the skin and underlying collagen network. Subsequently, areas to be contoured were followed with suction-assisted lipectomy to remove excess fat and fluid.

RESULTS

An estimated 300 operations were performed on 240 patients in 421 anatomic areas. Treated areas included the face, trunk, and extremities. The average maximum temperatures were 38.6°C externally and 65.6°C internally. The average total and fat aspirate volumes were 1264 and 648 mL. There were no major complications or mortalities, and 3 minor complications treated locally.

CONCLUSIONS

The data indicated statistically significant lower proportions of major, minor, or cumulative complications compared with the patients who received first-generation RFAL treatment. Major complications were exhibited for 6.25% of the first-generation group and 0% for the second-generation group. The first-generation group exhibited 8.3% minor complications, with 0.7% in the second-generation group. In sum, the data from the second-generation series of RFAL device operations indicate a statistically, as well as clinically, significant reduction in the overall complication rates compared with the first-generation device.

Role and Prognosis of Extracorporeal Life Support in Patients Who Develop Cardiac Arrest during or after Office-Based Cosmetic Surgery

Background

Cardiac arrest during or after office-based cosmetic surgery is rare, and little is known about its prognosis. We assessed the clinical outcomes of patients who developed cardiac arrest during or after cosmetic surgery at office-based clinics.

Methods

Between May 2009 and May 2016, 32 patients who developed cardiac arrest during or after treatment at cosmetic surgery clinics were consecutively enrolled. We compared clinical outcomes, including complications, between survivors (n=19) and non-survivors (n=13) and attempted to determine the prognostic factors of mortality.

Results

All 32 of the patients were female, with a mean age of 30.40±11.87 years. Of the 32 patients, 13 (41%) died. Extracorporeal life support (ECLS) was applied in a greater percentage of non-survivors than survivors (92.3% vs. 47.4%, respectively; p=0.009). The mean duration of in-hospital cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) was longer for the non-survivors than the survivors (31.55±33 minutes vs. 7.59±9.07 minutes, respectively; p=0.01). The mean Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation score was also higher among non-survivors than survivors (23.85±6.68 vs. 16.79±7.44, respectively; p=0.01). No predictor of death was identified in the patients for whom ECLS was applied. Of the 19 survivors, 10 (52.6%) had hypoxic brain damage, and 1 (5.3%) had permanent lower leg ischemia. Logistic regression analyses revealed that the estimated glomerular filtration rate was a predictor of mortality.

Conclusion

Patients who developed cardiac arrest during or after cosmetic surgery at office-based clinics experienced poor prognoses, even though ECLS was applied in most cases. The survivors suffered serious complications. Careful monitoring of subjects and active CPR (when necessary) in cosmetic surgery clinics may be essential.

Demographic Differences Among Patients Undergoing Blepharoplasty Based on Surgeon Training in New York State

PURPOSE

To evaluate whether patient demographics and surgical metrics varied among differently trained surgeons performing blepharoplasty.

METHODS

The Statewide Planning and Research Cooperative System database was used to identify patients who underwent blepharoplasty in New York State. Surgeons were grouped based on residency training as listed in the New York State Physician Profile. Multivariate regression analysis was used to determine predictors of patient characteristics based on surgeon training.

RESULTS

There were 361 surgeons who performed 39,932 cases of blepharoplasty in New York State from 2008 to 2016. When aggregated by surgeon training, there were significant differences among procedure times and total charges for blepharoplasty. On average, cases performed by ophthalmologists took 66.7 minutes and patients were charged $6,860; cases performed by otolaryngologists took 158.2 minutes and patients were charged $9,084; and cases performed by plastic surgeons took 131.8 minutes and patients were charged $11,028. Unlike plastic surgeons or otolaryngologists, ophthalmologists tended to have older patients and more male patients. Ophthalmologists were more likely to operate on patients with comorbidities as well as non-white patients (p < 0.0001). They were also significantly more likely to have patients with insurance coverage than self-pay (p < 0.0001).

CONCLUSIONS

Demographic and surgical metrics of blepharoplasty cases performed by surgeons trained in otolaryngology and plastic surgery are similar. Ophthalmology-trained surgeons performed blepharoplasty on patients that were more likely to be older, male, non-white, and had insurance coverage. Ophthalmologist procedure time for blepharoplasty was also less than half of the procedure time of otolaryngologists and plastic surgeons.Blepharoplasty is a surgical procedure commonly performed by ophthalmologists, otolaryngologists, and plastic surgeons to address cosmetic concerns or visual impairment related to the eyelids.

Tumescent Local Infiltration Anesthesia for Mini Abdominoplasty with Liposuction

AIM:

To evaluate the feasibility and safety of mini abdominoplasty with liposuction under local tumescent anaesthesia (LA) as the sole anaesthetic modality.

METHODS:

The study included 60 female patients with a mean age of 33.3 ± 5.6 years. Local infiltration using a mixture of 1:1000 epinephrine (1 ml), 2% lidocaine (100 ml) and 0.5% Levobupivacaine (50 ml) in 2500 ml saline was started with Local infiltration started with the abdomen, outer thigh, hips, back, inner thighs and knees. After Mini Abdominoplasty with supplemental liposuction was conducted and application of suction drains wound closure was performed, and the tight bandage was applied. Pain during injection, incision and surgical manipulations was determined. Duration of postoperative analgesia, till oral intake and return home, patients and surgeon satisfaction scores were determined.

RESULTS:

All surgeries were conducted completely without conversion to general anaesthesia. Injection pain was mild in 46 patients, moderate in 10 and hardly tolerated in 4 patients. Incision pain was mild in 16 patients, while 44 patients reported no sensation. During the surgical procedure, 6 patients required an additional dose of LA. Meantime till resumption of oral intake was 1.6 ± 0.9 hours. Meantime till home return was 5.6 ± 2.4 hours. Twelve patients were highly satisfied, 18 patients were satisfied, and these 42 patients were willing to repeat the trial if required. Eight patients found the trial is good and only one patient refused to repeat the trial and was dissatisfied, for a mean total satisfaction score of 3.1 ± 0.9.

CONCLUSION:

Mini Abdominoplasty with liposuction could be conducted safely under tumescent LA with mostly pain-free intraoperative and PO courses and allowed such surgical procedure to be managed as an office procedure. The applied anaesthetic procedure provided patients’ satisfaction with varying degrees in about 97% of studied patients.

Safety of Deep Sedation in Patients Undergoing Full-Thickness Skin Graft Harvesting and Skin Graft Reconstruction for Limb Salvage An Outcome Analysis

BACKGROUND:

Studies on obtaining donor skin graft using intravenous sedation for patients undergoing major foot surgeries in the same operating room visit have not previously been reported. The objective of this retrospective study is to demonstrate that intravenous sedation in this setting is both adequate and safe in patients undergoing skin graft reconstruction of the lower extremities in which donor skin graft is harvested from the same patient in one operating room visit.

METHODS:

Medical records of 79 patients who underwent skin graft reconstruction of the lower extremities by one surgeon at the Yale New Haven Health System between November 1, 2008, and July 31, 2014, were reviewed. The patients' demographic characteristics, American Society of Anesthesiologists class, comorbid conditions, intraoperative analgesic administration, estimated blood loss, total operating room time, total postanesthesia care unit time, and postoperative complications within the first 72 hours were reviewed.

RESULTS:

This study found minimal blood loss and no postoperative complications, defined as any pulmonary or cardiac events, bleeding, admission to the intensive care unit, or requirement for invasive monitoring, in patients who underwent major foot surgery in conjunction with full-thickness skin graft.

CONCLUSIONS:

We propose that given the short duration and peripheral nature of the procedures, patients can safely undergo skin graft donor harvesting and skin graft reconstruction procedures with intravenous sedation regardless of American Society of Anesthesiologists class in one operating room visit.

Using continuous quantitative capnography for emergency department procedural sedation: a systematic review and cost-effectiveness analysis

End-tidal CO₂ has been advocated to improve safety of emergency department (ED) procedural sedation by decreasing hypoxia and catastrophic outcomes. This study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of routine use of continuous waveform quantitative end-tidal CO₂ monitoring for ED procedural sedation in prevention of catastrophic events. Markov modeling was used to perform cost-effectiveness analysis to estimate societal costs per prevented catastrophic event (death or hypoxic brain injury) during routine ED procedural sedation. Estimates for efficacy of capnography and safety of sedation were derived from the literature. This model was then applied to all procedural sedations performed in US EDs with assumptions selected to maximize efficacy and minimize cost of implementation. Assuming that capnography decreases the catastrophic adverse event rate by 40.7% (proportional to efficacy in preventing hypoxia), routine use of capnography would decrease the 5-year estimated catastrophic event rate in all US EDs from 15.5 events to 9.2 events (difference 6.3 prevented events per 5 years). Over a 5-year period, implementing routine end-tidal CO₂ monitoring would cost an estimated $2,830,326 per prevented catastrophic event, which translates into $114,007 per quality-adjusted life-year. Sensitivity analyses suggest that reasonable assumptions continue to estimate high costs of prevented catastrophic events. Continuous waveform quantitative end-tidal CO₂ monitoring is a very costly strategy to prevent catastrophic complications of procedural sedation when applied routinely in ED procedural sedations.

Evaluation of Monitored Anesthesia Care in Sialendoscopy

Importance

In the United States, sialendoscopy is most often performed under general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation (GETA); however, monitored anesthesia care (MAC) may be a viable alternative.

Objective

To investigate patient characteristics and outcomes following sialendoscopy performed under MAC or GETA to assess the potential of MAC as an alternative anesthetic option.

Design, Setting, and Participants

A retrospective review of medical records on patients who underwent sialendoscopy between October 1, 2011, and August 31, 2014, was performed. Patient characteristics, salivary stone characteristics, intraoperative findings, operative time (OT), anesthesia time (AT), and outcomes were evaluated. Data analysis was performed from November 1, 2015, to March 1, 2016.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Operative and anesthetic times for sialendoscopy under MAC and GETA.

Results

Sixty-five patients underwent 70 sialendoscopy procedures: 27 performed under MAC, 43 under GETA. Overall, 37 of 65 (56.9%) patients were women, with 17 (63.0%) in the MAC group and 20 (52.6%) in the GETA group. Mean (SD) patient age was 49.4 (17.3) and 47.2 (16.2) years for the MAC and GETA cohorts, respectively. Median (25th-75th quartiles) OT in minutes for MAC cases was significant for no stones (49.0 [31.0-49.0]) and stones (41.0 [28.0-92.0]) present; nonsignificant findings were stones in the Wharton (46.0 [28.0-92.0]) and Stenson (37.0; 1 case) ducts. For GETA cases, significance was also demonstrated for no stones (55.0 [52.0-91.0]) and stones (77.0 [56.0-107.0]) present; nonsignificant findings were stones in the Wharton (79.0 [56.0-107.0]) and Stenson (65.0 [49.0-98.0]) ducts. The AT in minutes for MAC cases was significant for no stones (33.0 [30.0-39.0]) and stones (38.0 [32.0-55.0]) present; nonsignificant findings were stones in the Wharton (60.0 [32.0-55.0]) and Stenson (37.0; 1 case) ducts. For GETA cases, findings were also significant for no stones (61.0 [52.0-67.0]) and stones (59.0 [53.0-67.0]) present; nonsignificant findings were stones in the Wharton (60.0 [54.0-69.0]) and Stenson (52.0 [48.0-61.0]) ducts.

Conclusions and Relevance

This study suggests that sialendoscopy under MAC has faster median OT and AT, regardless of varying case circumstances, such as the presence or lack of stones, successful stone removal, stone size (>5 mm), stone location, and sialendoscopy-assisted open procedures. Sialendoscopy under MAC may be a reasonable anesthetic alternative to GETA in an appropriate setting with an experienced surgeon, experienced anesthesiologist comfortable with administering MAC, cases with small (<4-mm) singular stones, and patients comfortable with undergoing the procedure without GETA.

Caprini Scores, Risk Stratification, and Rivaroxaban in Plastic Surgery: Time to Reconsider Our Strategy

Limited data are available regarding the pathophysiology of venous thromboembolism in plastic surgery patients. In an effort to identify patients at greater risk, some investigators promote individual risk assessment using Caprini scores. However, these scores do not correlate with relative risk values. Affected patients cannot be reliably predicted (97% false positive rate). Caprini scores make many body contouring patients candidates for chemoprophylaxis, an intervention that introduces risks related to anticoagulation. Caprini has financial conflicts with several companies that manufacture products such as enoxaparin, commonly used for chemoprophylaxis. Rivaroxaban, taken orally, has been used by some plastic surgeons as an alternative to enoxaparin injections. However, this medication is not United States Food and Drug Administration approved for venous thromboembolism prophylaxis in plastic surgery patients, and a reversal agent is unavailable. This article challenges the prevailing wisdom regarding individual risk stratification and chemoprophylaxis. Alternative methods to reduce risk for all patients include safer anesthesia methods and Doppler ultrasound surveillance. Clinical findings alone are unreliable in diagnosing deep venous thromboses. Only by using a reliable diagnostic tool such as Doppler ultrasound are we able to learn more about the natural history of this problem in our patients. Such knowledge is likely to better inform our treatment recommendations.

Ultrasound screening for deep venous thrombosis detection: a prospective evaluation of 200 plastic surgery outpatients

Background:

Our understanding of the pathophysiology of venous thromboembolism is largely based on the experience of orthopedic patients undergoing total joint replacement. Little is known regarding the natural history of venous thromboembolism in plastic surgery outpatients. Today, ultrasound screening, including compression and Doppler color flow imaging, represents the standard for detecting deep venous thromboses.

Methods:

Ultrasound screening was offered to 200 consecutive plastic surgery outpatients undergoing 205 operations. Patients were scanned before surgery, on the day after surgery, and approximately 1 week after surgery. No patient declined to participate (inclusion rate, 100%). Spontaneous breathing, Avoid gas, Face up, Extremities mobile anesthesia was used, with no chemoprophylaxis. Patient surveys were administered.

Results:

Six hundred ultrasound screening tests were performed. All scans performed the day after surgery were negative. Only one examination was positive, 8 days after a lipoabdominoplasty. Subsequent scans revealed complete resolution of the thrombosis with anticoagulation. Ninety percent of surveyed patients would choose to have ultrasound screening in the future.

Conclusions:

The natural history of thromboembolism in plastic surgery outpatients differs from orthopedic patients. The risk of a deep venous thrombosis in a patient treated with Spontaneous breathing, Avoid gas, Face up, Extremities mobile anesthesia is approximately 0.5%. Thromboses are unlikely to develop intraoperatively. In the single affected patient, the thrombosis was located distally, in a location that is less prone to embolism and highly susceptible to anticoagulation. Ultrasound screening is an effective and highly feasible method to identify affected patients for treatment.

The Case against Chemoprophylaxis for Venous Thromboembolism Prevention and the Rationale for SAFE Anesthesia

SUMMARY

The Venous Thromboembolism Prevention study concludes that anticoagulation is effective in reducing the risk of thromboembolism in patients who are identified as higher risk by Caprini scores. This report critically assesses the statistics used in the Venous Thromboembolism Prevention study, its method of data presentation, and its conclusions. The usefulness of risk stratification and the value of anticoagulation-both prevailing concepts in risk reduction today-are challenged. Actual data show that chemoprophylaxis has no proven benefit in plastic surgery. Complications of anticoagulation predictably include excessive bleeding and hematomas, which may be serious and life-threatening. Several large published series of patients undergoing elective plastic surgery under total intravenous anesthesia have shown a much reduced risk of thromboembolism. A SAFE (Spontaneous breathing, Avoid gas, Face up, Extremities mobile) anesthesia method is discussed as a safer and more effective alternative to traditional general endotracheal anesthesia and anticoagulation. The choice for plastic surgeons is not between a venous thromboembolism and a hematoma. The choice is between a thromboembolism and adjusting our anesthesia and surgery habits to reduce the risk to a baseline level.

Chemoprophylaxis for venous thromboembolism prevention: concerns regarding efficacy and ethics

SUMMARY

Chemoprophylaxis has been recommended for plastic surgery patients judged to be at increased risk for venous thromboembolism. Several investigators have encountered this complication in patients despite anticoagulation therapy. An increased rate of complications related to postoperative bleeding has been reported. This article examines the efficacy and safety of this intervention, along with ethical considerations, in an attempt to determine whether any benefits of chemoprophylaxis justify the additional risks. The statistical methods and conclusion of the Venous Thromboembolism Prevention Study are challenged. Other preventative measures that do not cause negative side effects are discussed as safer alternatives.

The role of systematic reviews in pharmacovigilance planning and Clinical Trials Authorisation application: example from the SLEEPS trial

BACKGROUND

Adequate sedation is crucial to the management of children requiring assisted ventilation on Paediatric Intensive Care Units (PICU). The evidence-base of randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in this area is small and a trial was planned to compare midazolam and clonidine, two sedatives widely used within PICUs neither of which being licensed for that use. The application to obtain a Clinical Trials Authorisation from the Medicines and Healthcare products Regulatory Agency (MHRA) required a dossier summarising the safety profiles of each drug and the pharmacovigilance plan for the trial needed to be determined by this information. A systematic review was undertaken to identify reports relating to the safety of each drug.

METHODOLOGY/PRINCIPAL FINDINGS

The Summary of Product Characteristics (SmPC) were obtained for each sedative. The MHRA were requested to provide reports relating to the use of each drug as a sedative in children under the age of 16. Medline was searched to identify RCTs, controlled clinical trials, observational studies, case reports and series. 288 abstracts were identified for midazolam and 16 for clonidine with full texts obtained for 80 and 6 articles respectively. Thirty-three studies provided data for midazolam and two for clonidine. The majority of data has come from observational studies and case reports. The MHRA provided details of 10 and 3 reports of suspected adverse drug reactions.

CONCLUSIONS/SIGNIFICANCE

No adverse reactions were identified in addition to those specified within the SmPC for the licensed use of the drugs. Based on this information and the wide spread use of both sedatives in routine practice the pharmacovigilance plan was restricted to adverse reactions. The Clinical Trials Authorisation was granted based on the data presented in the SmPC and the pharmacovigilance plan within the clinical trial protocol restricting collection and reporting to adverse reactions.

Usefulness of Intravenous Anesthesia Using a Target-controlled Infusion System with Local Anesthesia in Submuscular Breast Augmentation Surgery

Background

Patients have anxiety and fear of complications due to general anesthesia. Through new instruments and local anesthetic drugs, a variety of anesthetic methods have been introduced. These methods keep hospital costs down and save time for patients. In particular, the target-controlled infusion (TCI) system maintains a relatively accurate level of plasma concentration, so the depth of anesthesia can be adjusted more easily. We conducted this study to examine whether intravenous anesthesia using the TCI system with propofol and remifentanil would be an effective method of anesthesia in breast augmentation.

Methods

This study recruited 100 patients who underwent breast augmentation surgery from February to August 2011. Intravenous anesthesia was performed with 10 mg/mL propofol and 50 µg/mL remifentanil simultaneously administered using two separate modules of a continuous computer-assisted TCI system. The average target concentration was set at 2 µg/mL and 2 ng/mL for propofol and remifentanil, respectively, and titrated against clinical effect and vital signs. Oxygen saturation, electrocardiography, and respiratory status were continuously measured during surgery. Blood pressure was measured at 5-minute intervals. Information collected includes total duration of surgery, dose of drugs administered during surgery, memory about surgery, and side effects.

Results

Intraoperatively, there was transient hypotension in two cases and hypoxia in three cases. However, there were no serious complications due to anesthesia such as respiratory difficulty, deep vein thrombosis, or malignant hypertension, for which an endotracheal intubation or reversal agent would have been needed. All the patients were discharged on the day of surgery and able to ambulate normally.

Conclusions

Our results indicate that anesthetic methods, where the TCI of propofol and remifentanil is used, might replace general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation in breast augmentation surgery.

Minimally invasive parathyroidectomy using local anesthesia with intravenous sedation and targeted approaches

OBJECTIVES

Minimally invasive parathyroidectomy (MIP) is generally performed under general anesthesia. This study evaluates the efficacy and safety of MIP performed under intravenous sedation with local anesthesia.

STUDY DESIGN

Historical cohort study.

SUBJECTS

One hundred eighty-six consecutive patients undergoing MIP using sedation with local anesthesia.

METHODS

Two different targeted approaches were used to achieve good exposure with minimal retraction, which allows the procedure to be performed with little discomfort. In all patients, an adenoma was localized preoperatively and its depth mapped by sestamibi scan with single-photon emission computed tomography and/or ultrasound. A midline anterior approach was used for inferior glands that were superficially located. A lateral approach was used for glands that were located posteriorly or superiorly.

RESULTS

MIP was successfully completed under local/sedation in 177 patients; 167 were discharged the same day. Complications include two pneumothorax, one small hematoma, and one transient vocal cord paralysis.

CONCLUSIONS

By using a targeted approach, MIP can be safely performed under local anesthesia in appropriately selected patients.

Office-based plastic surgery with general anesthesia: efficiency of cost and time

Office-based plastic surgery with general anesthesia has several benefits compared with hospital-based surgery. Office-based procedures can be done in a safe, cost- and time-efficient manner, with improved convenience for both the surgeon and the patient. A review and discussion of outpatient plastic surgery procedures at the Marina Outpatient Surgery Center in Marina del Rey, California, was performed.

Sedation monitor for the office-based plastic surgery setting

Safety is always the primary concern of surgeons and patients in any office-based procedure. With the growing use of safe intravenous sedation in this setting, a need for a standardized protocol for dissociative anesthesia exists. We have accomplished this task by using a sedation monitoring system, which could easily be implemented in any existing office-based operating setting. Our sedation monitor, abbreviated SeMo, provides a standardized means of monitoring deep intravenous sedation administration to patients in the operating room setting. The idea of SeMo is to develop a stand-alone system capable of integrating all facets of the operating room staff through a common communication media to improve efficiency and safety.

Periocular anesthesia in aesthetic surgery

This article focuses on the administration of anesthesia for periocular aesthetic procedures. Special emphasis is given to office-based procedures, most often without any systemic sedation, highlighting the importance of open communication with patients. Finally, attention is given to potential pitfalls including anesthetic systemic toxicity, ocular injuries, and orbicularis myotoxicity.

Demographics and trends in nonoperating-room anesthesia

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

Nonoperating-room anesthesia includes sedation or anesthesia for radiological imaging, cardiac catheterization, office-based surgery, and pediatric procedures or investigations, all of which have seen explosive growth over the last decade. This review discusses the factors that are driving this growth and the challenges we face as a profession to accommodate new practice paradigms.

RECENT FINDINGS

Many departments have difficulty providing services for nonoperating-room anesthesia. A shortage of providers, insufficient reimbursement, and lack of institutional support have been identified as barriers limiting delivery of pediatric nonoperating-room sedation services. Practitioners from other specialties appear increasingly eager to provide sedation at an institutional level. The use of propofol by nonanesthesiologists is widespread, and the issue of provider credentialing has yet to be fully resolved. The shift to nonoperating-room locations will continue, driven by cost savings and convenience for patients and providers.

SUMMARY

Nonoperating-room anesthesia will play a central role in anesthesia practice in the future. Provision of these services requires planning, personnel, and institutional resources. This should be a high priority for anesthesiology departments to ensure delivery of the highest quality of patient care in a cost-effective and organized manner.

Comparison of electrophysiologic monitors with clinical assessment of level of sedation

OBJECTIVE

To assess the correlation between 2 clinical sedation scales and 2 electroencephalographic (EEG)-based monitors used during surgical procedures that required mild to moderate sedation.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Patients scheduled for elective surgery participated in this Institutional review board-approved study from March 2003 to February 2004. Level of sedation was determined both clinically using the Ramsay and the Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scales and with 2 EEG measures (the Bispectral Index version XP [BIS XP] or the Patient State Analyzer [PSA 4000]). Correlation between these 2 measures of sedation were tested using nonparametric statistical tests.

RESULTS

The BIS XP monitor was used in 26 patients, and the PSA 4000 monitor was used in 24 patients. The Ramsay and Observer's Assessment of Alertness/Sedation scores correlated with each other (r = -0.96; P < .001) and with both the BIS XP (r = -0.89 and r = 0.91, respectively; P < .001) and the PSA 4000 (r = -0.80 and r = 0.80, respectively; P < .001) values. However, this correlation was strongest only at the extremes. Between the BIS XP and PSA 4000 values of 61 and 80, the clinical sedation scores varied greatly.

CONCLUSION

On the basis of our results, these EEG-based monitors cannot reliably distinguish between light and deep sedation.