Pre-operative echocardiography among patients with coronary artery disease in the United States Veterans Affairs healthcare system: A retrospective cohort study

Perioperative Medicine for Ambulatory Surgery

Ambulatory anesthesia for same-day surgery is a fast-growing and ever-improving branch of modern anesthesia. This is primarily driven by the involvement of anesthesiologists as perioperative physicians working in multidisciplinary groups. These groups work together to improve patient safety, patient outcomes, and overall efficiency of both in-patient and out-patient surgery. Appropriate patient selection and optimization are critical to maintain and improve the foundational entities of best ambulatory anesthesia practice. In this review article, a selection of considerations in the field of ambulatory anesthesia are featured, such as the aging population, sleep apnea, obesity, diabetes, cardiac disease, substance abuse, preoperative medication management, multimodal analgesia, social determinants of health, and surgical facility resources.

Preoperative assessment of adults undergoing elective noncardiac surgery: Updated guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care

BACKGROUND

When considering whether a patient is fit for surgery, a comprehensive patient assessment represents the first step for an anaesthetist to evaluate the risks associated with the procedure and the patient's underlying diseases, and to optimise (whenever possible) the perioperative surgical journey. These guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine (ESAIC) update previous guidelines to provide new evidence on existing and emerging topics that consider the different aspects of the patient's surgical path.

DESIGN

A comprehensive literature review focused on organisation, clinical facets, optimisation and planning. The methodological quality of the studies included was evaluated using the GRADE (Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation) methodology. A Delphi process agreed on the wording of recommendations, and clinical practice statements (CPS) supported by minimal evidence. A draft version of the guidelines was published on the ESAIC website for 4 weeks, and the link was distributed to all ESAIC members, both individual and national, encompassing most European national anaesthesia societies. Feedback was gathered and incorporated into the guidelines accordingly. Following the finalisation of the draft, the Guidelines Committee and ESAIC Board officially approved the guidelines.

RESULTS

In the first phase of the guidelines update, 17 668 titles were initially identified. After removing duplicates and restricting the search period from 1 January 2018 to 3 May 2023, the number of titles was reduced to 16 774, which were then screened, yielding 414 abstracts. Among these, 267 relevant abstracts were identified from which 204 appropriate titles were selected for a comprehensive GRADE analysis. Additionally, the study considered 4 reviews, 16 meta-analyses, 9 previously published guidelines, 58 prospective cohort studies and 83 retrospective studies. The guideline provides 55 evidence-based recommendations that were voted on by a Delphi process, reaching a solid consensus (>90% agreement).

DISCUSSION

This update of the previous guidelines has covered new organisational and clinical aspects of the preoperative anaesthesia assessment to provide a more objective evaluation of patients with a high risk of postoperative complications requiring intensive care. Telemedicine and more predictive preoperative scores and biomarkers should guide the anaesthetist in selecting the appropriate preoperative blood tests, x-rays, and so forth for each patient, allowing the anaesthetist to assess the risks and suggest the most appropriate anaesthetic plan.

CONCLUSION

Each patient should have a tailored assessment of their fitness to undergo procedures requiring the involvement of an anaesthetist. The anaesthetist's role is essential in this phase to obtain a broad vision of the patient's clinical conditions, to coordinate care and to help the patient reach an informed decision.

2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM Guideline for Perioperative Cardiovascular Management for Noncardiac Surgery: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM Guideline for Perioperative Cardiovascular Management for Noncardiac Surgery" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and management of adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from August 2022 to March 2023 to identify clinical studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from the "2014 ACC/AHA Guideline on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Management of Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery" have been updated with new evidence consolidated to guide clinicians; clinicians should be advised this guideline supersedes the previously published 2014 guideline. In addition, evidence-based management strategies, including pharmacological therapies, perioperative monitoring, and devices, for cardiovascular disease and associated medical conditions, have been developed.

2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM Guideline for Perioperative Cardiovascular Management for Noncardiac Surgery: A Report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Joint Committee on Clinical Practice Guidelines

AIM

The "2024 AHA/ACC/ACS/ASNC/HRS/SCA/SCCT/SCMR/SVM Guideline for Perioperative Cardiovascular Management for Noncardiac Surgery" provides recommendations to guide clinicians in the perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and management of adult patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

METHODS

A comprehensive literature search was conducted from August 2022 to March 2023 to identify clinical studies, reviews, and other evidence conducted on human subjects that were published in English from MEDLINE (through PubMed), EMBASE, the Cochrane Library, the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality, and other selected databases relevant to this guideline.

STRUCTURE

Recommendations from the "2014 ACC/AHA Guideline on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Management of Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery" have been updated with new evidence consolidated to guide clinicians; clinicians should be advised this guideline supersedes the previously published 2014 guideline. In addition, evidence-based management strategies, including pharmacological therapies, perioperative monitoring, and devices, for cardiovascular disease and associated medical conditions, have been developed.

Prognostic value of stress CMR and SPECT-MPI in patients undergoing intermediate-to-high-risk non-cardiac surgery

PURPOSE

The objective of this study was to investigate the role of myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI) stress tests using stress cardiac magnetic resonance (sCMR) and single-photon emission computed tomography myocardial perfusion imaging (SPECT-MPI) in non-cardiac surgery (NCS) pre-operatory management.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This monocentric retrospective study enrolled patients with coronary artery disease or a minimum of two cardiovascular risk factors undergoing intermediate-to-high-risk non-cardiac surgeries. The primary composite endpoint comprised cardiac death, cardiogenic shock, acute coronary syndromes (ACS), and cardiogenic pulmonary edema occurring within 30 days after surgery, while the secondary endpoint was ACS.

RESULTS

A total of 1590 patients were enrolled; among them, 669 underwent a MPI stress test strategy (sCMR: 287, SPECT-MPI: 382). The incidence of 30-day cardiac events was lower in the stress-tested group compared to the non-stress-tested group (1.2% vs. 3.4%; p 0.006). Adopting a stress test strategy showed a significant reduction in the risk of the composite endpoint (OR: 0.33, 95% CI: 0.15-0.76, p 0.009) and ACS (OR: 0.41, 95% CI: 0.17-0.98, p 0.046) at multivariable analysis, with similar cardiac events rate between stress CMR and SPECT (1.1% vs. 1.3%, p 0.756). Stress CMR showed a greater accuracy to predict coronary artery revascularizations (sCMR c-statistic: 0.95, ischemic cut-point: 5.5%; SPECT c-statistic: 0.85, ischemic cut-point: 7.5%).

CONCLUSION

Stress test strategy is related to a lower occurrence of cardiac events in high-risk patients scheduled for intermediate-to-high-risk non-cardiac surgeries. Both sCMR and SPECT-MPI comparably reduce the likelihood of cardiac complications, albeit sCMR offers greater accuracy in predicting coronary artery revascularization.

The comparative and added prognostic value of biomarkers to the Revised Cardiac Risk Index for preoperative prediction of major adverse cardiac events and all-cause mortality in patients who undergo noncardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

The Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) is a widely acknowledged prognostic model to estimate preoperatively the probability of developing in-hospital major adverse cardiac events (MACE) in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. However, the RCRI does not always make accurate predictions, so various studies have investigated whether biomarkers added to or compared with the RCRI could improve this.

OBJECTIVES

Primary: To investigate the added predictive value of biomarkers to the RCRI to preoperatively predict in-hospital MACE and other adverse outcomes in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Secondary: To investigate the prognostic value of biomarkers compared to the RCRI to preoperatively predict in-hospital MACE and other adverse outcomes in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. Tertiary: To investigate the prognostic value of other prediction models compared to the RCRI to preoperatively predict in-hospital MACE and other adverse outcomes in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched MEDLINE and Embase from 1 January 1999 (the year that the RCRI was published) until 25 June 2020. We also searched ISI Web of Science and SCOPUS for articles referring to the original RCRI development study in that period.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included studies among adults who underwent noncardiac surgery, reporting on (external) validation of the RCRI and: - the addition of biomarker(s) to the RCRI; or - the comparison of the predictive accuracy of biomarker(s) to the RCRI; or - the comparison of the predictive accuracy of the RCRI to other models. Besides MACE, all other adverse outcomes were considered for inclusion.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We developed a data extraction form based on the CHARMS checklist. Independent pairs of authors screened references, extracted data and assessed risk of bias and concerns regarding applicability according to PROBAST. For biomarkers and prediction models that were added or compared to the RCRI in ≥ 3 different articles, we described study characteristics and findings in further detail. We did not apply GRADE as no guidance is available for prognostic model reviews.

MAIN RESULTS

We screened 3960 records and included 107 articles.   Over all objectives we rated risk of bias as high in ≥ 1 domain in 90% of included studies, particularly in the analysis domain. Statistical pooling or meta-analysis of reported results was impossible due to heterogeneity in various aspects: outcomes used, scale by which the biomarker was added/compared to the RCRI, prediction horizons and studied populations.  Added predictive value of biomarkers to the RCRI Fifty-one studies reported on the added value of biomarkers to the RCRI. Sixty-nine different predictors were identified derived from blood (29%), imaging (33%) or other sources (38%). Addition of NT-proBNP, troponin or their combination improved the RCRI for predicting MACE (median delta c-statistics: 0.08, 0.14 and 0.12 for NT-proBNP, troponin and their combination, respectively). The median total net reclassification index (NRI) was 0.16 and 0.74 after addition of troponin and NT-proBNP to the RCRI, respectively. Calibration was not reported. To predict myocardial infarction, the median delta c-statistic when NT-proBNP was added to the RCRI was 0.09, and 0.06 for prediction of all-cause mortality and MACE combined. For BNP and copeptin, data were not sufficient to provide results on their added predictive performance, for any of the outcomes. Comparison of the predictive value of biomarkers to the RCRI  Fifty-one studies assessed the predictive performance of biomarkers alone compared to the RCRI. We identified 60 unique predictors derived from blood (38%), imaging (30%) or other sources, such as the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification (32%). Predictions were similar between the ASA classification and the RCRI for all studied outcomes. In studies different from those identified in objective 1, the median delta c-statistic was 0.15 and 0.12 in favour of  BNP and NT-proBNP alone, respectively, when compared to the RCRI, for the prediction of MACE. For C-reactive protein, the predictive performance was similar to the RCRI. For other biomarkers and outcomes, data were insufficient to provide summary results. One study reported on calibration and none on reclassification. Comparison of the predictive value of other prognostic models to the RCRI   Fifty-two articles compared the predictive ability of the RCRI to other prognostic models. Of these, 42% developed a new prediction model, 22% updated the RCRI, or another prediction model, and 37% validated an existing prediction model. None of the other prediction models showed better performance in predicting MACE than the RCRI. To predict myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest, ACS-NSQIP-MICA had a higher median delta c-statistic of 0.11 compared to the RCRI. To predict all-cause mortality, the median delta c-statistic was 0.15 higher in favour of ACS-NSQIP-SRS compared to the RCRI. Predictive performance was not better for CHADS2, CHA2DS2-VASc, R2CHADS2, Goldman index, Detsky index or VSG-CRI compared to the RCRI for any of the outcomes. Calibration and reclassification were reported in only one and three studies, respectively.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

Studies included in this review suggest that the predictive performance of the RCRI in predicting MACE is improved when NT-proBNP, troponin or their combination are added. Other studies indicate that BNP and NT-proBNP, when used in isolation, may even have a higher discriminative performance than the RCRI. There was insufficient evidence of a difference between the predictive accuracy of the RCRI and other prediction models in predicting MACE. However, ACS-NSQIP-MICA and ACS-NSQIP-SRS outperformed the RCRI in predicting myocardial infarction and cardiac arrest combined, and all-cause mortality, respectively. Nevertheless, the results cannot be interpreted as conclusive due to high risks of bias in a majority of papers, and pooling was impossible due to heterogeneity in outcomes, prediction horizons, biomarkers and studied populations. Future research on the added prognostic value of biomarkers to existing prediction models should focus on biomarkers with good predictive accuracy in other settings (e.g. diagnosis of myocardial infarction) and identification of biomarkers from omics data. They should be compared to novel biomarkers with so far insufficient evidence compared to established ones, including NT-proBNP or troponins. Adherence to recent guidance for prediction model studies (e.g. TRIPOD; PROBAST) and use of standardised outcome definitions in primary studies is highly recommended to facilitate systematic review and meta-analyses in the future.

Evaluation of Appropriate Use of Preoperative Echocardiography before Major Abdominal Surgery: A Retrospective Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

Preoperative resting echocardiography is often performed before noncardiac surgery, but indications for preoperative resting echocardiography are limited. This study aimed to investigate appropriateness of preoperative resting echocardiography using the Appropriate Use Criteria for Echocardiography, which encompass indications from the guidelines on perioperative cardiovascular evaluation and management and nonperioperative indications independent of the perioperative period. The authors hypothesized that patients are frequently tested without an appropriate indication.

METHODS

Records of patients in the Truven Health MarketScan Commercial and Medicare Supplemental Databases who underwent a major abdominal surgery from 2005 to 2017 were included. These databases contain de-identified records of health services for more than 250 million patients with primary or Medicare supplemental health insurance coverage through employer-based fee-for-service, point-of-service, or capitated plans. Patients were classified based on the presence of an outpatient claim for resting transthoracic echocardiography within 60 days of surgery. Appropriateness was determined via International Classification of Diseases, Ninth Revision-Clinical Modification, and International Classification of Diseases, Tenth Revision-Clinical Modification principal and secondary diagnosis codes associated with the claims, and classified as "appropriate," "rarely appropriate," or "unclassifiable" using the Appropriate Use Criteria for Echocardiography.

RESULTS

Among 230,535 patients in the authors' cohort, preoperative resting transthoracic echocardiography was performed in 6.0% (13,936) of patients. There were 12,638 (91%) studies classifiable by the Appropriate Use Criteria for Echocardiography, and 1,298 (9%) were unable to be classified. Among the classifiable studies, 8,959 (71%) were deemed "appropriate," while 3,679 (29%) were deemed "rarely appropriate." Surveillance of chronic ischemic heart disease and uncomplicated hypertension accounted for 43% (1,588 of 3,679) of "rarely appropriate" echocardiograms.

CONCLUSIONS

More than one in four preoperative resting echocardiograms were considered "rarely appropriate" according to the Appropriate Use Criteria for Echocardiography. A narrow set of patient characteristics accounts for a large proportion of "rarely appropriate" preoperative resting echocardiograms.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE

Association of Echocardiography Before Major Elective Non-Cardiac Surgery With Improved Postoperative Outcomes - Possible Implications for Patient Care

BACKGROUND

Whether preoperative echocardiography improves postoperative outcomes is not well established, so we examined the value of echocardiographic assessment on the onset of postoperative heart failure (HF), and determining which patients benefitted most from undergoing echocardiography prior to major elective non-cardiac surgery.

METHODS AND RESULTS

We identified all patients aged 50 years and older who had major elective non-cardiac surgery, and excluded patients with previously identified severe cardiovascular disease. The primary endpoint was the onset of HF during hospitalization. A total of 806 patients were included in the analysis. During hospitalization, 49 patients (6%) reached the primary endpoint. Within the matched cohort, preoperative echocardiography was associated with a statistically significant decrease in postoperative HF (hazard ratio: 0.46, P=0.01). In subgroup analyses, age, sex, body surface area, hypertension, diabetes mellitus, prior HF, surgical type, chronic kidney disease, pulmonary disease, and malignancy influenced the association of echocardiography with postoperative HF.

CONCLUSIONS

The use of echocardiography in elderly patients with certain risk factors was associated with improved postoperative outcomes. The basis for this finding remains to be determined; particularly whether echocardiography is simply a marker of a population with better outcomes or whether it leads to better management that improves outcomes.

Use of echocardiography at diagnosis and detection of acute cardiac disease in youth with systemic lupus erythematosus

Objectives There are no guidelines on the use of echocardiography to detect cardiac manifestations of childhood-onset systemic lupus erythematosus (SLE). We quantify the prevalence of acute cardiac disease in youth with SLE, describe echocardiogram utilization at SLE diagnosis, and compare regional echocardiogram use with incident cardiac diagnoses. Methods Using the Clinformatics® DataMart (OptumInsight, Eden Prairie, MN) de-identified United States administrative database from 2000 to 2013, we identified youth ages 5-24 years with new-onset SLE (≥3 ICD-9 SLE codes 710.0, > 30 days apart) and determined the prevalence of diagnostic codes for pericardial disease, myocarditis, endocarditis, and valvular insufficiency. Multiple logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with echocardiography during the baseline period, up to one year before or six months after SLE diagnosis. We calculated a regional echocardiogram utilization index, which is the ratio of observed use over the mean predicted probability based on all available baseline characteristics. Spearman's rank correlation coefficient was used to evaluate the association between regional echocardiogram utilization indices and percentage of imaged youth diagnosed with their first cardiac manifestation following echocardiography. Results Among 699 youth with new-onset SLE, 18% had ≥ 1 diagnosis code for acute cardiac disease, of which valvular insufficiency and pericarditis were most common. Twenty-five percent of all youth underwent echocardiogram during the baseline period. Regional echocardiogram use was positively correlated with the percentage of imaged youth found to have cardiac disease (ρ = 0.71, p = 0.05). There was up to a five-fold difference in adjusted odds of baseline echocardiography between low- and high-utilizing regions (OR = 0.19, p = 0.007). Conclusion Nearly one-fifth of youth with new-onset SLE have acute cardiac manifestations; however, use of echocardiograms at SLE diagnosis is highly variable. There may be incremental diagnostic value to early use of echocardiography, but prospective studies are needed to determine whether greater use of echocardiograms modifies outcomes.