Search

Cardiovascular conditions such as hypertension, arrhythmias, and heart failure are common in patients undergoing anesthesia for surgical or other procedures. Numerous guidelines from various specialty societies offer variable recommendations for the perioperative management of these medications. The Society for Perioperative Assessment and Quality Improvement identified a need to provide multidisciplinary evidence-based recommendations for preoperative medication management. The society convened a group of 13 members with expertise in perioperative medicine and training in anesthesiology or internal medicine. The aim of this consensus effort is to provide perioperative clinicians with guidance on the management of cardiovascular medications commonly encountered during the preoperative evaluation. We used a modified Delphi process to establish consensus. Twenty-one classes of medications were identified: α-adrenergic receptor antagonists, angiotensin-converting enzyme inhibitors, angiotensin II receptor blockers, angiotensin receptor-neprilysin inhibitors, β-adrenoceptor blockers, calcium-channel blockers, centrally acting sympatholytic medications, direct-acting vasodilators, loop diuretics, thiazide diuretics, potassium-sparing diuretics, endothelin receptor antagonists, cardiac glycosides, nitrodilators, phosphodiesterase-5 inhibitors, class III antiarrhythmic agents, potassium-channel openers, renin inhibitors, class I antiarrhythmic agents, sodium-channel blockers, and sodium glucose cotransportor-2 inhibitors. We provide recommendations for the management of these medications preoperatively.

Background Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways have been shown to considerably reduce complications, length of stay and costs after most of surgical procedures by standardised application of best evidence-based perioperative care. The aim was to elaborate dedicated recommendations for cytoreductive surgery (CRS) ± hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) in a two-part series of guidelines based on expert consensus. The present part I of the guidelines highlights preoperative and intraoperative management. Methods The core group assembled a multidisciplinary panel of 24 experts involved in peritoneal surface malignancy surgery representing the fields of general surgery (n = 12), gynaecological surgery (n = 6), and anaesthesia (n = 6). Experts systematically reviewed and summarized the available evidence on 72 identified perioperative care items, following the GRADE (grading of recommendations, assessment, development, evaluation) system. Final consensus (defined as ≥50%, or ≥70% of weak/strong recommendations combined) was reached by a standardised 2-round Delphi process, regarding the strength of recommendations. Results Response rates were 100% for both Delphi rounds. Quality of evidence was evaluated high, moderate low and very low, for 15 (21%), 26 (36%), 29 (40%) and 2 items, respectively. Consensus was reached for 71/72(98.6%) items. Strong recommendations were defined for 37 items, No consensus could be reached regarding the preemptive use of fresh frozen plasma. Conclusion The present ERAS recommendations for CRS±HIPEC are based on a standardised expert consensus process providing clinicians with valuable guidance. There is an urgent need to produce high quality studies for CRS±HIPEC and to prospectively evaluate recommendations in clinical practice.

Postoperative urinary retention (POUR) is a common and vexing complication in elective spine surgery. Efficacious prevention strategies are still lacking, and existing studies focus primarily on identifying risk factors. Spinal anesthesia has become an attractive alternative to general anesthesia in elective lumbar surgery, with the potential of having a differential impact on POUR.422 spinal anesthesia procedures were prospectively collected between 2017 and 2021 and compared to 416 general anesthesia procedures retrospectively collected between 2014 and 2017, at a single academic center by the same senior neurosurgeon. The main outcome was POUR, defined as the need for straight bladder catheterization or indwelling bladder catheter placement after surgery due to failure to void. A power calculation was performed prior to data collection.The general anesthesia group had a higher rate of POUR (9.1 %) compared with the spinal anesthesia group (4.3 %), p = 0.005. At baseline, the spinal anesthesia cohort had an older average age and fewer patients with a history of previous spine surgery. Other comorbid conditions were comparable between the groups. For perioperative characteristics, spinal anesthesia patients had higher ASA scores, shorter operative times, shorter lengths of hospital stay, less operative levels, and zero use of intraoperative bladder catheterization. Acute pain service consult was similar between the groups. A multivariable logistic regression revealed that spinal anesthesia was associated with a significantly lower rate of urinary retention in the spinal anesthesia group (p = 0.0130), after adjusting for potentially confounding factors. Other statistically significant risk factors for POUR included diabetes, (p = 0.003), BPH (p = 0.014), operative time (p = 4.94e-06), and ASA score (p = 0.005).We collect and analyze one of the largest available cohorts of patients undergoing simple and complex surgeries under spinal and general anesthesia, finding that spinal anesthesia is independently associated with a lower incidence of POUR compared to general anesthesia, even when adjusted for potentially confounding risk factors. Further prospective trials are needed to explore this finding.