Search

BACKGROUND: The use of anesthetics may result in depression of the hypoxic ventilatory response. Since there are no receptor-specific antagonists for most anesthetics, there is the need for agnostic respiratory stimulants that increase respiratory drive irrespective of its cause. The authors tested whether ENA-001, an agnostic respiratory stimulant that blocks carotid body BK-channels, could restore the hypoxic ventilatory response during propofol infusion. They hypothesize that ENA-001 is able to fully restore the hypoxic ventilatory response. METHODS: In this randomized, double-blind crossover trial, 14 male and female healthy volunteers were randomized to receive placebo and low- and high-dose ENA-001 on three separate occasions. On each occasion, isohypercapnic hypoxic ventilatory responses were measured during a fixed sequence of placebo, followed by low- and high-dose propofol infusion. The authors conducted a population pharmacokinetic/pharmacodynamic analysis that included oxygen and carbon dioxide kinetics. RESULTS: Twelve subjects completed the three sessions; no serious adverse events occurred. The propofol concentrations were 0.6 and 2.0 µg/ml at low and high dose, respectively. The ENA-001 concentrations were 0.6 and 1.0 µg/ml at low and high dose, respectively. The propofol concentration that reduced the hypoxic ventilatory response by 50% was 1.47 ± 0.20 µg/ml. The steady state ENA-001 concentration to increase the depressed ventilatory response by 50% was 0.51 ± 0.04 µg/ml. A concentration of 1 µg/ml ENA-001 was required for full reversal of the propofol effect at the propofol concentration that reduced the hypoxic ventilatory response by 50%. CONCLUSIONS: In this pilot study, the authors demonstrated that ENA-001 restored the hypoxic ventilatory response impaired by propofol. This finding is not only of clinical importance but also provides mechanistic insights into the peripheral stimulation of breathing with ENA-001 overcoming central depression b

Educational challenge: Medical education must equip future professionals with the necessary skills to navigate the complex healthcare landscape. Clinical knowledge is essential, and critical and creative thinking skills are vital to meet the challenges of the system. Design thinking offers a structured approach that integrates creativity and innovation, yet its application in medical education is absent. Solution and implementation: The compulsory MasterMinds Challenge course at Leiden University Medical Center utilizes design thinking principles to address real world healthcare challenges. Final-year medical students participated in a two-day program. The course encompassed empathizing with stakeholders, problem definition, ideation, prototyping, and refining solutions. Presentation skills were emphasized, culminating in a symposium where teams showcase their outcomes. Implementation of the MasterMinds Challenge course was successful with 33 sessions delivered to 1217 medical students. Challenges covered various healthcare topics, yielding creative yet practical outcomes. Students appreciate the real world healthcare challenge, team-based approach, and the applicability of design thinking principles. Challenge owners expressed satisfaction with students’ commitment, creativity, and empathizing abilities. Lessons learned and next steps: To further enhance the MasterMinds Challenge course, a more longitudinal format is being designed, enabling greater autonomy and emphasizing the refining and implementation phases. The course can be extended to medical postgraduate professionals and interdisciplinary collaborations, fostering innovative ideas beyond current practices. By developing problem-solving skills, the MasterMinds Challenge course contributes to a future-proof medical education program and prepares students to meet the evolving needs of healthcare., Delft Centre for Entrepreneurship

Jesse Vincent Groen,1 SC Boon,2 MW Minderhoud,2 Bert A Bonsing,1 CH Martini,2 H Putter,3 AL Vahrmeijer,1 Monique van Velzen,2 J Vuijk,2 JSD Mieog,1,* A Dahan2,* 1Department of Surgery, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; 2Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands; 3Department of Medical Statistics, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, The Netherlands*These authors contributed equally to this workCorrespondence: A Dahan, Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, 2300 RC, The Netherlands, Tel +31 71 526 2301, Email A.Dahan@lumc.nlBackground: The optimal treatment strategy for postoperative pain following pancreatoduodenectomy remains unknown. The aim of this study was to investigate whether sublingual sufentanil tablet (SST) is a non-inferior analgesic compared to our standard-of-care (patient-controlled epidural analgesia [PCEA] or PCA morphine) in the treatment of pain following pancreatoduodenectomy.Methods: This was a pragmatic, strategy, open-label, non-inferiority, parallel group, randomized (1:1) trial. The primary outcome was an overall mean pain score (Numerical Rating Scale: 0– 10) on postoperative days 1 to 3 combined. The non-inferiority margin was − 1.5 since this difference was considered clinically relevant.Results: Between October 2018 and July 2021, 190 patients were assessed for eligibility and 36 patients were included in the final analysis: 17 patients were randomized to SST and 19 patients to standard-of-care. Early treatment failure in the SST group occurred in 2 patients (12%) due to inability to operate the SST system and in 2 patients (12%) due to severe nausea despite antiemetics. Early treatment failure in the standard-of-care group occurred in 2 patients (11%) due to preoperative PCEA placement failure and in 1 patient (5%) due to hemodynamic instability caused by PCEA. The mean difference in pa

As socio-technological environments shape and direct listener behaviour, an ecologicalaccount is needed that encompasses listening in complexity (i.e., multiple listeners, multiple sounds and their sources, and multiple sound-induced actions that ensure the success of a mission). In this study, we explored sound-induced action under the framework of “acoustic biotopes” (a notion of ecological acoustics by Smolders, Aertsen, and Johanessma, 1979 and 1982) in a specific socio- technological environment, i.e., the context of an orthopaedic operating room. Our approach is based on literature research into the topics of environmental psychology and auditory perception and action and in situ observations in healthcare with field recordings, participatory observations, and interviews on the spot. The results suggest a human-centered definition of sound-induced action in acoustic biotopes: Acoustic biotope is an active and shared sound environment with entangled interactions and sound-induced actions taking place in a specific space that has a critical function. Listening in highly functional environments is an individual experience and is influenced by hearing function, physical position and role in an environment, and the task at hand. There is a range of active and passive sound listeners as a function of their attentive state and listeners as sound sources within the acoustic biotope. There are many different sound sources and sound locals in socio-technological environments and sounds have great potential to serve critical information to operators. Overall, our study provides a holistic, multi-layered and yet a listener-centric view on the organisation of complex spaces and the results can immediately be applicable for rethinking the acoustic environment for ORs for better listening and sound-induced action., Design Aesthetics, Design Conceptualization and Communication

Chris H Martini,1 GH Maarten Honing,1 Lori D Bash,2 Erik Olofsen,1 Marieke Niesters,1 Monique van Velzen,1 Albert Dahan,1 Martijn Boon1 1Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Leiden, the Netherlands; 2Center for Observational and Real- World Evidence (CORE), Merck & Co., Inc, Kenilworth, NJ, USACorrespondence: Chris H Martini, Department of Anesthesiology, Leiden University Medical Center, Albinusdreef 2, Leiden, 2333, ZA, the Netherlands, Tel +31 71 526 2301, Email c.h.martini@lumc.nlIntroduction: Muscle relaxants are often given during general anesthesia to facilitate endotracheal intubation. However lingering effects after anesthesia-end may lead to respiratory compromise in the PACU. Strategies to reduce these adverse events include monitoring neuromuscular block, the use of short-acting agents and active pharmacological reversal before extubation. At Leiden University Medical Center (LUMC), a tertiary care academic hospital in the Netherlands, various muscle relaxants and reversal agents are freely available to all clinicians without restrictions. In this setting, we intended to evaluate how patient and surgical characteristics impacted the use of these agents for a variety of non-cardiac surgeries.Material and Methods: This is a retrospective database study of adult patients that had received elective, non-cardiac surgery and general anesthesia with endotracheal intubation between 2016 and 2020 at LUMC in the Netherlands. Exclusion criteria consisted of patients pharmacologically reversed with both sugammadex and neostigmine during the same procedure, diagnosed with myasthenia gravis, receiving pyridostigmine therapy, or with renal failure (eGFR < 30 mL.min.1.73m2).Results: We retrieved 23,373 patient records of which 9742 were excluded because one or more exclusion criteria were met. The final cohort consisted of 13,631 cases. Rocuronium was the most commonly used muscle relaxant (88.5%); sugammadex was the most commonly used