Search

Nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) presents a unique opportunity for the application of value-based care (VBC) principles to procedures performed in the office-based and nonoperating room inpatient settings. The purpose of this article is to review how value is defined in NORA and enabling principles by which anesthesiologists can maximize value in NORA.In order to drive value, NORA providers can target improvements in clinical outcomes where NORA lags behind operating room-based anesthesia (death, over-sedation, nerve injury), implement protocols focusing on intermediate outcomes/quality (postoperative nausea and vomiting, pain control, hypothermia, delirium), incorporate patient-reported outcomes (PROs) to assess the trajectory of a patient's perioperative care, and reduce costs (direct and indirect) through operational and supply-based efficiencies. Establishing a culture of patient and provider safety first, appropriate patient selection with targeted, perioperative optimization of comorbidities, and efficient deployment of staff, space, and resources are critical enablers for success.Value in NORA can be defined as clinical outcomes, quality, patient-reported outcomes, and efficiency divided by the direct and indirect costs for achieving those outcomes. We present a novel framework adapting current VBC practices in operating room anesthesia to the NORA environment.

Chronic pain is a common source of morbidity in many patient populations worldwide. There are growing concerns about the potential side effects of currently prescribed medications and a continued need for effective treatment. Related to these concerns, peripheral nerve stimulation has been regaining popularity as a potential treatment modality. Peripheral nerve stimulation components include helically coiled electrical leads, which direct an applied current to afferent neurons providing sensory innervation to the painful area. In theory, the applied current to the peripheral nerve will alter the large-diameter myelinated afferent nerve fibers, which interfere with the central processing of pain signals through small-diameter afferent fibers at the level of the spinal cord. Multiple studies have shown success in the use of peripheral nerve stimulation for acute post-surgical pain for orthopedic surgery, including post total knee arthroplasty and anterior cruciate ligament surgery, and chronic knee pain. Many studies have investigated the utility of peripheral nerve stimulation for the management of chronic shoulder pain. Peripheral nerve stimulation also serves as one of the potential non-pharmacologic therapies to treat back pain along with physical therapy, application of transcutaneous electrical neurostimulation unit, radiofrequency ablation, epidural steroid injections, permanently implanted neurostimulators, and surgery. Studies regarding back pain treatment have shown that peripheral nerve stimulation led to significant improvement in all pain and quality-of-life measures and a reduction in the use of opioids. Further studies are needed as the long-term risks and benefits of peripheral nerve stimulation have not been well studied as most information available on the effectiveness of peripheral nerve stimulation is based on shorter-term improvements in chronic pain.

Introduction The management of neuromuscular blockade (NMB) has evolved over time and remains a critical component of general anesthesia. However, NMB use varies by patient and procedural characteristics, clinical practices, protocols, and drug access. National utilization patterns are unknown. We describe changes in NMB and NMB reversal agent administration in surgical inpatients since the US introduction of sugammadex in December 2015. Methods In a retrospective observational study of inpatients involving NMB with rocuronium or vecuronium in the Premier Healthcare Database, we estimate associations between factors related to choice of (1) active NMB reversal versus spontaneous recovery and (2) sugammadex versus neostigmine as the reversal agent. Results Among 4.3 million adult inpatient encounters involving rocuronium or vecuronium, the most widely administered NMB agent was rocuronium alone (86%). Over time, gradual declines in both neostigmine use and spontaneous reversal were observed (64% and 36% in 2014 to 38% and 28%, respectively in the first half of 2019). Several factors were independently associated with use of active versus spontaneous NMB recovery including years since 2016, patient (age, race, comorbidities), and procedure (admission and surgery type) characteristics. Among those actively reversed, these and other factors were independently associated with choice of reversal agent administered, including size and teaching affiliation of hospital. While both impacted choices in treatment, the direction and magnitude of effect of patient comorbidities and procedure type varied in their impact on choice of mode (pharmacologic vs. spontaneous) and agent (neostigmine vs. sugammadex) of NMB reversal independent of other factors and each other. Sites which adopted sugammadex earlier were more likely to choose sugammadex over neostigmine compared with later adopters independent of other factors. Conclusions Among US adult inpatients administered NMBs, we observed complex relationships between patient, site, procedural characteristics, and NMB management choices as NMBA choice and active reversal options among inpatient cases changed over time. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01835-2., Plain Language Summary Neuromuscular blocking agents, medications that temporarily paralyze muscles, are used frequently during surgical procedures to facilitate intubation and patient immobility. Over time, muscle function can return spontaneously or through pharmacological reversal agents. This study looked at how the use of reversal agents in inpatients undergoing surgical procedures changed after a new reversal agent, sugammadex, became available for use in the USA in December 2015. Medical records of 4.3 million adult patients treated with neuromuscular blocking agents (rocuronium or vecuronium) in the USA were studied. In 2014 (before sugammadex was available), one-third of patients (36%) recovered spontaneously from a neuromuscular blocking agent and two-thirds (64%) were treated with the reversal agent neostigmine. The use of both neostigmine and spontaneous recovery reduced gradually after sugammadex became available, so that by the first half of 2019, 38% of patients were treated with neostigmine and 28% of patients recovered spontaneously. Whether or not a patient was treated with a reversal agent and what type of agent was chosen were affected by the length of time since 2016, patient characteristics, the type of surgical procedure that was performed as well as local hospital characteristics and practice differences. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s12325-021-01835-2.

Painful diabetic neuropathy is a common disease that results in significant pain and disability. Treatment options have traditionally consisted of conservative measures including topical and oral medication management as well as transcutaneous electrical stimulation units. These treatments demonstrate various degrees of efficacy, and many times initial treatments are discontinued, indicating low levels of satisfaction or poor tolerability. Spinal cord stimulation has been proposed as an alternative therapy for treatment of painful diabetic neuropathy of the lower extremities. We performed a systematic literature review to evaluate the safety and effectiveness of this procedure. A literature search identified 14 prospective studies. Based on our analysis of the available evidence, there is moderate-quality evidence for the safety and efficacy of spinal cord stimulation for painful diabetic neuropathy. However, further high-quality research, including a large-scale randomized controlled trial is warranted. Supplementary Information The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1007/s40122-021-00282-9.

Background: Patients who are diagnosed with dextrocardia, a rare congenital heart condition in which the heart points toward the right side of the chest, need their specific situs classification (eg, solitus, inversus, ambiguus) ascertained to optimize their care and outcomes. In this report, we discuss the perioperative anesthetic management of a patient presenting with dextrocardia. Case Report: A 44-year-old African American female with a history of hypertension, hyperlipidemia, gastroesophageal reflux disease, and diabetes mellitus type 2 was admitted for shortness of breath, dyspnea on exertion, orthopnea, and paroxysmal nocturnal dyspnea. The patient had been diagnosed with dextrocardia in 2003 at an outside hospital and was asymptomatic prior to this presentation. Chest x-ray revealed bilateral perihilar vascular congestion with bibasilar atelectasis and suspected small bilateral pleural effusions consistent with new-onset congestive heart failure. Preoperative 2-dimensional transthoracic echocardiography revealed an ostium secundum–type atrial septal defect (ASD) with mild left-to-right atrial shunting. The patient's ASD was repaired using a pericardial patch. Conclusion: The anesthetic management of patients presenting with dextrocardia is complex. Preoperative cardiac transthoracic echocardiography can identify cardiac lesions or aberrant anatomy associated with dextrocardia. Proper placement of electrocardiogram electrodes is necessary to avoid false-positive results for perioperative ischemia. Central line access must be adjusted to anatomic variations. Clinicians should have high suspicion for associated pulmonary hypertension and should limit sedatives preoperatively to minimize the cardiovascular effects of hypoxia and/or hypercarbia on the pulmonary vasculature. Finally, high clinical suspicion for respiratory complications should be maintained, as dextrocardia has been associated with respiratory complications secondary to primary ciliary dyskinesia in approximately 25% of patients.

The management principles of non-obstetric surgery during pregnancy are important concepts for all health care providers to be cognizant of. The goals of non-obstetric surgery are to ensure maternal safety, maintain the pregnancy, and ensure fetal well-being. In this regard, organogenesis occurs roughly between days 7-57 and thus, certain medications have a higher incidence of fetal teratogenicity in this first trimester. Some examples of common surgeries performed urgently or emergently include appendectomies, ovarian detorsions, bowel obstruction, trauma, and cholecystectomies. The choice of anesthetic technique and the selection of appropriate anesthetic drugs should be guided by indication for surgery, the nature of the surgery, and the site of the surgical procedure. Many of the concerns for any patients undergoing urgent or emergent surgery must be considered by anesthesia providers along with steps to ensure the fetus has the best outcome.

Limiting the spread of the disease is key to controlling the COVID-19 pandemic. This includes identifying people who have been exposed to COVID-19, minimizing patient contact, and enforcing strict hygiene measures. To prevent healthcare systems from becoming overburdened, elective and non-urgent medical procedures and treatments have been postponed, and primary health care has broadened to include virtual appointments via telemedicine. Although telemedicine precludes the physical examination of a patient, it allows collection of a range of information prior to a patient's admission, and may therefore be used in preoperative assessment. This new tool can be used to evaluate the severity and progression of the main disease, other comorbidities, and the urgency of the surgical treatment as well as preferencing anesthetic procedures. It can also be used for effective screening and triaging of patients with suspected or established COVID-19, thereby protecting other patients, clinicians and communities alike.

Purpose of review The prevalence of procedures performed outside of the operating room is steadily growing around the world, especially in the United States. This review aims to discuss the risks and safety of anesthesia performed in remote locations based on an up-to-date literature review, with a focus on the results from closed claims and other database analyses. Recent findings The published literature in the last decade shows that there is an increase in nonoperating room anesthesia cases and that the highest number of these cases are in gastroenterology endoscopy suites. There are safety concerns in nonoperating room cases that involve both anesthesia and nonanesthesia providers. Specific complications found in closed claims analyses include airway compromise, aspiration pneumonia, and dental injuries. Summary The current literature demonstrates that procedures performed in the endoscopy suite make up the largest number of nonoperating room closed claims anesthesia cases. Oversedation and subsequent inadequate oxygenation/ventilation account for the majority of malpractice claims. Conclusions from the current literature emphasize the importance of complying with monitoring standards and having well prepared providers to improve patient outcomes in nonoperating room locations.

Purpose of Review This is a comprehensive review of the literature about the use of bupivacaine hydrochloride for the treatment of post-herpetic neuralgia (PHN). It briefly reviews the background, biology, diagnosis and conventional treatment for PHN, and then introduces and compares the recent evidence for the use of topical bupivacaine. Recent Findings PHN is defined by pain lasting 90 days or more after the initial presentation of herpes zoster (“Shingles”, HZ) rash and is the most common complication of this disease. A product of re-activation of the Varicella-Zoster virus (VZV), HZ is diagnosed more than 1 million times annually in the United States. Approximately 20% of patients with HZ will experience PHN and will continue to suffer intermittent neuropathic symptoms, including itching and pain, that is sharp, stabbing, throbbing or burning, with the pain localized to the site of their original rash. This long-lasting pain compares with the severity of long-standing rheumatics and osteo-arthritis and is accompanied by severe allodynia causing significant suffering, and a financial burden that is manifested in both healthcare costs and loss of quality-adjusted life years. Prevention of PHN may be achieved with the Zoster vaccine, although there is still a large segment of unvaccinated population. Moreover, the Zoster vaccine is not always effective for prevention. Current treatment includes medical (systemic tricyclic antidepressants, anticonvulsants and opioids, topical lidocaine and capsaicin) and interventional (subcutaneous Botox injections, nerve blocks and nerve stimulation) therapies. These therapies are not always effective, and each carries their own profile of side effects and risks. Moreover, up to 50% of patients with PHN are refractory to management. Recent evidence is emerging to support the use of topical local anesthetics for the treatment of PHN. Two small studies recently found topical lidocaine spray to be effective in treating paroxysmal pain attacks associated with PHN. Bupivacaine is a longer-lasting local anesthetic, and a film-forming formulation allows easy and durable application to the affected skin. Recent studies show that topical film-forming bupivacaine is safe and as effective as lidocaine for the treatment of PHN. Summary PHN is an important though common complication of HZ and can cause long-lasting pain and disability. Current treatment for PNH is limited by efficacy and safety profiles of individual therapies. Recent evidence points to topical local anesthetics as an effective and safe alternative to conventional therapy. Film-forming bupivacaine may offer a durable and safe option for this otherwise difficult to treat syndrome.

Purpose of review Patient decision aids are educational tools used to assist patients and clinicians in healthcare decisions. As healthcare moves toward patient-centered care, these tools can provide support to anesthesiologists by facilitating shared decision-making. Recent findings Recent research has shown that patient decision aids are beneficial in the clinical setting for patients and physicians. Studies have shown that patients feel better informed, have better knowledge, and have less anxiety, depression, and decisional conflict after using patient decision aids. In addition, a structured approach for the development of patient decision aids in the field of anesthesia has been established. Summary Patient decision aids can support patient-centered care delivery and shared decision-making, especially in the field of anesthesia. Current research involves implementing the use of patient decision aids in the discussion for monitored anesthesia care. Further development of quality metrics is needed to improve the decision aids and maximize decision quality.

Study objective We examined the association of body mass index (BMI) with hospital admission, same-day complications, and 30-day hospital readmission following day-case eligible joint arthroscopy. Design Retrospective cohort study. Setting Multi-institutional. Patients Adult patients undergoing arthroscopy of the knee, hip or shoulder in the outpatient setting. Intervention None. Measurements Using the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program dataset from 2012 to 2016, we examined seven BMI ranges: normal BMI (≥20 kg/m2 and Main results There were a total of 99,410 patients included in the final analysis, in which there was a 2.6% rate of hospital admission. When compared to class 3 obesity, only those with BMI ≥50 kg/m2 ( OR 1.55, 95% CI 1.18–2.01, p = 0.005) had increased odds of hospital admission. There were no differences in 30-day hospital readmission or same-day postoperative complications. Conclusion We found that only patients with BMI ≥50 kg/m2 had increased odds for same-day hospital admission even when patient's comorbid conditions are optimized, suggesting that a BMI ≥50 kg/m2 may be used as a sole factor for patient selection in patients undergoing joint arthroscopy. For patients with BMI

Non-operating room anesthesia (NORA) represents a growing field of medicine with an increasing trend in the number of cases performed over the previous decade. As a result, anesthesia providers will need to enhance their familiarity with the resources, personnel, and environment outside of the operating room. Anesthesia delivery in NORA settings should be held with the same high-quality standards as that within the operating room. This review looks at special considerations in patient selection and the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative periods. In addition, there is a discussion on the unique aspects of specific NORA areas and the considerations that come with them.

Novel preparations allowing for the extended duration of action of local anesthetics have many clinically relevant benefits. With regard to this, the development of liposomal bupivacaine has the potential to significantly impact patient care by improving perioperative pain control. The unique liposomal bilayer that encapsulates bupivacaine allows for a sustained release of local anesthetic for up to 72 h after a single use and can significantly decrease postoperative opioid consumption. SABER-bupivacaine is another depot formulation that helps in sustained release of bupivacaine from an encapsulated bupivacaine in a biodegradable sucrose acetate isobutyrate biolayer. HTX-011 is an investigational extended-release local anesthetic formulation currently undergoing Phase 3 clinical trials. HTX-011 is composed of a bioerodible polymer with bupivacaine and low-dose meloxicam in which the polymer undergoes hydrolysis and allows for sustained release of bupivacaine and meloxicam for 3 days. The present investigation reviews pharmacologic considerations related to the formulation of liposomal bupivacaine, current FDA-approved indications for its use, and future extended-release local anesthetic formulations currently under investigation.

Purpose of review Although both cost and patient preference tend to favor the office-based setting, one must consider the hidden costs in managing complications and readmissions. The purpose of this review is to provide an update on safety outcomes of office-based procedures, as well as to identify common patient-specific factors that influence the decision for office-based surgery or impact patient outcomes. Recent findings Office-based anesthesia (OBA) success rates from the latest publications of orthopedic, plastic, endovascular, and otolaryngologic continue to improve. A common thread among these studies is the ability to predict which patients will benefit from going home the same day, as well as identifying comorbid factors that would lead to failure to discharge or readmission after surgery. Specifically, patients with active infection, cardiovascular disease, coagulopathy, insulin-dependent diabetes, obesity, obstructive sleep apnea, poorly controlled hypertension, and thromboembolic disease are presumed to be poor candidates for outpatient office procedures. Summary Overall, anesthesia and surgery in the office is becoming increasingly safe. Recent data suggest that the improved safety in the office-based setting is attributable to proper patient selection. Anesthesiologists play a critical role in prescreening eligible patients to ensure a safe and productive process. Patients treated in the office seem to be selected based on their low risk for complications, and our review reflects this position.

Neuromuscular blockade (NMB) is a critical part of many surgical procedures. Data on practice patterns of NMB agents (NMBAs) and NMB reversal in recent years in the US ambulatory surgical care setting are limited.This retrospective analysis of US adult outpatients was conducted using the Premier Healthcare Database. We describe anesthesia practice trends in NMB management and assess the association of patient, procedural, and site characteristics with NMB reversal approach using multivariable logistic regression.Approximately 5.2 million outpatient surgical encounters involving NMB and 4.6 million involving rocuronium or vecuronium between January 2014 and June 2019 were included. Following the introduction of sugammadex to US clinical practice (~2016), there was an increased use of rocuronium or vecuronium and a decrease in succinylcholine alone. Before 2016, NMB was pharmacologically reversed with neostigmine in approximately two-thirds of outpatient encounters. Over time, active reversal increased; by 2019, 42.3% and 36.0% of encounters were reversed by neostigmine and sugammadex, respectively, with 21.7% undergoing spontaneous recovery. Choice of NMBA (rocuronium or vecuronium alone), time since 2016, obesity, peripheral vascular disease, and procedures on the digestive, ocular, and female genital systems (vs musculoskeletal procedures) were independently and positively associated with pharmacologic reversal (versus spontaneous reversal). Conversely, advanced age; Western geography; and cardiovascular, endocrine, hemic/lymphatic, respiratory, and ear, nose, and throat procedures were independently and negatively associated with pharmacologic reversal of NMB.Among pharmacologic reversals, time since 2016 was positively and independently associated with sugammadex compared with neostigmine (odds ratios [ORs], ranged from 1.8 in 2017 to 3.2, P.0001 in 2019). Those administered rocuronium or vecuronium without succinylcholine, with increased age and history of certain comorbidities, and those undergoing ocular or respiratory procedures (compared with musculoskeletal) were positively associated with reversal with sugammadex and endocrine procedure negatively and independently associated with reversal with sugammadex. There was variability in the association of several factors with NMB reversal choices by geographic region, particularly in patients' race, ethnicity, and size of affiliated hospital.Overall, active pharmacological reversal of NMB increased in US adult outpatients following the introduction of sugammadex, although there remains significant practice variability. The multifactorial relationship between patient-, procedural-, and environmental-level characteristics and NMB management is rapidly evolving. Additional research on how these anesthesia practice patterns may be impacted by the shift to the ambulatory care setting and how they may impact patient outcomes and health disparities is warranted.

Peripheral nerve blocks (PNB) have become standard of care for enhanced recovery pathways after surgery. For brachial plexus delivery of anesthesia, both supraclavicular (SC) and infraclavicular (IC) approaches have been shown to require less supplemental anesthesia, are performed more rapidly, have quicker onset time, and have lower rates of complications than other approaches (axillary, interscalene, etc.). Ultrasound-guidance is commonly utilized to improve outcomes, limit the need for deep sedation or general anesthesia, and reduce procedural complications. Given the SC and IC approaches are the most common approaches for brachial plexus blocks, the differences between the two have been critically evaluated in the present manuscript. Various studies have demonstrated slight favorability towards the IC approach from the standpoint of complications and safety. Two prospective RCTs found a higher incidence of complications in the SC approach – particularly Horner syndrome. The IC method appears to support a greater block distribution as well. Overall, both SC and IC brachial plexus nerve block approaches are the most effective and safe approaches, particularly under ultrasound-guidance. Given the success of the supraclavicular and infraclavicular blocks, these techniques are an important skill set for the anesthesiologist for intraoperative anesthesia and postoperative analgesia.

Adjuvant drugs for peripheral nerve blocks are a promising solution to acute postoperative pain and the transition to chronic pain treatment. Peripheral nerve blocks (PNB) are used in the brachial plexus, lumbar plexus, femoral nerve, sciatic nerve, and many other anatomic locations for site-specific pain relief. However, the duration of action of a PNB is limited without an adjuvant drug. The use of non-opioid adjuvant drugs for single-shot peripheral nerve blocks (sPNB), such as alpha-2 agonists, dexamethasone, midazolam, and non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs, can extend the duration of local anesthetics and reduce the dose-dependent adverse effects of local anesthetics. Tramadol is a weak opioid that acts as a central analgesic. It can block voltage-dependent sodium and potassium channels, cause serotonin release, and inhibit norepinephrine reuptake and can also be used as an adjuvant in PNBs. However, tramadol’s effectiveness and safety as an adjuvant to local anesthetic for PNB are inconsistent. The effects of the adjuvants on neurotoxicity must be further evaluated with further studies to delineate the safety in their use in PNB. Further research needs to be done. However, the use of adjuvants in PNB can be a way to help control postoperative pain.

PURPOSE OF REVIEW: Nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) continues to increase in popularity and scope. This article reviews current and new trends in NORA, trends in anesthesia management in nonoperating room settings, and the evolving debates surrounding these trends. RECENT FINDINGS: National data suggests that NORA cases will continue to rise relative to operating room (OR) anesthesia and there will continue to be a shift towards performing more interventional procedures outside of the OR. These trends have important implications for the safety of interventional procedures as they become increasingly more complex and patients continue to be older and more frail. In order for anesthesia providers and proceduralists to be prepared for this future, rigorous standards must be set for safe anesthetic care outside of the OR.Although the overall association between NORA and patient morbidity and mortality remains unclear, focused studies point toward trends specific to each non-OR procedure type. Given increasing patient and procedure complexity, anesthesiology teams may see a larger role in the interventional suite. However, the ideal setting and placement of anesthesia staff for interventional procedures remain controversial. Also, the impact of COVID-19 on the growth and utilization of non-OR anesthesia remains unclear, and it remains to be seen how the pandemic will influence the delivery of NORA procedures in postpandemic settings. SUMMARY: NORA is a rapidly growing field of anesthesia. Continuing discussions of complication rates and mortality in different subspecialty areas will determine the need for anesthesia care and quality improvement efforts in each setting. As new noninvasive procedures are developed, new data will continue to shape debates surrounding anesthesia care outside of the operating room.

Study objective To provide a contemporary medicolegal analysis of claims brought against anesthesia providers in the United States related to neuraxial blocks for surgery and obstetrics. Design In this retrospective analysis, we analyzed closed claims data from the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO) Comparative Benchmarking System (CBS) database between 2007 and 2016. Setting Closed claims from inpatient and outpatient settings related to neuraxial anesthesia for surgical procedures and obstetrics. Patients Forty-five claims were identified for analysis. These patients underwent a variety of surgical procedures, included both children and adults, and with ages ranging from 6 to 82. Interventions Patients receiving neuraxial anesthesia (spinals, epidurals) for surgery or obstetrics. Measurements Data collected includes patient demographics, alleged injury type/severity, surgical specialty, likely contributors to the alleged damaging event, and case outcome. Some of the data were drawn directly from coded variables in the CRICO database, and some were gathered from narrative case summaries. Main results Settlement payments were made in 20% of claims. Reported adverse outcomes ranged from temporary minor to permanent major injuries. Most closed claims were classified as permanent minor injuries. The greatest number of claims involved residual weakness and radiculopathy resulting from epidurals. The largest contributing factor to these injuries was noted to be “Technical Knowledge/Performance” of the anesthesia provider followed by “Missing or Documentation Error.” Over half of the claims arose from obstetric patients (31%) and patients undergoing orthopedic surgery (27%). Conclusions Patients with pre-existing radiculopathy or comorbidities may warrant more thorough informed consent about the increased risk of injury. Additionally, prompt follow-up, monitoring, and documentation of post-operative symptoms, such as weakness or radiculopathy, are crucial for improving patient safety and satisfaction. More timely communication with the patient and the surgical team regarding residual neurologic symptoms is important for earlier diagnosis of injury.

INTRODUCTION Perioperative vision loss (POVL) is a rare but catastrophic event. Closed claim databases are useful for investigating risk factors of POVL to help guide practices in risk mitigation and risk management strategies. METHODS We retrospectively analyzed the Controlled Risk Insurance Company (CRICO) Comparative Benchmarking System database for perioperative nerve injuries from when claims were closed between 2007 and 2016. We then extracted, deidentified, and analyzed all the POVL cases. RESULTS Of 53 nerve injury claims closed between 2007 and 2016, we found 9 pertaining to POVL. Of these 9 cases, 100% resulted in permanent injury, 76% were associated with spine surgery, 89% of the patients were positioned prone intraoperatively, 67% were noted to have improper or missing documentation, and 56% of the patients claimed they were not informed of the risk of vision loss during preoperative consenting. Four of the 9 cases were settled, with a mean settlement amount of $906,250 (standard deviation, ± $745,647). CONCLUSIONS POVL often results in permanent injury with costly burden on the health care system. Risk reduction strategies need to be instituted on the provider and system level, involving a multidisciplinary health care team to develop and execute clinical protocols and patient communication strategies that will help prevent POVL.

Lower extremity fracture fixation is commonplace and represents the majority of orthopedic trauma surgical volume. Despite this, few studies have examined the use of regional anesthesia or neuraxial anesthesia (RA/NA) versus general anesthesia (GA) in this surgical population. We aimed to determine the overall rates of RA/NA use and whether RA/NA was associated with lower mortality and morbidity versus GA for patients with lower extremity orthopedic trauma.We conducted a propensity-matched, retrospective cohort study of hospitalized patients. We used the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Project (ACS-NSQIP) dataset to identify patients undergoing surgical correction of low velocity orthopedic lower extremity traumas between 2011 and 2016. Patients were separated into 2 groups based on anesthesia type (RA/NA versus GA). The primary outcome was 30-day mortality. Secondary outcomes included return to the operating room, failure to wean from the ventilator, intubation, pneumonia, acute kidney injury, myocardial infarction, transfusion, venous thromboembolism (VTE), urinary tract infection, sepsis, length of stay, days from operation to discharge, number of complications, and unplanned readmission.We identified 18,467 patients undergoing surgical repair of lower extremity fractures. Approximately 9.58% had RA/NA and 89.9% had GA as their primary anesthetic. After 1:1 propensity matching, the final cohort had 3254 patients. Our analysis did not find a difference in 30-day mortality between the 2 groups. There were also no significant differences in secondary outcomes.Despite the potential advantages of RA/NA, utilization for lower extremity trauma was low in our analysis; only 9.58% of patients were in the RA/NA group, with the majority receiving spinal anesthesia. This may be due to surgeon preference to allow for postoperative monitoring for neurologic injury and compartment syndrome or logistical factors given the urgent nature of these trauma cases. No significant differences in 30-day mortality and postoperative complications were found between RA/NA and GA for patients with lower extremity orthopedic fractures. The choice of anesthesia is multifactorial and may be driven by patient and provider preferences in these operations.

The population of older adults is rapidly growing. With the continued advancement of medical and surgical interventions, the average age of this population will continue to increase. Nearly one-third of surgical procedures are performed in older adults. Physiologic changes, multiple comorbidities, frailty, and postoperative cognitive dysfunction affect an elderly patient's postoperative recovery. Anesthesia providers can play a key role in creating perioperative geriatric pathways. The perioperative care of a geriatric patient is associated with unique and anesthetic risks. Perioperative care must be tailored to individual patients to reduce perioperative complications in this important, vulnerable population.

Patient decision aids are educational tools used by health care providers to assist patients in choosing their treatment and care. The use of anesthesia-related patient decision aids can help practitioners provide patient-centered care by facilitating shared decision-making. The benefits of these aids have been well documented, yet a structured approach for developing patient decision aids in anesthesia has not been well established. Educating patients on various anesthesia-related options is paramount in their decision-making, yet accessible and validated resources are limited. In addition, many limitations exist with current patient decision aids that must be addressed. We have reviewed multiple processes for developing decision aids and have suggested a structured approach to their creation. We address the common limitations of current patient decision aids and provide improvements to the developmental process. Improvements include increasing patient input during development, thoroughly evaluating data included in the aids, and integrating a cyclic review of the aids before and after their use. Using the provided developmental process and checklist, anesthesia providers can create evidence-based patient decision aids in a standardized manner. It is important to evaluate decision aids and measure their decision quality, or patient-centeredness, to further improve them and maximize their effectiveness. Moving forward, development of proper metrics for patient participation and decision quality are required.

Over 150,000 carotid endarterectomy (CEA) procedures are performed each year. Perioperative anesthetic management may be complex due to multiple patient and procedure-related risk factors. The authorsaimed to determine whether the use of general anesthesia (GA), when compared with regional anesthesia (RA), would be associated with reduced perioperative morbidity and mortality in patients undergoing a CEA.Retrospective analysis of the American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (NSQIP) database.The authors evaluated patients undergoing a CEA at multiple university- and community-based settings.A total of 43,463 patients were identified; 22,845 patients were propensity matched after excluding for missing data.The study population was divided into 2 groups: patients undergoing RA or GA. The RA group included regional anesthesia performed by the anesthesiologist or surgeon, monitored anesthesia care, and local infiltration.The primary endpoint was 30-day mortality. Secondary endpoints included surgical site infection, pulmonary complications, return to the operating room, acute kidney injury, cardiac arrest, urinary tract infection, myocardial infarction, thromboembolism, perioperative transfusion, sepsis, and days to discharge.Younger age, Hispanic ethnicity, body mass index18.5, dyspnea, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, and smoking history were associated with receiving GA. Patients with low hematocrit and low platelets were more likely to get RA. There was no mortality difference. GA was associated with a significantly higher rate of perioperative transfusions (p = 0.037) and perioperative pneumonia (p = 0.027).The use of RA over GA in CEA is associated with decreased risk of postoperative pneumonia and a reduced need for perioperative blood transfusions.

In this review, we evaluate recent literature on use of ER granisetron in clinical practice as compared with current antiemetics and describe its potential uses for perioperative PONV prophylaxis and treatment. Recent literature was evaluated on ER granisetron use compared with currently used antiemetic agents ondansetron, droperidol, metoclopramide, promethazine, and dexamethasone with a focus on procedural anti-emesis. Though promising great effect, application of extended release granisetron to clinical use may be limited by it's increased relative cost.

Background: The role of anesthesiologists has expanded from operating rooms to preoperative evaluation clinics. This role involves performing preoperative cardiovascular evaluation and optimization of patients before elective surgery, which can include ordering cardiac stress tests. We aimed to study the ordering patterns by anesthesiologists for preoperative cardiac stress tests, focusing on whether societal and institutional guidelines and recommendations were used. Choice of type of cardiac stress test was also examined. Methods: A single center retrospective chart review from December 1, 2005 to May 31, 2015 was performed on 492 patients who had a cardiac stress test ordered by an anesthesiologist. Patients were categorized by indication for ordering the cardiac stress test based on societal practice guidelines, institutional guidelines or other relevant reasons at the time of patient encounter. Those “other” category cardiac stress tests were assessed for indication and evaluated by physician peer review to see if there was peer agreement for being appropriately ordered. Exercise electrocardiography (ECG) cardiac stress tests ordered were evaluated for appropriateness based on baseline resting ECG findings. Patients with left bundle branch block (LBBB) or right ventricular (RV) pacing were evaluated for appropriateness of proper cardiac stress test modality based on whether a pharmacological vasodilator cardiac stress test was ordered. Results: Analysis of the cardiac stress tests ordered showed that 43% were ordered according to American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines, 29% were ordered according to institutional guidelines, and 28% were categorized as “other”. Of the 28% “other” cardiac stress tests, 53% were in agreement for ordering by peer review. Sixty-four exercise ECG cardiac stress tests were ordered, of which 58% were appropriate based on having no baseline resting ECG abnormalities. Fifty-one patients were identified as having a resting ECG of LBBB or RV pacing of which 41% had an appropriate pharmacological vasodilator cardiac stress tests ordered. Conclusions: Anesthesiologists order most preoperative cardiac stress tests according to professional societal or institutional guidelines (72%), yet they are not always choosing the best modality of cardiac stress test. A significant portion of cardiac stress tests are ordered (28%) based on clinical judgment, likely due to the lack of guidelines and recommendations being all-encompassing on many commonly encountered preoperative patient situations. Cardiol Res. 2019;10(1):1-8 doi: https://doi.org/10.14740/cr821

Purpose of review The purpose of this review is to provide an update on the current knowledge about patient safety and outcomes in the office-based setting. Ambulatory procedures performed outside the hospital are steadily increasing, resulting in an increasing number and complexity of office-based procedures and patient comorbidities over the past two decades. In this review we focus on most recent outcomes studies encompassing different surgical specialties and patient populations. Recent findings Rates of complications in the office-based surgical (OBS) setting from the latest publications are similar to, or lower than previously reported studies. Many of the studies published were in the field of plastic surgery, with a few publications on office vascular and dental procedures. The most common complications were haematoma, infection and venous thromboembolism (VTE) and pulmonary embolism. Death was a rare finding, though when it occurred, it was often associated with VTE/pulmonary emboli and abdominoplasties. Summary Overall, these studies contribute positively to our current understanding of the safety of office-based anaesthesia. As an increasing number of procedures migrate from the hospital setting to ambulatory and office-based environments, it will be critically important to ensure high quality and safe patient care in these settings.

The anesthetic management of pregnant patients can present a variety of challenges and a thorough preoperative assessment is necessary before initiating any anesthetic services. Both the mother and the fetus need to be considered when formulating an anesthetic plan and discussing informed consent. The overall aims in assessing a pregnant patient are to identity potential issues that can lead to catastrophic complications, provide adequate information allowing the mother to make informed decisions, and to obtain knowledge for tailoring an anesthetic that maintains maternal and fetal homeostasis.

Purpose of review As the volume and types of procedures requiring anesthesiologist involvement in the nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) setting continue to grow, it is important to create a formal curriculum and clearly define educational goals. Recent findings A NORA rotation should be accompanied by a dedicated curriculum that should include topics such as education objectives, information about different interventional procedures, anesthesia techniques and equipment, and safety principles. NORA environment may be unfamiliar to anesthesia residents. The trainees must also learn the principles of efficiency, rapid recovery from anesthesia, and timely room turnover. Resident education in NORA should be an essential component of their training. The goals and objectives of the NORA educational experience should include not only developing the clinical knowledge necessary to implement the specific type of anesthetic desired for each procedure, but also the practical knowledge of care coordination needed to safely and efficiently work in the NORA setting. Summary As educators, we must foster and grow a resident's resilience by continually challenging them with new clinical scenarios and giving them appropriate autonomy to take risks and move outside of their comfort zone. Residents should understand that exposure to such unique and demanding environment can be transformative.

This book reviews the practice of vascular anesthesia, which is now increasingly recognized as a subspecialty of anesthesia, and looks at developments and latest evidence in neuraxial, regional, and general anesthesia techniques. It explores essential topics on vascular anatomy, common vascular procedures, and anesthetic techniques in general and regional anesthesia. It also includes subjects relating to complications, perioperative patient monitoring, and post-operative management. The book begins with an analysis of the basic vascular anatomy and physiology, which covers the three components of the vascular system where oxygen, nutrients, and metabolites exchange: artery, vein, and capillaries. It ends with the anesthetic approach on patients that are presented for vascular surgery and considered to be a very sick, comorbid population with higher ASA classification.

Although anesthetic management for thoracic surgery can be challenging, ventilation and hemodynamic monitoring are critical. In this chapter, we begin with a brief history of the pneumothorax challenge that surgeons and anesthesiologists needed to overcome during intrathoracic surgical procedures. They then discuss the intraoperative ventilation and hemodynamic monitoring approaches, as well as management strategies for intraoperative hypoxemia. There are newer anesthetic approaches such as nonintubating techniques for thoracic surgical procedures, and a greater emphasis on the application of goal-directed fluid therapy and the multimodal analgesic strategies.

In this review, we discuss surgical infiltration and various abdominal wall blocks, including transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block and quadratus lumborum blocks, and review the literature on the evidence behind these approaches and analgesia for cesarean delivery (CD). Adequate pain management in the parturient following CD is important to facilitate early ambulation and neonatal care while also improving patient satisfaction and decreasing hospital length of stay. Neuraxial opioids have been a mainstay for postoperative analgesia; however, this option may not be available for patients undergoing emergency CD and have contraindications to neuraxial approaches, refusing an epidural or spinal, or with technical difficulties for neuraxial placement. In such cases, alternative options include a fascial plane block or surgical wound infiltration. The use of regional blocks or surgical wound infiltration is especially recommended in the parturient who does not receive neuraxial opioids for CD. Adequate postoperative analgesia following CD is an important component of the overall care of the parturient as it helps facilitate early mobilization and improve patient satisfaction. In conclusion, the use of abdominal fascial plane blocks or surgical wound infiltration is recommended in the parturient who does not receive neuraxial opioids for CD.