Search

Objective: Optimal perioperative pain management is an essential component of perioperative care for the cardiac surgical patient. This turnkey order set is part of a series created by the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery Cardiac Society, first presented at the Annual Meeting of The American Association for Thoracic Surgery in 2023. Several guidelines and expert consensus documents have been published to provide guidance on pain management and opioid reduction in cardiac surgery. Our objective is to consolidate that guidance into an evidence-based order set that will assist in the implementation of a comprehensive multimodal approach to pain management. Methods: Subject matter experts were consulted to translate existing guidelines and peer-reviewed literature into a sample turnkey order set for pain management. Orders derived from consistent Class I, IIA, or equivalent recommendations across referenced guidelines and consensus manuscripts appear in the order set in bold type. Selected orders that were inconsistently Class I or IIA, Class IIB, or supported by published evidence, were also included in italicized type. Results: Opioid-based analgesia is associated with delayed recovery and opioid-related adverse events. Several multimodal medications have been shown to reduce reliance upon opioids. These include the scheduled use of acetaminophen, gabapentinoids, and nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs. In addition, intravenous analgesics such as dexmedetomidine, ketamine, magnesium, and lidocaine have been shown to both complement the maintenance of anesthesia as well as optimize pain control postoperatively. Long-acting opioids remain a key component of pain management when provided to reduce the overall use of short-acting synthetic opioids or in direct response to break though pain after exhausting other alternatives. When applied in a bundled fashion, several studies have demonstrated a reduction in overall opioid administration and improved rates of postoperative recovery. Conclusions: There has been increased awareness regarding the potential short- and long-term adverse effects of both inadequate analgesia and excessive opioid administration after cardiac surgery. This turnkey order set aims to facilitate implementation of a comprehensive approach toward provision of multimodal, opioid-sparing medications to optimize pain management in cardiac surgery.

Objective: Prolonged mechanical ventilation after cardiac surgery significantly increases morbidity and mortality. The aim of this study is to establish the role of diaphragmatic pacing to decrease mechanical ventilation burden in high-risk patients undergoing cardiac surgery. Methods: This is a prospective, randomized trial of temporary diaphragmatic pacing electrode use in patients undergoing cardiac surgery (NCT04899856). Prognostic enrichment strategy was used to identify patients at higher risk of prolonged mechanical ventilation by having inclusion criteria of prior open cardiac surgery, left ventricular ejection fraction less than 30%, history of stroke, intra-aortic balloon pump, or history of chronic obstructive pulmonary disease. Two electrodes were placed in each hemidiaphragm intraoperatively. On arrival to the intensive care unit, patients were randomized to immediate diaphragmatic pacing or standard of care. Results: Forty patients received implants, with 19 in the treatment group and 21 in the standard of care group. Only 1 patient in the treatment group was on mechanical ventilation at 24 hours versus 4 patients in the standard of care group, resulting in a relative risk reduction of 71% being on mechanical ventilation at 24 hours postoperatively. Predictive enrichment strategy was used to identify patients most likely to respond to therapy of diaphragmatic pacing. In this analysis, median time on mechanical ventilation was 17.7 hours (interquartile range, 8.3-23.4) for the 15 patients in the standard of care group and 9.4 hours (interquartile range, 7.14-12.5) for the 13 patients in the treatment group, for an improvement of 8 hours with diaphragm pacing (P

Despite the benefits established for multiple surgical specialties, enhanced recovery after surgery has been underused in cardiac surgery. A cardiac enhanced recovery after surgery summit was convened at the 102nd American Association for Thoracic Surgery annual meeting in May 2022 for experts to convey key enhanced recovery after surgery concepts, best practices, and applicable results for cardiac surgery. Topics included implementation of enhanced recovery after surgery, prehabilitation and nutrition, rigid sternal fixation, goal-directed therapy, and multimodal pain management.

Objective: In 2019, the Society for Enhanced Recovery After Cardiac Surgery (ERAS-CS) published perioperative guidelines to optimize the care of patients undergoing cardiac surgery. For centers with limited capacity, a sequential approach to the implementation of the full guidelines may be more feasible. Therefore, we aimed to explore the priority of implementation of the ERAS-CS guideline recommendations from a patient and caregiver perspective. Methods: Using a modified nominal group technique, individuals who previously underwent cardiac surgery and their caregivers ranked ERAS-CS recommendations within 3 time points (ie, preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative) and across 2 to 3 voting rounds. Final round rankings (median, mean and first quartile) were used to determine relative priorities. Results: Seven individuals (5 patients and 2 caregivers) participated in the study. Patient engagement tools (2, 2.29, and 1.50), surgical site infection reduction (2, 1.67, and 1.25), and postoperative systematic delirium screening (1, 2.43, and 1.00) were the top-ranked ERAS-CS recommendations in the preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative time points, respectively. Conclusions: Exploration of patient and caregiver priorities may provide important insights to guide the healthcare team with clinical pathway development and implementation. Further study is needed to understand the impact of the integration of patient and caregiver values on effective and sustainable clinical pathway implementation.

Background: Permanent pacemaker (PPM) implantation may be indicated post-transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI). The Emory Risk Score (ERS) is a validated predictive risk score of the need for a PPM post-TAVI using a balloon-expandable valve. Our objectives were to determine the validity of the ERS in our local TAVI population with both balloon-expandable and self-expanding valves and to identify additional electrocardiographic (ECG) parameters predictive of the need for a PPM post-TAVI. Methods: Retrospective chart and electronic database reviews were performed to collect demographic and procedural information. Two expert readers reviewed all ECGs. Independent factors associated with PPM implantation were examined with multivariable logistic regression via a stepwise selection process with calculation of the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve to assess model discrimination. Results: The overall PPM implantation rate was 11.7%; rates were 9% for the Sapien 3 valves, 10% for the Evolut Pro valves, and 17% for the Evolut R valves. The ERS was found to not be predictive of need for PPM post-TAVI for the entire cohort. Right bundle branch block was the only ERS parameter independently associated with new PPM implant (8.5% vs 25%, odds ratio = 3.59, P = 0.01). No additional ECG parameters met the criteria for statistical significance. Conclusions: The poor predictive value of the ERS in determining the need for a PPM post-TAVI in our patient population suggests that further refinement of a formula (or risk-calculator) is warranted. Identification of a precise risk-calculator is likely to facilitate patient mobilization and reduce inpatient healthcare resource utilization. Résumé: Introduction: L’implantation d’un stimulateur cardiaque permanent (SCP) peut être indiquée après l’implantation valvulaire aortique par cathéter (post-IVAC). L’Emory Risk Score (ERS) est un score de prédiction du risque validé de la nécessité d’un SCP post-IVAC au moyen d’une valve expansible par ballonnet. Nous avions pour objectif de déterminer la validité de l’ERS auprès de notre population ayant eu une IVAC soit par valve expansible par ballonnet ou valve auto-expansible, et de déterminer d’autres paramètres électrocardiographiques (ECG) prédictifs de la nécessité d’un SCP post-IVAC. Méthodes: Nous avons réalisé des revues rétrospectives de dossiers et de bases de données électroniques pour collecter les données démographiques et interventionnelles. Deux experts ont lu et interprété tous les ECG. Les facteurs indépendants associés à l’implantation du SCP ont été examinés en effectuant la régression logistique multivariée par processus de sélection pas-à-pas au moyen du calcul de la surface sous la courbe caractéristique d’efficacité du récepteur afin d’évaluer la discrimination du modèle. Résultats: Le taux global d’implantation d’un SCP était de 11,7 % ; les taux étaient de 9 % pour les valves Sapien 3, de 10 % pour les valves Evolut Pro et de 17 % pour les valves Evolut R. Nous avons observé que l’ERS ne permettait pas de prédire si l’implantation d’un SCP post-IVAC était nécessaire pour la cohorte entière. Le bloc de branche droit était le seul paramètre de l’ERS indépendamment associé à la nouvelle implantation d’un SCP (8,5 % vs 25 %, rapport de cotes = 3,59, P = 0,01). Aucun autre paramètre ECG ne satisfaisait au critère de signification statistique. Conclusions: La faible valeur prédictive de l’ERS à déterminer la nécessité d’un SCP post-IVAC au sein de notre population de patients montre que des améliorations de la formule (ou calculateur de risques) sont justifiées. L’identification d’un calculateur de risques précis devrait favoriser l’adhésion des patients et réduire l’utilisation des ressources en soins de santé en milieu hospitalier.

Objectives: The coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic negatively impacted cardiothoracic (CT) surgery, with changes in clinical, academic, and personal responsibilities. We hypothesized that the pandemic may disproportionately impact female academic CT surgeons, accentuating preexisting sex disparities. This study assessed sex differences in authorship of 2 major CT surgery journals during the early part of the COVID-19 pandemic. Methods: All accepted submissions to The Annals of Thoracic Surgery and The Journal of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgery between April and August of 2019 and the same period in 2020 were reviewed. Article type and author characteristics were obtained from the journals. Author sex was predicted using a validated multinational database (Genderize.io) and verified with authors' institutional and public professional profiles. Results: In total, 1106 submissions were accepted during the 2019 period, whereas 900 articles (18.6% decrease) were accepted during the same period in 2020. Original research articles comprised 33.3% of the 2019 articles but only 4.9% of the 2020 articles. Female authors contributed to 39.3% (23.1% original research and 16.2% nonoriginal articles) and 29.4% (3.3% original research and 26.1% nonoriginal articles) of articles during the 2019 and 2020 periods, respectively. This represents a marked change in the type of articles that female authors contributed to. Conclusions: Early on during the COVID-19 pandemic, the type of articles accepted, and authorship demographic changed. There was a decrease in contribution of female-authored CT surgery articles submitted to both journals, especially for original research. Future research will elucidate the long-term impact of the pandemic on sex disparities in academic productivity. Video Abstract:

Background: Current intensive care unit physician-staffing (IPS) models for postoperative cardiac surgery have not been previously investigated in Canada. The purpose of this study was to determine current IPS models at 2 time points and describe the evolution of Canadian cardiac surgery IPS models. Methods: A survey of 32 Canadian cardiovascular intensive care units (CVICUs) was undertaken in 2012 and 2017 to determine IPS models of care during “daytime” and “after-hours” in each unit. Data were collected regarding surgical volume, base specialties, and style of IPS management (“open”; “semi-open”; “closed”). In addition, we collected the overnight experience level of the bedside healthcare provider for in-house intensive care units. Results: Survey responses were received from 27 of 32 CVICUs (87%). As of 2017, the style of 1 (4%) was open, 7 (26%) were semi-open, and 19 (70%) were closed in their unit IPS strategy. Base specialties of CVICU physicians varied. A medical doctor provided after-hours coverage in 81% of CVICUs. Senior residents (37%) or critical care certified attending staff (25%) typically provided after-hours coverage for in-house CVICUs. Linked Canadian Institute for Health Information data did not indicate a difference among CVICU models in mortality or rehospitalization for coronary artery bypass graft or valve procedures. Conclusions: Considerable heterogeneity is demonstrated in CVICU staffing patterns. No consensus was identified regarding the appropriate level of training for “after-hours” coverage. In-house overnight physician staffing in CVICUs varies widely. Finally, semi-open and closed style models did not demonstrate differences compared to Canadian Institute for Health Information data. Variability among CVICUs does exist; however, benefits of one model over another have not been identified. Résumé: Introduction: Les modèles actuels de dotation en médecins aux soins intensifs (DMSI) postopératoires de chirurgie cardiaque n’ont pas fait l’objet d’études antérieures au Canada. L’objectif de la présente étude était de déterminer les modèles actuels de DMSI à deux points temporels et de décrire l’évolution des modèles de DMSI de chirurgie cardiaque au Canada. Méthodes: Nous avons entrepris une enquête auprès de 32 unités de soins intensifs cardiovasculaires du Canada (USICC) en 2012 et en 2017 pour déterminer les modèles de soins DMSI « pendant la journée » et « après les heures normales » dans chaque unité. Nous avons collecté les données relatives au volume d’interventions chi- rurgicales, aux spécialités de base et au style de gestion de la DMSI (« ouvert », « semi-ouvert », « fermé »). De plus, nous avons collecté les données sur le niveau d’expérience de nuit des prestataires de soins au chevet des patients des unités intégrées de soins intensifs. Résultats: Nous avons reçu les réponses à l’enquête de 27 des 32 USICC (87 %). Depuis 2017, le style de 1 (4 %) USICC était ouvert, de 7 (26 %) était semi-ouvert et de 19 (70 %) était fermé dans leur stra- tégie de DMSI à l’unité. Les spécialités de base des médecins de l’USICC variaient. Un docteur en médecine offrait ses services après les heures normales dans 81 % des USICC. Les résidents chevronnés (37 %) ou les médecins titulaires agréés en soins aux patients en phase critique (25 %) offraient habituellement leurs services après les heures normales aux USICC intégrées. Les données liées de l’Institut canadien d’information sur la santé n’indiquaient pas de différence entre les modèles des USICC en ce qui a trait à la mortalité ou à la réhospitalisation en raison de pontages aortocoronariens ou d’interventions valvulaires. Conclusions: Les modèles de dotation en personnel aux USICC démontrent une importante hétérogénéité. Aucun consensus n’a été établi quant au niveau approprié de formation pour les services offerts « après les heures normales ». Le personnel médical de nuit à l’interne des USICC varie grandement. Finalement, les modèles de styles semi-ouverts et fermés ne démontraient pas de différence par rapport aux données de l’Institut canadien d’information sur la santé. Une variabilité existe entre les USICC. Toutefois, les avantages d’un modèle par rapport à un autre n’ont pas été définis.

The importance and value of engaging patients and the public as co-researchers (i.e., “patient engagement in research”) is becoming more evident, and guiding methods must be available for researchers conducting their work at different points along the engagement spectrum. This article provides a virtual workshop model for integrating patient and public stakeholder perspectives in data analysis and interpretation. The model is based upon a critical reflection on the methods that underlaid the consultation stage of our scoping review on patient and caregiver preferences for cardiac surgery. It involves four virtual workshop sessions held on separate days, each achieving the unique goals of (a) establishing participants’ technological literacy within the virtual platform, (b) obtaining responses to the research question, (c) introducing participant perspectives into research analysis and interpretation, and (d) prioritizing research findings or future research agendas. Further, a description of the considerations related to virtual engagement, including those pertaining to equity, diversity, and inclusion; features of the virtual platform; and roles for the research team are provided. This paper contributes toward a methodological toolkit for patient engagement in research, especially as an adjunct to research with otherwise minimal patient engagement. It also adds to the emerging literature on practical approaches to patient engagement in research as more engagement is occurring virtually.