2014 ACC/AHA Guideline on Perioperative Cardiovascular Evaluation and Management of Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery: Executive Summary

Impact of preoperative echocardiographic delay on timing of hip fracture surgery in elderly patients

Objectives

Early surgery is recommended for hip fractures in elderly patients. This study was performed to evaluate factors contributing to delayed surgery and associated outcomes in a secondary hospital in Japan with a rehabilitation centre.

Methods

We retrospectively reviewed the records of 895 patients aged >50 years [median age, 86 (81-91) years] treated for hip fractures at our institution from 2016 to 2020. We defined surgical delay as surgery performed >48 h after admission. We evaluated several risk factors for surgical delay and associated outcomes: mortality, length of hospital stay and walking status.

Results

Binomial logistic regression analysis showed that several factors, including preoperative echocardiographic delay (odds ratio, 9.38; 95% confidence interval, 5.95-15.28), were risk factors for surgical delay. In the multiple regression analyses, surgical delay was a significant risk factor for a longer hospital stay (partial regression coefficient, 6.99; 95% confidence interval, 3.67-10.31).

Conclusions

Our findings indicated that preoperative echocardiographic delay was one of the risk factors for surgical delay of hip fractures in elderly patients. Surgical delay was a risk factor for a longer hospital stay, including rehabilitation.

Prediction of perioperative myocardial infarction/injury in high-risk patients after noncardiac surgery

AIMS

Perioperative myocardial infarction/injury (PMI) is a surprisingly common yet difficult-to-predict cardiac complication in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. We aimed to assess the incremental value of preoperative cardiac troponin (cTn) concentration in the prediction of PMI.

METHODS AND RESULTS

Among prospectively recruited patients at high cardiovascular risk (age ≥65 years or ≥45 years with preexisting cardiovascular disease), PMI was defined as an absolute increase in high-sensitivity cTnT (hs-cTnT) concentration of ≥14 ng/L (the 99th percentile) above the preoperative concentration. Perioperative myocardial infarction/injury was centrally adjudicated by two independent cardiologists using serial measurements of hs-cTnT. Using logistic regression, three models were derived: Model 1 including patient- and procedure-related information, Model 2 adding routinely available laboratory values, and Model 3 further adding preoperative hs-cTnT concentration. Models were also compared vs. preoperative hs-cTnT alone. The findings were validated in two independent cohorts. Among 6944 patients, PMI occurred in 1058 patients (15.2%). The predictive accuracy as quantified by the area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.73 [95% confidence interval (CI) 0.71-0.74] for Model 1, 0.75 (95% CI 0.74-0.77) for Model 2, 0.79 (95% CI 0.77-0.80) for Model 3, and 0.74 for hs-cTnT alone. Model 3 included 10 preoperative variables: age, body mass index, known coronary artery disease, metabolic equivalent >4, risk of surgery, emergency surgery, planned duration of surgery, haemoglobin, platelet count, and hs-cTnT. These findings were confirmed in both independent validation cohorts (n = 722 and n = 966).

CONCLUSION

Preoperative cTn adds incremental value above patient- and procedure-related variables as well as routine laboratory variables in the prediction of PMI.

Patient, provider, and system-level factors associated with preoperative cardiac testing: A systematic review

BACKGROUND

Overuse of preoperative cardiac testing contributes to high healthcare costs and delayed surgeries. A large body of research has evaluated factors associated with variation in preoperative cardiac testing. However, patient, provider, and system-level factors associated with variation in testing have not been systematically studied.

OBJECTIVE

To conduct a systematic review to better delineate the patient, provider, and system-level factors associated with variation in preoperative cardiac testing.

METHODS

We included studies of an adult US population evaluating a patient, provider, or system-level factor associated with variation in preoperative cardiac testing for noncardiac surgery since 2012. Our search strategy used terms related to preoperative testing, diagnostic cardiac tests, and care variation with Ovid MEDLINE and Embase from inception through January 2023. We extracted study characteristics and factors associated with variation and qualitatively analyzed them. We assessed risk of bias using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale and Evidence Project Risk of Bias tool.

RESULTS

Twenty-eight articles met inclusion criteria. Older age and higher comorbidity were strongly associated with higher-intensity testing. The evidence for provider and system-level covariates was weaker. However, there was strong evidence that a focus on primary care and away from preoperative clinic and cardiac consultations was associated with less testing and that interventions to reduce low-value testing can be successful.

CONCLUSIONS

There is significant interprovider and interhospital variation in preoperative cardiac testing, the correlates of which are not well-defined. Further work should aim to better understand these factors.

Perioperative management of aortic stenosis in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery

Aortic stenosis is one of the most common cardiac valve pathologies in the world and its prevalence increases with age. Although previously associated with increased perioperative mortality, more recent studies suggest that mortality rates may be decreasing. Recent guidelines suggest that major non-cardiac surgery can be performed safely in asymptomatic severe aortic stenosis patients with close hemodynamic monitoring. Among symptomatic patients, the guidelines recommend aortic valve intervention prior to major non-cardiac surgery because of a reduction in the incidence of postoperative heart failure and improved rates of long-term overall survival. This review provides a comprehensive and contemporary review of the perioperative management of patients with severe aortic valve stenosis.

Risk of cardiac events after elective versus urgent or emergent noncardiac surgery: Implications for quality measurement and improvement

INTRODUCTION

Patient populations differ for elective vs urgent and emergent surgery. The effect of this difference on surgical outcome is not well understood and may be important for improving surgical safety. Our primary hypothesis was that there is an association of surgical acuity with risk of postoperative cardiac events. Secondarily, we examined elective vs urgent and emergent patients separately to understand patient characteristics that are associated with postoperative cardiac events.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective cohort study of patients ≥65 years undergoing noncardiac elective or urgent/emergent surgery. Logistic regression estimated the association of surgical acuity with a postoperative cardiac event, which was defined as myocardial infarction or cardiac arrest within 30 days of surgery. For the secondary analysis, we modeled the outcome after stratifying by acuity.

RESULTS

The study included 161,177 patients with 1014 cardiac events. The unadjusted risk of a postoperative cardiac event was 3.2 per 1000 among elective patients and 28.7 per 1000 among urgent and emergent patients (adjusted odds ratio 4.10, 95% confidence interval 3.56-4.72). After adjustment, increased age, higher baseline cardiac risk, peripheral vascular disease, hypertension, worse American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) physical classification, and longer operative time were associated with a postoperative cardiac event. Higher baseline cardiac risk was more strongly associated with postoperative cardiac events in elective patients. In contrast, worse ASA physical classification was more strongly associated with postoperative cardiac events in urgent and emergent patients. Black patients had higher odds of a postoperative cardiac event only in urgent and emergent patients compared to White patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Quality measurement and improvement to address postoperative cardiac risk should consider patients based on surgical acuity.

Anemia and Its Severity Is Associated With Worse Postoperative Outcomes Following Open Reduction Internal Fixation of Ankle Fractures

BACKGROUND

Ankle fractures are often treated in a nonemergent fashion and therefore offer the chance for treatment of preoperative anemia. Although preoperative anemia has been associated with postoperative morbidity following certain types of orthopaedic procedures, its effect on postoperative outcomes following open reduction internal fixation (ORIF) of ankle fractures has not been evaluated. The purpose of this study was to determine the influence of preoperative anemia on 30-day postoperative outcomes following ankle fracture ORIF.

METHODS

The American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Program (ASC-NSQIP) registry was queried from 2005 to 2019 for patients undergoing ankle fracture ORIF. Patients were stratified into nonanemic, mildly anemic, and moderately to severely anemic. Univariate analyses were used to assess differences in patient characteristics between cohorts. Multivariate logistic regressions adjusting for these differences were performed to assess the effect of preoperative anemia on 30-day postoperative outcomes.

RESULTS

We obtained data for 21 211 patients, of whom 14 931 (70.39%) were not anemic, 3982 (18.77%) were mildly anemic, and 2298 (10.83%) were moderately to severely anemic. After adjustment, mild preoperative anemia was associated with higher odds of any adverse event (P < .001), deep surgical site infections (SSIs; P = .013), sepsis (P = .001), 30-day readmission (P < .001), and extended length of stay (LOS) (P < .001). Similarly, moderate to severe anemia in these patients was also associated with increased odds of any adverse event (P < .001), deep SSIs (P = .003), sepsis (P = .001), readmission (P < .001), and extended LOS (P < .001). Both mild (P = .004) and moderate to severe (P < .001) anemia groups had higher odds of requiring a blood transfusion.

CONCLUSION

Preoperative anemia is associated with an increased risk of adverse postoperative outcomes in patients undergoing ORIF for ankle fractures. Future studies should evaluate whether optimization of hematocrit in these patients results in improved outcomes.

LEVEL OF EVIDENCE

Level III, comparative study.

Hip Fracture Surgery in Severe Aortic Stenosis: A Study of Factors Affecting Mortality

Background

Purpose

Patients and Methods

Results

Conclusion

Cardiac risk assessment with the Revised Cardiac Risk Index index before elective non-cardiac surgery: A retrospective audit from an Australian tertiary hospital

Clinicians assessing cardiac risk as part of a comprehensive consultation before surgery can use an expanding set of tools, including predictive risk calculators, cardiac stress tests and measuring serum natriuretic peptides. The optimal assessment strategy is unclear, with conflicting international guidelines. We investigated the prognostic accuracy of the Revised Cardiac Risk Index for risk stratification and cardiac outcomes in patients undergoing elective non-cardiac surgery in a contemporary Australian cohort.

We audited the records for 1465 consecutive patients 45 years and older presenting to the perioperative clinic for elective non-cardiac surgery in our tertiary hospital. We calculated individual Revised Cardiac Risk Index scores and documented any use of preoperative cardiac tests. The primary outcome was any major adverse cardiac events within 30 days of surgery, including myocardial infarction, pulmonary oedema, complete heart block or cardiac death.

Myocardial perfusion imaging was the most common preoperative stress test (4.2%, 61/1465). There was no routine investigation of natriuretic peptide levels for cardiac risk assessment before surgery. Major adverse cardiac events occurred in 1.3% (18/1366) of patients who had surgery. The Revised Cardiac Risk Index score had modest prognostic accuracy for major cardiac complications, area under receiver operator curve 0.73, 95% confidence interval 0.60 to 0.86. Stratifying major adverse cardiac events by the Revised Cardiac Risk Index scores 0, 1, 2 and 3 or greater corresponded to event rates of 0.6% (4/683), 0.8% (4/488), 4.1% (6/145) and 8.0% (4/50), respectively.

The Revised Cardiac Risk Index had only modest predictive value in our single-centre experience. Patients with a revised cardiac risk index score of 2 or more had an elevated risk of early cardiac complications after elective non-cardiac surgery.

Preoperative multidisciplinary team decisions for high-risk patients scheduled for noncardiac surgery-a retrospective observational study

PURPOSE

Preoperative multidisciplinary team (MDT) meetings are recommended for patients at high risk for perioperative complications and mortality, although the underlying evidence is scarce. We aimed to investigate the effect of MDT decisions on patient management and patient outcome.

METHODS

We conducted a single-centre retrospective cohort study including all noncardiac surgical patients selected for discussion at preoperative MDT meetings from January 2017 to December 2019 (N = 120). We abstracted preoperative data, MDT decisions, and patient outcomes from the electronic health records for analysis.

RESULTS

Of the 120 patients registered for an MDT meeting, 43% did not undergo their initially planned surgery. Only 27% of patients received perioperative management as planned before the MDT meeting. Most surgery cancellations were the MDT's decision (22%) or the patient's decision before or after the MDT discussion (10%). Postoperative complications occurred in 28% of operated patients, and postoperative mortality was 4% at 30 days and 10% at three months, most of which was attributable to postoperative complications. Non-operated patients had a 7% mortality rate at 30 days and 9% at three months. Alterations of perioperative management following MDT discussion were associated with fewer cases of extended length of hospital stay (> ten days).

CONCLUSION

This study shows that preoperative MDT meetings for high-risk noncardiac surgical patients altered the management of most patients. Management alterations were associated with fewer hospital admissions of long duration. These results should be interpreted with appropriate caution given the methodological limitations inherent to this small study.

Mitral Regurgitation in Patients Undergoing Noncardiac Surgery

Mitral regurgitation (MR) is one of the most frequently encountered types of valvular heart disease in the United States. Patients with significant MR (moderate-to-severe or severe) undergoing noncardiac surgery have an increased risk of perioperative cardiovascular complications. MR can arise from a diverse array of causes that fall into 2 broad categories: primary (diseases intrinsic to the valvular apparatus) and secondary (diseases that disrupt normal valve function via effects on the left ventricle or mitral annulus). This article highlights key guideline updates from the American College of Cardiologists (ACC) and the American Heart Association (AHA) that inform decision-making for the anesthesiologist caring for a patient with MR undergoing noncardiac surgery. The pathophysiology and natural history of acute and chronic MR, staging of chronic primary and secondary MR, and considerations for timing of valvular corrective surgery are reviewed. These topics are then applied to a discussion of anesthetic management, including preoperative risk evaluation, anesthetic selection, hemodynamic goals, and intraoperative monitoring of the noncardiac surgical patient with MR.

Kidney Transplant List Status and Outcomes in the ISCHEMIA-CKD Trial

BACKGROUND

Patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD) and coronary artery disease frequently undergo preemptive revascularization before kidney transplant listing.

OBJECTIVES

In this post hoc analysis from ISCHEMIA-CKD (International Study of Comparative Health Effectiveness of Medical and Invasive Approaches-Chronic Kidney Disease), we compared outcomes of patients not listed versus those listed according to management strategy.

METHODS

In the ISCHEMIA-CKD trial (n = 777), 194 patients (25%) with chronic coronary syndromes and at least moderate ischemia were listed for transplant. The primary (all-cause mortality or nonfatal myocardial infarction) and secondary (death, nonfatal myocardial infarction, hospitalization for unstable angina, heart failure, resuscitated cardiac arrest, or stroke) outcomes were analyzed using Cox multivariable modeling. Heterogeneity of randomized treatment effect between listed versus not listed groups was assessed.

RESULTS

Compared with those not listed, listed patients were younger (60 years vs 65 years), were less likely to be of Asian race (15% vs 29%), were more likely to be on dialysis (83% vs 44%), had fewer anginal symptoms, and were more likely to have coronary angiography and coronary revascularization irrespective of treatment assignment. Among patients assigned to an invasive strategy versus conservative strategy, the adjusted hazard ratios for the primary outcome were 0.91 (95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.54-1.54) and 1.03 (95% CI: 0.78-1.37) for those listed and not listed, respectively (pinteraction= 0.68). Adjusted hazard ratios for secondary outcomes were 0.89 (95% CI: 0.55-1.46) in listed and 1.17 (95% CI: 0.89-1.53) in those not listed (pinteraction = 0.35).

CONCLUSIONS

In ISCHEMIA-CKD, an invasive strategy in kidney transplant candidates did not improve outcomes compared with conservative management. These data do not support routine coronary angiography or revascularization in patients with advanced CKD and chronic coronary syndromes listed for transplant. (ISCHEMIA-Chronic Kidney Disease Trial [ISCHEMIA-CKD]; NCT01985360).

Asymptomatic Severe Aortic Stenosis and Noncardiac Surgery

The patient with severe asymptomatic aortic stenosis presenting for elective noncardiac surgery poses a unique challenge. These patients are not traditionally offered surgical aortic valve replacement or transcatheter aortic valve replacement given their lack of symptoms; however, they are at increased risk for postsurgical complications given the severity of their aortic stenosis. The decision to proceed with elective noncardiac surgery should be based on individual and surgical risk factors. However, severity of aortic stenosis is not accounted for in current surgical risk factor assessment scoring; therefore, extensive communication with patients and surgical teams is necessary to minimize a patient's risk. A clear intraoperative plan should be designed to manage the unique hemodynamics of these patients, and a discussion should address postoperative placement.

Rationale and design of an evidence-based tool to guide preoperative evaluation and management

BACKGROUND

In the United States, over-testing and over-treatment are recognised causes of excess cost and patient harm. Healthcare value, defined as health outcomes achieved relative to the costs of care, has become a focus to improve the quality and affordability of healthcare.

AIM

To describe the rationale for, and development of a standardised clinical preoperative decision-support tool.Program description: An evidence-based, preoperative clinical decision tool was developed to guide preoperative testing and management of high-risk medications.Program evaluation: Patient data before and after implementation of the tool will be analysed to determine its effectiveness in reducing preoperative testing.

DISCUSSION

Preoperative testing is an area that presents an opportunity to increase healthcare value and decrease healthcare spending. Guidelines are available to standardise preoperative assessment but their adoption and acceptance into practice has been slow. To systematise preoperative assessment within our healthcare system, we reviewed current published literature and guidelines and synthesised them into an electronic, evidence-based, decision-support tool. After distribution of the tool to clinicians in our healthcare system, we will assess its impact on healthcare value, costs and outcomes. We believe that an evidence-based preoperative tool, seamlessly and efficiently integrated into clinician workflow, can improve preoperative patient care.

Risk Factors for Postoperative Hypotension and Hypertension following Carotid Endarterectomy

BACKGROUND

Patients undergoing carotid endarterectomy (CEA) often experience postoperative hemodynamic changes that require intravenous medications for hypo- and hypertension. Prior studies have found these changes to be associated with increased risks of 30-day mortality, stroke, myocardial infarction (MI), and length of stay (LOS). Our aim is to investigate preoperative risk factors associated with the need for postoperative intravenous medications for blood pressure control.

METHODS

A retrospective review of an internally maintained prospective database of patients undergoing carotid interventions between January 2014 and March 2019 was performed. Demographic data, clinical history, and perioperative data were recorded. Carotid artery stents and reinterventions were excluded. Our primary end points were the need to intervene with intravenous medication for either postoperative hypotension [systolic blood pressure (SBP) <100 mm Hg] or postoperative hypertension (SBP >160 mm Hg).

RESULTS

A total of 221 patients were included in the study after excluding those with a prior ipsilateral CEA or carotid artery stent. The mean age was 72.3 (±8.9) years, 157 (71%) patients were male, and 78 (35.3%) were Caucasian. Following CEA, 151 (68.3%) patients were normotensive, while 33 (14.9%) and 37 (16.7%) required medication for hypotension and hypertension, respectively. A univariate logistic regression identified 5 variables as being associated with postoperative blood pressure including race, history of MI, prior percutaneous transluminal coronary angioplasty (PTCA), statin use, and angiotensin-converting enzyme-inhibitor/angiotensin-receptor blocker (ARB) use. A stepwise regression selection found race, prior MI, and statin use to be associated with our primary end points. The hypertensive group was more likely to have a history of MI compared to the hypotensive and normotensive groups (40.5% vs. 27.3% vs. 18.5%, P = 0.02), PTCA (43.2% vs. 39.4% vs. 23.8%, P = 0.03), and statin use (94.6% vs. 93.9% vs. 78.8%, P = 0.01). Mean LOS was also the highest for the hypertensive group, followed by hypotensive and normotensive patients [2.0 (±1.6) vs. 1.8 (±2.4) vs. 1.3 (±0.8), P = 0.002]. Multivariable logistic regression demonstrated that non-Caucasian patients [odds ratio (OR) 2.72, 95% confidence interval (CI) 1.26-5.86, P = 0.01] and those with a history of MI (OR 2.98, 95% CI 1.33-6.67) were more likely to have postoperative hypertension compared to patients who were Caucasian or had no history of MI.

CONCLUSIONS

Postoperative hypertension is associated with non-Caucasian race and a history of MI. Given the potential implications for adverse perioperative outcomes including MI, mortality, and LOS, it is important to continue to elucidate potential risk factors in order to further tailor the perioperative management of patients undergoing CEA.

Establishing a Geriatric Hip Fracture Program at a Level 1 Community Trauma Center

BACKGROUND

Traditional care of patients with geriatric hip fracture has been fragmented with patients admitted under various specialty services and to different units within a hospital. This produces inconsistent care and leads to varying outcomes that can be associated with increased length of stay, delays in time from admission to surgery, and higher readmission rates.

PURPOSE

The purpose of this article is to describe the process taken to establish a successful geriatric hip fracture program (GFP) and the initial results observed in a single institution after its implementation.

METHODS

All patients 60 years or older, with an osteoporotic hip fracture sustained from a low energy mechanism (defined as a fall from 3-ft height or less), were included in our program. Fracture patterns include femoral neck, intertrochanteric, pertrochanteric, and subtrochanteric femur fractures including displaced, nondisplaced, and periprosthetic fractures. Preprogram data included all patients admitted from January 1, 2012, through December 31, 2014; postprogram data were collected on patients admitted between May 1, 2016, and May 1, 2018.

RESULTS

Demographic characteristics of the populations were similar. After the GFP was implemented, the proportion of patients who were treated surgically within 24 and 48 hours increased. The average number of hours between admission and surgery significantly reduced from 35.2 to 23.2 hours. Overall length of stay was decreased by 1.8 days and readmission within 30 days of discharge was lower. Reasons for readmission were similar in both timeframes. The rate of inpatient death was similar in the two groups. Mortality within 30 days of surgery appeared somewhat higher in the post-GFP period.

CONCLUSION

Our program found that, with the utilization of a multidisciplinary approach, we could positively influence the care of patients with geriatric hip fracture through the implementation of evidence-based practice guidelines. In the first 2 years after initiation of the GFP, our institution saw a decrease in time from admission to surgery, length of stay, and blood transfusion requirements.

The prevalence of preoperative medical testing and consultation in cataract surgery patients at a teaching hospital

PURPOSE

To investigate the prevalence of preoperative cataract surgery testing and consultation at a single United States teaching hospital.

SETTING

Academic-affiliated Veterans Affairs Medical Center.

DESIGN

Retrospective chart review.

METHODS

This study included patients who received cataract surgery from 2014 to 2018. For patients with bilateral cataracts, the second surgery was excluded to ensure independent selection. Charlson Comorbidity Index (CCI) scores and heart disease status were recorded. The outcomes of interest were preoperative testing, such as complete blood count, chemistry panel, and echocardiography, and consultation (office visits to non-ophthalmologists) during the period between the date the decision was made to proceed with surgery and the cataract surgery date.

RESULTS

For this study 1320 charts were reviewed; 1257 (95.2%) patients met the study criteria. The mean CCI score was 1.7; 42.0% (528/1257) had heart disease. The prevalence of preoperative testing was 0.08% (1/1257). The prevalence of preoperative consultation was 4.2% (53/1257); 86.8% (46/53) of patients received cardiology consultation; 17.0% (9/53) pulmonology; and 15.1% (8/53) primary care. Of the patients who received cardiac consultation, 63.0% (29/46) had heart disease; the remaining had an electrocardiogram abnormality.

CONCLUSIONS

There was a low prevalence of preoperative testing and consultation for cataract surgery at this teaching hospital. Further studies using medical record data are needed to assess the current rates and the role of preoperative testing and consultation for cataract surgery patients.

Anesthesia for meningioma surgery

Patients receiving treatment for a meningioma require anesthesia when undergoing open craniotomy and, in some cases, during preoperative tumor embolization and radiosurgery. Adequate anesthesia management is integral to patients' perioperative care, which consists of the three phases of preoperative assessment and optimization, intraoperative care, and postoperative recovery. The preoperative anesthesia evaluation focusses on the cardiorespiratory and neurologic systems, as well as the airway, but also extends to ensure the optimal treatment of significant comorbidities before surgical intervention. The goals of intraoperative care are maintenance of brain physiology, facilitating surgery, and correcting any adverse effects of surgery and underlying pathology to preserve general patient homeostasis. This requires adequate intraoperative patient monitoring, cardiorespiratory support, management of infusion therapy, and application of knowledge about the effects of anesthetic agents on brain physiology. The anesthesiologist's responsibilities for patient care extend well into the postoperative recovery period, with a focus on pain control, prevention, and treatment of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and, in some patients, intensive care therapy.

Routine preoperative medical testing for cataract surgery

BACKGROUND

Cataract surgery is practiced widely, and substantial resources are committed to an increasing cataract surgical rate in low- and middle-income countries. With the current volume of cataract surgery and future increases, it is critical to optimize the safety and cost-effectiveness of this procedure. Most cataracts are performed on older individuals with correspondingly high systemic and ocular comorbidities. It is likely that routine preoperative medical testing will detect medical conditions, but it is questionable whether these conditions should preclude individuals from cataract surgery or change their perioperative management.

OBJECTIVES

1. To investigate the evidence for reductions in adverse events through preoperative medical testing2. To estimate the average cost of performing routine medical testing SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) (which contains the Cochrane Eyes and Vision Trials Register) (2018, Issue 6); Ovid MEDLINE; Embase.com; PubMed; LILACS BIREME, the metaRegister of Controlled Trials (mRCT) (last searched 5 January 2012); ClinicalTrials.gov and the WHO ICTRP. The date of the search was 29 June 2018, with the exception of mRCT which is no longer in service. We searched the references of reports from included studies for additional relevant studies without restrictions regarding language or date of publication.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized clinical trials in which routine preoperative medical testing was compared to no preoperative or selective preoperative testing prior to age-related cataract surgery.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

Two review authors independently assessed abstracts to identify possible trials for inclusion. For each included study, two review authors independently documented study characteristics, extracted data, and assessed risk of bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified three randomized clinical trials that compared routine preoperative medical testing versus selective or no preoperative testing for 21,531 cataract surgeries. The largest trial, in which 19,557 surgeries were randomized, was conducted in Canada and the USA. Another study was conducted in Brazil and the third in Italy. Although the studies had some issues with respect to performance and detection bias due to lack of masking (high risk for one study, unclear for two studies), we assessed the studies as at overall low risk of bias.The three randomized clinical trials included in this review reported results for 21,531 total cataract surgeries with 707 total surgery-associated medical adverse events, including 61 hospitalizations and three deaths. Of the 707 medical adverse events reported, 353 occurred in the pre-testing group and 354 occurred in the no-testing group (odds ratio (OR) 1.00, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.86 to 1.16; high-certainty evidence). Most events were cardiovascular and occurred during the intraoperative period. Routine preoperative medical testing did not reduce the risk of intraoperative (OR 0.99, 95% CI 0.71 to 1.38) or postoperative ocular adverse events (OR 1.11, 95% CI 0.74 to 1.67) when compared to selective or no testing (2 studies; 2281 cataract surgeries; moderate-certainty evidence). One study evaluated cost savings, estimating the costs to be 2.55 times higher in those with preoperative medical testing compared to those without preoperative medical testing (1 study; 1005 cataract surgeries; moderate-certainty evidence). There was no difference in cancellation of surgery between those with preoperative medical testing and those with selective or no preoperative testing, reported by two studies with 20,582 cataract surgeries (OR 0.97, 95% CI 0.78 to 1.21; high-certainty evidence). No study reported outcomes related to clinical management changes (other than cancellation) or quality of life scores.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

This review has shown that routine preoperative testing does not increase the safety of cataract surgery. Alternatives to routine preoperative medical testing have been proposed, including self administered health questionnaires, which could substitute for health provider histories and physical examinations. Such avenues may lead to cost-effective means of identifying those at increased risk of medical adverse events due to cataract surgery. However, despite the rare occurrence, adverse medical events precipitated by cataract surgery remain a concern because of the large number of elderly patients with multiple medical comorbidities who have cataract surgery in various settings. The studies summarized in this review should assist recommendations for the standard of care of cataract surgery, at least in low- and middle-income settings. Unfortunately, in these settings, medical history questionnaires may be useless to screen for risk because few people have ever been to a physician, let alone been diagnosed with any chronic disease.

Clinical agreement in the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status classification

Background

The American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status (ASA-PS) classification is not intended to predict risk, but increasing ASA-PS class has been associated with increased perioperative mortality. The ASA-PS class is being used by many institutions to identify patients that may require further workup or exams preoperatively. Studies regarding the ASA-PS classification system show significant variability in class assignment by anesthesiologists as well as providers of different specialties when provided with short clinical scenarios. Discrepancies in the ASA-PS accuracy have the potential to lead to unnecessary testing and cancelation of surgical procedures. Our study aimed to determine whether these differences in ASA-PS classification were present when actual patients were evaluated rather than previously published scenario-based studies.

Methods

A retrospective chart review was completed for patients >/= 65 years of age undergoing elective total hip or total knee replacements. One hundred seventy-seven records were reviewed of which 101 records had the necessary data. The outcome measures noted were the ASA-PS classification assigned by the internal medicine clinic provider, the ASA-PS classification assigned by the Pre-Anesthesia Unit (PAU) clinic provider, and the ASA-PS classification assigned on the day of surgery (DOS) by the anesthesia provider conducting the anesthetic care.

Results

A statistically significant difference was shown between the internal medicine and the PAU preoperative ASA-PS designation as well as between the internal medicine and DOS designation (McNemar p = 0.034 and p = 0.025). Low kappa values were obtained confirming the inter-observer variation in the application of the ASA-PS classification of patients by providers of different specialties [Kappa of 0.170 (− 0.001, 0.340) and 0.156 (− 0.015, 0.327)].

Conclusions

There was disagreement in the ASA-PS class designation between two providers of different specialties when evaluating the same patients with access to full medical records. When the anesthesia-run PAU and the anesthesia assigned DOS ASA-PS class designations were evaluated, there was agreement. This agreement was seen between anesthesia providers regardless of education or training level. The difference in the application of the ASA-PS classification in our study appeared to be reflective of department membership and not reflective of the individual provider’s level of training.

Risk Assessment

Purpose of Review

The central question of preoperative assessment is not “What can be done?” but “What should be done and how?” Predicting a patient’s risk of unwanted outcomes is vital to answering this question. This review discusses risk prediction tools currently available and anticipates future developments.

Recent Findings

Simple, parsimonious risk scales and scores are being replaced by complex risk prediction models as high-capacity information systems become ubiquitous. The accuracy of risk estimation will be further increased by improved assessment of physical fitness, frailty, and incorporation of existing and novel biomarkers. However, the limitations of risk prediction for individual patient care must be recognized.

Summary

Risk prediction is transforming from clinical estimation to statistical science. Predictions should be used within the context of a patient’s baseline risk (life expectancy independent of surgery), personal circumstances, quality of life, their expectations and values, and consideration of outcomes that are meaningful for the patient.

The Effect of Previous Coronary Artery Revascularization on the Adverse Cardiac Events Ninety days After Total Joint Arthroplasty

BACKGROUND

Although coronary artery revascularization therapies are effective for treating coronary artery disease (CAD), these patients may be more susceptible to adverse cardiac events during later non-cardiac surgeries. The purpose of this study is to evaluate post-operative 90-day complications of total joint arthroplasty (TJA) in CAD patients with a history of CAD and to study the risk factors for cardiac complications.

METHODS

We performed a retrospective analysis of TJA patients between 2005 and 2015 at our institute by summarizing the history of CAD, cardiac revascularization, and cardiac complications within 90 days after the operation. Multivariate logistic regression was performed to identify the factors that predicted cardiac complications within 90 days after the operation.

RESULTS

A total of 4414 patients were included; of these, 64 underwent cardiac revascularization and 201 CAD patients underwent medical therapy other than revascularization. All the revascularization had history of myocardial infarction (MI). The rate of cardiac complications within 90 days for the CAD with revascularization was 18.7%, 18.4% for the CAD without revascularization, and 2.0% for the non-CAD group. A history of CAD and revascularization, bilateral TJA, general anesthesia, body mass index ≥30 kg/m², and history of MI were associated with a higher risk of cardiac complications. Patients who underwent TJA within 2 years after cardiac revascularization had a significantly higher cardiac complication rate, and the risk decreased with time.

CONCLUSION

There is an increased risk of cardiac complications within 90 days after the operation among TJA patients with a history of CAD. Revascularization cannot significantly reduce the risk of cardiac complications after TJA for CAD patients. However, the risk decreased as the interval between revascularization and TJA increased.

[Anesthesiological care of trauma patients in orthogeriatric co-management]

Elderly patients increasingly need to undergo surgery under anesthesia, especially following trauma. A timely interdisciplinary approach to the perioperative management of these patients is decisive for the long-term outcome. Orthogeriatric co-management, which includes geriatricians and anesthesiologists from an early stage, is of great benefit for geriatric patients. Patient age, comorbidities and self-sufficiency in activities of daily life are decisive for an anesthesiological assessment of the state of health and preoperative risk stratification. If necessary additional investigations, such as echocardiography must be carried out, in order to guarantee optimal perioperative anesthesiological management. Certain medical factors can delay the initiation of anesthesia and it is absolutely necessary that these are taken into consideration for surgical management. Not every form of anesthesia is equally suitable for every geriatric patient.

[Epidemiological profile of patients seen in the pre-anesthetic assessment clinic of a university hospital]

OBJECTIVE

Assess the demographic and clinical characteristics of surgical patients seen in the Pre-anesthetic Assessment Clinic of the Hospital Universitário Gaffrée e Guinle (APA/HUGG), in order to assist in the pursuit for quality, effectiveness, and resource rationalization of hospital management.

METHOD

Cross-sectional descriptive study with 491 patients undergoing elective surgery, treated at APA/HUGG Clinic from March to December 2014. The following variables were assessed: sex, age, BMI, smoking status, associated diseases, classification of MET's and ASA, presence of decompensated disease, medical associated appointments interconsultation, specialty and surgical risk, history of prior anesthetic-surgical procedure, and complications.

RESULTS

There was a predominance of female (64.8%) and overweight patients (55.9%), aged 18-59 years. The prevalence of associated diseases was high (71.3%), with hypertension pressure prevailing (50.1%). Most patients had clinically compensated morbidity (96.3%) and long-term use of medication (77.4%). Regarding the surgical characteristics, the most frequent specialty was general and medium risk surgeries. The analysis of the characteristics by age showed that the elderly have more associated diseases and long-term use of medication, in addition to predominance of ASA II-III.

CONCLUSION

The epidemiological profile of surgical patients seen at the APA/HUGG was female, age 18-59 years, overweight, with associated diseases, long-term use of medication, without clinical decompensation, ASA II and MET's ≥4. Knowledge of the clinical characteristics of surgical patients is critical to schedule the perioperative care, allowing the improvement of quality and safety in anesthesia and surgery.

The pathophysiology of coronary heart disease from a student's perspective

It is estimated that 2.3 million people in the UK are living with coronary heart disease (CHD) (ONS 2014a). It is therefore important to have a deeper understanding of the pathophysiology of the condition and an awareness of the complex interplay of contributory factors. Written from the perspective of a student ODP, this article investigates the aetiology, presentation and progression of the disease, and puts CHD into the context of the emerging anaesthetic practitioner's practice.

Cardiac assessment prior to non-cardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Increasingly, patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery are older and have more comorbidities yet preoperative cardiac assessment appears haphazard and unsystematic. We hypothesised that patients at high cardiac risk were not receiving adequate cardiac assessment, and patients with low-cardiac risk were being over-investigated.

AIMS

To compare in a representative sample of patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery the use of cardiac investigations in patients at high and low preoperative cardiac risk.

METHODS

We examined cardiac assessment patterns prior to elective non-cardiac surgery in a representative sample of patients. Cardiac risk was calculated using the Revised Cardiac Risk Index.

RESULTS

Of 671 patients, 589 (88%) were low risk and 82 (12%) were high risk. We found that nearly 14% of low-risk and 45% of high-risk patients had investigations for coronary ischaemia prior to surgery. Vascular surgery had the highest rate of investigation (38%) and thoracic patients the lowest rate (14%). Whilst 78% of high-risk patients had coronary disease, only 46% were on beta-blockers, 49% on aspirin and 77% on statins. For current smokers (17.3% of cohort, n = 98), 60% were advised to quit pre-op.

CONCLUSIONS

Practice patterns varied across surgical sub-types with low-risk patients tending to be over-investigated and high-risk patients under-investigated. A more systemised approach to this large group of patients could improve clinical outcomes, and more judicious use of investigations could lower healthcare costs and increase efficiency in managing this cohort.

[Anesthesiological care in orthogeriatric co-management. Perioperative treatment of geriatric trauma patients]

Elderly patients increasingly need to undergo surgery under anesthesia, especially following trauma. A timely interdisciplinary approach to the perioperative management of these patients is decisive for the long-term outcome. Orthogeriatric co-management, which includes geriatricians and anesthesiologists from an early stage, is of great benefit for geriatric patients. Patient age, comorbidities and self-sufficiency in activities of daily life are decisive for an anesthesiological assessment of the state of health and preoperative risk stratification. If necessary additional investigations, such as echocardiography must be carried out, in order to guarantee optimal perioperative anesthesiological management. Certain medical factors can delay the initiation of anesthesia and it is absolutely necessary that these are taken into consideration for surgical management. Not every form of anesthesia is equally suitable for every geriatric patient.

Preoperative Laboratory Testing

Routine preoperative testing is not cost-effective, because it is unlikely to identify significant abnormalities. Abnormal findings from routine testing are more likely to be false positive, are costly to pursue, introduce a new risk, increase the patient's anxiety, and are inconvenient to the patient. Abnormal findings rarely alter the surgical or anesthetic plan, and there is usually no association between perioperative complications and abnormal laboratory results. Incidental findings and false positive results may lead to increased hospital visits and admissions. Preoperative testing needs to be done based on a targeted history and physical examination and the type of surgery.

Aspirin in the perioperative period: a review of the recent literature

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

The indications for aspirin (ASA) for both primary and secondary prevention of thrombotic events continue to evolve. We review some of these indications and the recent literature regarding the perioperative administration of ASA.

RECENT FINDINGS

ASA for primary prevention of cardiac ischemia, stroke, cancer, and death remains controversial. When used for primary prevention, ASA may be safely discontinued perioperatively. Patients with coronary or carotid artery stents should continue to receive ASA perioperatively. For patients with ischemic heart disease currently receiving ASA for secondary prevention of cardiac ischemia and stroke undergoing general surgery, orthopedic surgery, ophthalmological surgery, cardiovascular surgery, major vascular surgery, or a urological procedure, continuation of ASA is probably well tolerated, but further study is required. There is no indication to initiate ASA perioperatively in patients with stable ischemic heart disease as the risks outweigh the benefits. Until further data become available, decisions regarding the perioperative continuation of ASA should be made on a case-by-case risk-benefit analysis.

SUMMARY

The continuation or discontinuation of ASA perioperatively remains a complicated issue. Further, well designed trials are needed for additional clarification.

Patterns of β-blocker initiation in patients undergoing intermediate to high-risk noncardiac surgery

BACKGROUND

Based on 2 small randomized controlled trials (RCTs) from the 1990s, β-blockers were promoted to prevent perioperative cardiac events in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery. In 2008, a large RCT (POISE trial) showed an increased mortality risk associated with perioperative β-blockade, raising concerns about an extensive β-Blocker use.

OBJECTIVES

The objective of the study is to examine patterns of β-Blocker initiation among patients undergoing noncardiac elective surgery in the US.

METHODS

From a large, nationwide US health care insurer, we identified patients ≥18 years old who underwent moderate- to high-risk noncardiac elective surgery between 2003 and 2012 and initiated a β-Blocker within 30 days before surgery. We evaluated temporal trends and assessed the impact of the POISE trial on perioperative β-Blocker initiation. We also evaluated patient characteristics and examined the effect of temporal proximity to surgery on the likelihood of β-Blocker initiation.

RESULTS

Of 499,752 patients undergoing surgery, 9,014 (18 per 1,000 patients) initiated a β-Blocker. β-Blocker initiation increased from 12 per 1,000 patients in 2003 to 23 before POISE, after which it decreased to 14 by December 2012 (P = .0001). β-Blocker initiation remained relatively high among patients undergoing vascular surgery or with Revised Cardiac Risk Index score ≥ 2. Proximity to surgery was highly predictive of β-Blocker initiation (odds ratio 3.34, 95% CI 3.17-3.51).

CONCLUSIONS

After a period of a rapidly increasing trend, perioperative β-Blocker initiation decreased sharply in the second half of 2008 and continued to decrease afterwards. β-Blocker initiation remained relatively high in patients with Revised Cardiac Risk Index score ≥2 and in those undergoing major vascular surgery.

Heart rate variables in the Vascular Quality Initiative are not reliable predictors of adverse cardiac outcomes or mortality after major elective vascular surgery

OBJECTIVE

Heart rate (HR) parameters are known indicators of cardiovascular complications after cardiac surgery, but there is little evidence of their role in predicting outcome after major vascular surgery. The purpose of this study was to determine whether arrival HR (AHR) and highest intraoperative HR are associated with mortality or major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) after elective vascular surgery in the Vascular Quality Initiative (VQI).

METHODS

Patients undergoing elective lower extremity bypass (LEB), aortofemoral bypass (AFB), and open abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair in the VQI were analyzed. MACE was defined as any postoperative myocardial infarction, dysrhythmia, or congestive heart failure. Controlled HR was defined as AHR <75 beats/min on operating room arrival. Delta HR (DHR) was defined as highest intraoperative HR - AHR. Procedure-specific MACE models were derived for risk stratification, and generalized estimating equations were used to account for clustering of center effects. HR, beta-blocker exposure, cardiac risk, and their interactions were explored to determine association with MACE or 30-day mortality. A Bonferroni correction with P < .004 was used to declare significance.

RESULTS

There were 13,291 patients reviewed (LEB, n = 8155 [62%]; AFB, n = 2629 [18%]; open AAA, n = 2629 [20%]). Rates of any preoperative beta-blocker exposure were as follows: LEB, 66.5% (n = 5412); AFB, 57% (n = 1342); and open AAA, 74.2% (n = 1949). AHR and DHR outcome association was variable across patients and procedures. AHR <75 beats/min was associated with increased postoperative myocardial infarction risk for LEB patients across all risk strata (odds ratio [OR], 1.4; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.03-1.9; P = .03), whereas AHR <75 beats/min was associated with decreased dysrhythmia risk (OR, 0.42; 95% CI, 0.28-0.63; P = .0001) and 30-day death (OR, 0.50; 95% CI, 0.33-0.77; P = .001) in patients at moderate and high cardiac risk. These HR associations disappeared in controlling for beta-blocker status. For AFB and open AAA repair patients, there was no significant association between AHR and MACE or 30-day mortality, irrespective or cardiac risk or beta-blocker status. DHR and extremes of highest intraoperative HR (>90 or 100 beats/min) were analyzed among all three operations, and no consistent associations with MACE or 30-day mortality were detected.

CONCLUSIONS

The VQI AHR and highest intraoperative HR variables are highly confounded by patient presentation, operative variables, and beta-blocker therapy. The discordance between cardiac risk and HR as well as the lack of consistent correlation to outcome makes them unreliable predictors. The VQI has elected to discontinue collecting AHR and highest intraoperative HR data, given insufficient evidence to suggest their importance as an outcome measure.

Aortic stenosis and perioperative risk with noncardiac surgery

Aortic stenosis (AS) is characterized as a high-risk index for cardiac complications during noncardiac surgery. The American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association guidelines define severe AS as aortic valve area ≤1 cm(2), mean gradient of ≥40 mm Hg, and peak velocity of ≥4 m/s. As per current clinical practice, any of these characteristic features label a patient as at high risk for noncardiac surgery. However, these parameters appear inconsistent, particularly with respect to the aortic valve area cutoff value. The perioperative risk associated with AS during noncardiac surgery depends upon its severity (moderate vs. severe), clinical status, and the complexity of the surgical procedure (low to intermediate risk vs. high risk). A critical analysis of old and new data from published studies indicates that the significance of the presence of AS in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery is overemphasized in studies that predate the more recent advances in echocardiography and cardiac catheterization in assessment of aortic stenosis, anesthetic and surgical techniques, as well as post-operative patient care.