Displaying all 8 publications

Abstract:
Sort:
  1. Lo SY, Teah MK, Ho YZ, Yeap TB
    BMJ Case Rep, 2021 Feb 05;14(2).
    PMID: 33547110 DOI: 10.1136/bcr-2020-241189
    A young man presented to our centre needing an urgent debridement of his postcraniotomy wound due to massive myiasis during the COVID-19 pandemic in October 2020. Prior to the surgery, his nasopharyngeal swab real-time PCR test result was unknown. One day later, it returned as SARS-CoV-2 positive. All healthcare workers who were involved in the patient management avoided cross infection as they wore appropriate personal protective equipment. This article depicts the importance of adequate preparations when handling potentially infectious patients and the perioperative issues associated with it.
    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods*
  2. Sartini C, Lomivorotov V, Pisano A, Riha H, Baiardo Redaelli M, Lopez-Delgado JC, et al.
    J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth, 2019 Oct;33(10):2685-2694.
    PMID: 31064730 DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2019.03.022
    OBJECTIVE: Reducing mortality is a key target in critical care and perioperative medicine. The authors aimed to identify all nonsurgical interventions (drugs, techniques, strategies) shown by randomized trials to increase mortality in these clinical settings.

    DESIGN: A systematic review of the literature followed by a consensus-based voting process.

    SETTING: A web-based international consensus conference.

    PARTICIPANTS: Two hundred fifty-one physicians from 46 countries.

    INTERVENTIONS: The authors performed a systematic literature search and identified all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) showing a significant increase in unadjusted landmark mortality among surgical or critically ill patients. The authors reviewed such studies during a meeting by a core group of experts. Studies selected after such review advanced to web-based voting by clinicians in relation to agreement, clinical practice, and willingness to include each intervention in international guidelines.

    MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The authors selected 12 RCTs dealing with 12 interventions increasing mortality: diaspirin-crosslinked hemoglobin (92% of agreement among web voters), overfeeding, nitric oxide synthase inhibitor in septic shock, human growth hormone, thyroxin in acute kidney injury, intravenous salbutamol in acute respiratory distress syndrome, plasma-derived protein C concentrate, aprotinin in high-risk cardiac surgery, cysteine prodrug, hypothermia in meningitis, methylprednisolone in traumatic brain injury, and albumin in traumatic brain injury (72% of agreement). Overall, a high consistency (ranging from 80% to 90%) between agreement and clinical practice was observed.

    CONCLUSION: The authors identified 12 clinical interventions showing increased mortality supported by randomized controlled trials with nonconflicting evidence, and wide agreement upon clinicians on a global scale.

    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods*
  3. Azman M, Mohd Yunus MR, Sulaiman S, Syed Omar SN
    Head Neck, 2015 Dec;37(12):1799-807.
    PMID: 24992652 DOI: 10.1002/hed.23839
    Glutamine supplementation is a novel approach to perioperative nutritional management.
    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods
  4. Kwan MK, Chiu CK, Hasan MS, Tan SH, Loh LH, Yeo KS, et al.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2019 03 15;44(6):E348-E356.
    PMID: 30130336 DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000002848
    STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study.

    OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the perioperative outcome of dual attending surgeon strategy for severe adolescent idiopathic scoliosis (AIS) patients with Cobb angle more than or equal to 90°.

    SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: The overall complication rate for AIS remains significant and is higher in severe scoliosis. Various operative strategies had been reported for severe scoliosis. However the role of dual attending surgeon strategy in improving the perioperative outcome in severe scoliosis has not been investigated.

    METHODS: The patients were stratified into two groups, Cobb angles 90° to 100° (Group 1) and more than 100° (Group 2). Demographic, intraoperative, preoperative, and postoperative day 2 data were collected. The main outcome measures were intraoperative blood loss, use of allogeneic blood transfusion, operative time, duration of hospital stay postsurgery, and documentation of any perioperative complications.

    RESULTS: Eighty-five patients were recruited. The mean age for the whole cohort was 16.2 ± 5.2 years old. The mean age of Group 1 was 16.7 ± 5.7 and Group 2 was 15.6 ± 4.8 years old. The majority of the patients in both groups were Lenke 2 curves with the average Cobb angle of 93.9 ± 3.0° in Group 1 and 114.2 ± 10.2° in Group 2. The average operative time was 198.5 ± 47.5 minutes with an average blood loss of 1699.5 ± 939.3 mL. The allogeneic blood transfusion rate was 17.6%. The average length of stay postoperation was 71.6 ± 22.5 hours. When comparing the patients between Group 1 and Group 2, the operating time, total blood loss, allogeneic transfusion rate showed significant intergroup differences. Five complications were documented (one intraoperative seizure, one massive blood loss, one intraoperative loss of somatosensory evoked potential (SSEP) signal, and two superficial wound breakdown).

    CONCLUSION: Dual attending surgeon strategy in severe AIS more than or equal to 90° demonstrated an average operative time of 199 minutes, intraoperative blood loss of 1.7 L, postoperative hospital stay of 71.6 hours, and a complication rate of 5.9% (5/85 patients). Curves with Cobb angle more than 100° lead to longer operating time, greater blood loss, and allogeneic transfusion rate.

    LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods
  5. Mihara Y, Chung WH, Chiu CK, Hasan MS, Lee SY, Ch'ng PY, et al.
    Spine (Phila Pa 1976), 2020 Mar 15;45(6):381-389.
    PMID: 31574058 DOI: 10.1097/BRS.0000000000003274
    STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective study from a prospectively collected database.

    OBJECTIVE: To compare the perioperative outcome between after-hours and daytime surgery carried out by a dedicated spinal deformity team for severe Idiopathic Scoliosis (IS) patients with Cobb angle ≥ 90°.

    SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: There were concerns that after-hours corrective surgeries in severe IS have higher morbidity compared to daytime surgeries.

    METHODS: Seventy-one severe IS patients who underwent single-staged Posterior Spinal Fusion (PSF) were included. Surgeries performed between 08:00H and 16:59H were classified as "daytime" group and surgeries performed between 17:00H and 06:00H were classified as "after-hours" group. Perioperative outcome parameters were average operation start time and end time, operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, preoperative and postoperative hemoglobin, blood transfusion rate, total patient-controlled anesthesia (PCA) morphine usage, length of postoperative hospitalization, and complications. Radiological variables assessed were preoperative and postoperative Cobb angle, side bending flexibility, number of fusion levels, number of screws used, Correction Rate, and Side Bending Correction Index.

    RESULTS: Thirty patients were operated during daytime and 41 patients were operated after-hours. The mean age was 16.1 ± 5.8 years old. The mean operation start time for daytime group was 11:31 ± 2:45H versus 19:10 ± 1:24H for after-hours group. There were no significant differences between both groups in the operation duration, intraoperative blood loss, intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, postoperative hemoglobin, hemoglobin drift, transfusion rate, length of postoperative hospitalization, postoperative Cobb angle, Correction Rate, and Side Bending Correction Index. There were four complications (1 SSEP loss, 1 massive blood loss, and 2 superficial wound infections) with no difference between daytime and after-hours group.

    CONCLUSION: After-hours elective spine deformity corrective surgeries in healthy ambulatory patients with severe IS performed by a dedicated spinal deformity team using dual attending surgeon strategy were as safe as those performed during daytime.

    LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods*
  6. Biccard BM, Sigamani A, Chan MTV, Sessler DI, Kurz A, Tittley JG, et al.
    Br J Surg, 2018 11;105(12):1591-1597.
    PMID: 30019751 DOI: 10.1002/bjs.10925
    BACKGROUND: In the POISE-2 (PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation 2) trial, perioperative aspirin did not reduce cardiovascular events, but increased major bleeding. There remains uncertainty regarding the effect of perioperative aspirin in patients undergoing vascular surgery. The aim of this substudy was to determine whether there is a subgroup effect of initiating or continuing aspirin in patients undergoing vascular surgery.

    METHODS: POISE-2 was a blinded, randomized trial of patients having non-cardiac surgery. Patients were assigned to perioperative aspirin or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of death or myocardial infarction at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included: vascular occlusive complications (a composite of amputation and peripheral arterial thrombosis) and major or life-threatening bleeding.

    RESULTS: Of 10 010 patients in POISE-2, 603 underwent vascular surgery, 319 in the continuation and 284 in the initiation stratum. Some 272 patients had vascular surgery for occlusive disease and 265 had aneurysm surgery. The primary outcome occurred in 13·7 per cent of patients having aneurysm repair allocated to aspirin and 9·0 per cent who had placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 1·48, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 3·09). Among patients who had surgery for occlusive vascular disease, 15·8 per cent allocated to aspirin and 13·6 per cent on placebo had the primary outcome (HR 1·16, 0·62 to 2·17). There was no interaction with the primary outcome for type of surgery (P = 0·294) or aspirin stratum (P = 0·623). There was no interaction for vascular occlusive complications (P = 0·413) or bleeding (P = 0·900) for vascular compared with non-vascular surgery.

    CONCLUSION: This study suggests that the overall POISE-2 results apply to vascular surgery. Perioperative withdrawal of chronic aspirin therapy did not increase cardiovascular or vascular occlusive complications. Registration number: NCT01082874 ( http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods
  7. Sessler DI, Conen D, Leslie K, Yusuf S, Popova E, Graham M, et al.
    Anesthesiology, 2020 04;132(4):692-701.
    PMID: 32022771 DOI: 10.1097/ALN.0000000000003158
    BACKGROUND: The authors previously reported that perioperative aspirin and/or clonidine does not prevent a composite of death or myocardial infarction 30 days after noncardiac surgery. Moreover, aspirin increased the risk of major bleeding and clonidine caused hypotension and bradycardia. Whether these complications produce harm at 1 yr remains unknown.

    METHODS: The authors randomized 10,010 patients with or at risk of atherosclerosis and scheduled for noncardiac surgery in a 1:1:1:1 ratio to clonidine/aspirin, clonidine/aspirin placebo, clonidine placebo/aspirin, or clonidine placebo/aspirin placebo. Patients started taking aspirin or placebo just before surgery; those not previously taking aspirin continued daily for 30 days, and those taking aspirin previously continued for 7 days. Patients were also randomly assigned to receive clonidine or placebo just before surgery, with the study drug continued for 72 h.

    RESULTS: Neither aspirin nor clonidine had a significant effect on the primary 1-yr outcome, a composite of death or nonfatal myocardial infarction, with a 1-yr hazard ratio for aspirin of 1.00 (95% CI, 0.89 to 1.12; P = 0.948; 586 patients [11.8%] vs. 589 patients [11.8%]) and a hazard ratio for clonidine of 1.07 (95% CI, 0.96 to 1.20; P = 0.218; 608 patients [12.1%] vs. 567 patients [11.3%]), with effect on death or nonfatal infarction. Reduction in death and nonfatal myocardial infarction from aspirin in patients who previously had percutaneous coronary intervention at 30 days persisted at 1 yr. Specifically, the hazard ratio was 0.58 (95% CI, 0.35 to 0.95) in those with previous percutaneous coronary intervention and 1.03 (95% CI, 0.91to 1.16) in those without (interaction P = 0.033). There was no significant effect of either drug on death, cardiovascular complications, cancer, or chronic incisional pain at 1 yr (all P > 0.1).

    CONCLUSIONS: Neither perioperative aspirin nor clonidine have significant long-term effects after noncardiac surgery. Perioperative aspirin in patients with previous percutaneous coronary intervention showed persistent benefit at 1 yr, a plausible sub-group effect.

    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods*
  8. Jacka MJ, Guyatt G, Mizera R, Van Vlymen J, Ponce de Leon D, Schricker T, et al.
    Anesth Analg, 2018 04;126(4):1150-1157.
    PMID: 29369093 DOI: 10.1213/ANE.0000000000002804
    BACKGROUND: Perioperative β-blockade reduces the incidence of myocardial infarction but increases that of death, stroke, and hypotension. The elderly may experience few benefits but more harms associated with β-blockade due to a normal effect of aging, that of a reduced resting heart rate. The tested hypothesis was that the effect of perioperative β-blockade is more significant with increasing age.

    METHODS: To determine whether the effect of perioperative β-blockade on the primary composite event, clinically significant hypotension, myocardial infarction, stroke, and death varies with age, we interrogated data from the perioperative ischemia evaluation (POISE) study. The POISE study randomly assigned 8351 patients, aged ≥45 years, in 23 countries, undergoing major noncardiac surgery to either 200 mg metoprolol CR daily or placebo for 30 days. Odds ratios or hazard ratios for time to events, when available, for each of the adverse effects were measured according to decile of age, and interaction term between age and treatment was calculated. No adjustment was made for multiple outcomes.

    RESULTS: Age was associated with higher incidences of the major outcomes of clinically significant hypotension, myocardial infarction, and death. Age was associated with a minimal reduction in resting heart rate from 84.2 (standard error, 0.63; ages 45-54 years) to 80.9 (standard error, 0.70; ages >85 years; P < .0001). We found no evidence of any interaction between age and study group regarding any of the major outcomes, although the limited sample size does not exclude any but large interactions.

    CONCLUSIONS: The effect of perioperative β-blockade on the major outcomes studied did not vary with age. Resting heart rate decreases slightly with age. Our data do not support a recommendation for the use of perioperative β-blockade in any age subgroup to achieve benefits but avoid harms. Therefore, current recommendations against the use of β-blockers in high-risk patients undergoing noncardiac surgery apply across all age groups.

    Matched MeSH terms: Perioperative Care/methods*
Filters
Contact Us

Please provide feedback to Administrator (afdal@afpm.org.my)

External Links