Search

Competing Interests: Declaration of Competing Interest The authors declare the following financial interests and/or personal relationships that may be considered potential competing interests: E. Richter serves as an Associate Editor for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia and was not involved in the editorial review or the decision to publish this article. E. Richter is also a member of the Advanced PTE Exam Writing Committee and PTE Certification Committee for the National Board of Echocardiography.

The novel coronavirus has caused a pandemic around the world. Management of patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus infection who have to undergo thoracic surgery will be a challenge for the anesthesiologists. The thoracic subspecialty committee of European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology (EACTA) has conducted a survey of opinion in order to create recommendations for the anesthetic approach to these challenging patients. It should be emphasized that both the management of the infected patient with COVID-19 and the self-protection of the anesthesia team constitute a complicated challenge. The text focuses therefore on both important topics., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The outbreak of a new coronavirus (severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 [SARS-CoV-2]) in China in December 2019 has brought serious challenges to disease prevention and public health. Patients with severe coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) who undergo cardiovascular surgery necessitate extremely high demands from anesthesia personnel, and face high risks of mortality and morbidity. Based on the current understanding of COVID-19 and the clinical characteristics of cardiovascular surgical patients, the authors provide anesthesia management guidelines for cardiovascular surgery along with the prevention and control of COVID-19., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 is still active in Wuhan, China, and is spreading to the rest of the world. Recently, perioperative anesthetic management in patients with suspected or confirmed coronavirus-2 has been reported. However, little has been reported on the anesthetic management of patients undergoing aortic dissection repair in patients with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection. During the outbreak in Wuhan, the authors' team completed 4 cases of aortic dissection repair successfully in patients with suspected severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus-2 infection. The purpose of the present report is to summarize current knowledge and experiences on anesthetic management in this patient population and to provide clinical practice guidelines on anesthetic management and infection prevention and control in these critically ill patients., (Copyright © 2020 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

The subspecialty of obstetric anesthesiology has embraced patient safety research, which has led to a reduction in obstetric anesthesia-related morbidity and mortality. Although there are innumerable individual improvements, this article highlights the following innovations: safer and more effective labor analgesia, safer treatments for hypotension associated with neuraxial blockade, advances in spinal and epidural techniques for operative deliveries, lower incidence of postdural puncture headache through improved technology, safer parental agents for labor analgesia, improved safety of general anesthesia in obstetrics, improved education and the use of simulation including team training, and reductions in operating room-related infections., (Copyright © 2019 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Cerebrospinal fluid drainage catheter-related complications can be reduced by following strict guidelines during their introduction, maintenance, and removal. The authors therefore aimed to determine whether simulation-based learning would improve senior anesthesiology residents' patient care performance during the insertion and management of these catheters compared to interactive problem-based learning (PBL) using the Anaesthetists' Non-Technical Skills global rating scale (ANTS)., Design: Prospective randomized trial., Setting: Vascular or hybrid operating rooms in a large academic tertiary care center., Participants: Senior anesthesia (categorical anesthesia-3) residents rotating through the vascular rotation at the Cleveland Clinic main campus in the period between December 2014 and June 2017., Intervention: Simulation-based learning versus PBL., Measurements and Main Results: The primary outcome was the composite score (ANTS global rating scale) achieved by participating residents as evaluated by their supervising anesthesiologists. Out of 28 residents who completed the study, N = 13 were randomized to simulation-based learning and N = 15 residents to the PBL approach. The median (first quartile, third quartile) composite score was 16 (14, 16) and 16 (13, 16) for the simulation-based learning and PBL groups, respectively. There was no significant difference in staff evaluation of the 2 study groups (p = 0.48) with an estimated odds (95% confidence interval) of getting a better staff evaluation score of 1.9 (0.3-10.6) times higher comparing simulation versus traditional training groups., Conclusion: Compared to interactive PBL, simulation-based learning does not result in a statistically significant improvement in anesthesia resident performance during insertion and management of cerebrospinal fluid drainage catheters., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: Comprehensive educational initiatives in ultrasound for practicing physicians are lacking. We developed a perioperative ultrasound training program for faculty to offer a broad orientation to the principles and clinical applications of ultrasound., Design and Setting: The program consisted of two phases. Phase one, which introduced ultrasound via didactic and hands-on components, had six live sessions. At the end of each, participants completed a knowledge quiz. During the sixth session, faculty participated in an objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). For phase two, faculty attended two to three sessions (8-10 hours each) of in-depth individualized training and demonstrated supervised performance of ultrasound-related procedures of their choice., Participants: Participants included Anesthesia faculty at Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center., Measurements and Main Results: On average 30 faculty members attended each live session for phase one; 12 completed phase two. There was a significant difference in quiz scores across the six sessions (p < 0.001) with scores for Session 6 being significantly higher than for Session 1 (p < 0.001). The average mean and median scores on the three OSCE stations were 95.63% and 98.33%, respectively. For phase two, the 8 participants who received training in regional anesthesia each performed > 10 blocks on patients over two days; 5 of the 7 participants who received training in transthoracic echocardiography each completed more than 15 examinations on simulators and 10 examinations on patients., Conclusion: It is possible to implement a departmental educational program for ultrasound to improve ultrasound knowledge and skills in practicing anesthesiologists., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Adult cardiothoracic anesthesiology (ACTA) is a competitive fellowship. Despite increases in both the number of programs offering cardiothoracic fellowships and the number of residents applying each year, there is little direction or advice for prospective candidates. This review aims to educate anesthesiology residents who are hoping to pursue cardiothoracic anesthesiology, by examining a brief history of the advanced perioperative echocardiography qualification, the credentialing goals of ACTA fellowships, and the current status of ACTA fellowships. The second part of the review covers the ACTA fellowship application and aims to assist the candidate in navigating this process. The review examines the qualifications that fellowship programs look for in a candidate, including a discussion on professional behavior, and what an applicant can look for in a program. Finally, there is a brief discussion on post-match preparation., (Copyright © 2018 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The role of focused assessment by transthoracic echocardiography or focused cardiac ultrasound (FoCUS) in the perioperative setting is uncertain and evolving. To the authors' knowledge, there are no studies that evaluate the current teaching practices regarding FoCUS in US anesthesiology residencies. The authors surveyed residents and residency program directors to examine the frequency, type, and variability of instruction regarding training of FoCUS., Design: A survey study., Setting: Anesthesiology residency programs in the United States., Participants: All 133 Accreditation Council for Graduate Medical Education anesthesiology program directors and their residents were invited to participate in an anonymous electronic survey., Measurements and Main Results: In all, 292 respondents replied to the survey, and 245 were included in the analysis. Overall response rate was 30% for program directors. The majority of the respondents were trainees (83.7%). FoCUS training was reported to be present by 36% of respondents. Respondents from institutions in which>10% of attending physicians used FoCUS were nearly 3 times as likely as those in which fewer attending physicians used FoCUS to report presence of FoCUS training program. The most common training mode is lectures with simulation (34%), followed by bedside training (31%). The most frequently reported responsible training parties were anesthesiologists (75%), followed by cardiologists (14%). Although FoCUS training is relatively rare, most respondents (187 of 205 residents and 26 of 40 program directors) said that FoCUS should be the standard in training for anesthesia residents., Conclusions: Despite the increasing availability and use of ultrasound in clinical practice, FoCUS-related use and training remain uncommon in anesthesiology. Trainees in anesthesiology are not receiving adequate instruction in FoCUS despite their desire to acquire this skill., (Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To explore the barriers to the use of epidural block (EDB) or paravertebral block (PVB) for thoracotomy or thoracoscopy., Design: Cross-sectional ancillary study., Setting: French nationwide practice survey., Participants: Lead anesthesiologists at centers practicing thoracic surgery completed an online questionnaire., Interventions: A 9-item electronic questionnaire regarding perceived barriers to the use of EDB and PVB was developed, including technical factors, nursing factors (training and supervision), and reluctance of non-anesthesiologist colleagues (eg, surgeons, nurses and hospital managers). Descriptive and factorial analyses were conducted, including the current use of the techniques in the model., Measurements and Main Results: The questionnaire was answered by 84 of 103 (82%) centers. For both techniques, the most frequently cited barriers were the 4 technical ones and lack of nursing supervision. There was a high rate of do not know/no opinion responses regarding barriers to paravertebral block. The type of center did not influence the responses, but paravertebral block was used more often in university hospitals. Colleague reluctance and time consumption (for both techniques), nursing barriers (for epidural block), and perception of risk and complexity (for paravertebral block), were correlated inversely with actual use. Perception of cost had no influence on practice., Conclusions: This survey suggested that the use of epidural or paravertebral block to provide analgesia for thoracic surgery might be increased by multimodal actions focused on improved communication with surgical and managerial teams. Paravertebral block, as an emerging technique, still is insufficiently recognized in France., (Copyright © 2015 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Unlabelled: In order to improve our understanding of the evidence-based literature supporting temperature management during adult cardiopulmonary bypass, The Society of Thoracic Surgeons, the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiology and the American Society of ExtraCorporeal Technology tasked the authors to conduct a review of the peer-reviewed literature, including: 1) optimal site for temperature monitoring, 2) avoidance of hyperthermia, 3) peak cooling temperature gradient and cooling rate, and 4) peak warming temperature gradient and rewarming rate. Authors adopted the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association method for development clinical practice guidelines, and arrived at the following recommendations: CLASS I RECOMMENDATIONS: a)The oxygenator arterial outlet blood temperature is recommended to be utilized as a surrogate for cerebral temperature measurement during CPB. (Class I, Level C) b)To monitor cerebral perfusate temperature during warming, it should be assumed that the oxygenator arterial outlet blood temperature under-estimates cerebral perfusate temperature. (Class I, Level C) c)Surgical teams should limit arterial outlet blood temperature to<37°C to avoid cerebral hyperthermia. (Class 1, Level C) d)Temperature gradients between the arterial outlet and venous inflow on the oxygenator during CPB cooling should not exceed 10°C to avoid generation of gaseous emboli. (Class 1, Level C) e)Temperature gradients between the arterial outlet and venous inflow on the oxygenator during CPB rewarming should not exceed 10°C to avoid out-gassing when blood is returned to the patient. (Class 1, Level C) CLASS IIa, Recommendations: a)Pulmonary artery or nasopharyngeal temperature recording is reasonable for weaning and immediate post-bypass temperature measurement. (Class IIa, Level C)b)Rewarming when arterial blood outlet temperature ≥30° C: i.To achieve the desired temperature for separation from bypass, it is reasonable to maintain a temperature gradient between arterial outlet temperature and the venous inflow of≤4°C. (Class IIa, Level B) ii.To achieve the desired temperature for separation from bypass, it is reasonable to maintain a rewarming rate≤0.5°C/min. (Class IIa, Level B) NO RECOMMENDATION: No recommendation for a guideline is provided concerning optimal temperature for weaning from CPB due to insufficient published evidence., (Copyright © 2015. Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: Review the findings and use of rescue echocardiography performed by the Division of Perioperative Echocardiography and its impact on patient management., Design: Retrospective observational study., Setting: Single institution, tertiary care hospital., Participants: Three hundred sixty-four consecutive rescue echocardiograms in the perioperative setting., Interventions: Rescue transesophageal or rescue transthoracic echocardiography., Measurements and Main Results: Of a total of 1,675 perioperative echocardiograms performed in a 28-month period, 364 (21.8%) were rescue studies. Of these, 95.9% were transesophageal and 4.1% were transthoracic. Location at time of rescue echocardiography was intraoperative (55.5%), postoperative (44.2%), and preoperative (0.3%). No single diagnosis predominated the intraoperative or postoperative environment, and the frequency of common etiologies did not allow for assumption. There was a change in management for 214 patients (59%) as the result of findings. The methods used in performing rescue echocardiography at the authors' institution are reported., Conclusions: The heterogeneity of diagnoses and the frequency with which rescue echocardiography changed management further supports the growing body of evidence that the hemodynamically unstable perioperative patient benefits from its use., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objectives: To describe perioperative management of patients with left ventricular assist devices (LVAD) in noncardiac procedures., Design: Survey of (1) respondent demographic characteristics, (2) anesthetic practices for LVAD patients having endoscopies, and (3) low-risk surgeries requiring general anesthesia., Setting: Internet-based., Participants: Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists membership., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Inpatient endoscopic procedures were done mainly in the endoscopy suite (71.7%) by a solo practitioner or 1:1 staffing ratio 59% of the time. LVAD-specific support personnel were present in more than 80% of all procedures. Both endoscopy and surgical patients used post-anesthesia recovery units and intensive care units for recovery; however, compared with endoscopy patients, surgical patients recovered in the ICU more frequently (45.5% v 29.1%, p<0.001). In addition, 18% of endoscopy patients recovered on site. Regarding patient monitoring, more than 90% of responders used electrocardiogram, pulse oximetry, end-tidal CO2, and blood pressure monitors on LVAD patients. Responders reported using arterial catheters to monitor blood pressure in 49% of endoscopy cases and 71% of surgical patients. The reported use of invasive monitors by individual clinicians was related inversely to institutional LVAD volume (p = 0.04 and p = 0.01 in endoscopy and surgical procedures, respectively)., Conclusions: This survey found heterogeneity in hospital resource utilization for noncardiac LVAD procedures. There was a decrease in the use of invasive monitors with increased institutional LVAD volume in both endoscopy and surgical procedures., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Vascular surgery patients frequently suffer from atherosclerosis and peripheral arterial occlusive disease generating endothelial dysfunction. Furthermore, ischemia and reperfusion during surgery damage endothelial cells and, especially, the endothelial glycocalix. The damage of the glycocalix promotes an increase in permeability. Not only crystalloids, which freely diffuse between the intravascular and the interstitial compartment, but also colloidal fluids cross from the intravascular space in the interstitial space with the consequence of edema formation. Possible tissue edema may result in an impairment of tissue oxygenation, leading to wound healing disturbances and initiation of inflammatory responses up to tissue apoptosis. Particularly in vascular anesthesia, this possibly means that colloids only should be administered in acute volume resuscitation immediately after unclamping a big vessel for immediate volume restoration. Which colloidal fluid should be administered is still under intense discussion. From a theoretical physiologic point of view, iso-osmolar albumin is the best choice regarding volume effect, antioxidative properties, and protection against destruction of the glycocalix. Nonetheless, albumin experimentally has not lived up to its promise in the clinical setting. Thus, further well-conducted large randomized clinical trials are necessary to ascertain the optimal fluid therapy in vascular surgery patients.

Objective: Ultrasound transmission gel (USTG) is used routinely to enhance the image quality during transesophageal echocardiogram examinations. Ultrasound gel is manufactured in both sterile and non-sterile preparations, and both preparations have been used during transesophageal echocardiograms in the United States. The United States Food and Drug Administration (FDA) currently recommends that all transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE) examinations be performed using sterile ultrasound gel. The authors sought to identify if anesthesiology departments with cardiothoracic fellowship programs follow current FDA recommendations of using sterile ultrasound gel during TEE examination., Design: Survey., Setting: Survey of cardiothoracic fellowship directors. The majority of fellowship directors practice in academic hospitals although the practice site was not addressed in the survey., Participants: Fellowship directors volunteered to participate in the study., Interventions: None., Measurements and Main Results: Survey responses were tallied using the website, www.surveymonkey.com, and 56% of respondents do not currently follow the current FDA recommendations., Conclusions: A majority of cardiothoracic program director respondents to the authors' survey do not utilize single-use sterile packets of USTG for TEE examinations. While the infectious risk of USTG used for TEE examinations from multiple-use containers versus single-use sterile containers has not been established clearly, a change in practice to follow the current FDA recommendations may be advised., (Copyright © 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

Objective: The authors compared the performance of a group of anesthesia providers to closed-loop (Learning Intravenous Resuscitator [LIR]) management in a simulated hemorrhage scenario using cardiac output monitoring., Design: A prospective cohort study., Setting: In silico simulation., Participants: University hospital anesthesiologists and the LIR closed-loop fluid administration system., Interventions: Using a patient simulator, a 90-minute simulated hemorrhage protocol was run, which included a 1,200-mL blood loss over 30 minutes. Twenty practicing anesthesiology providers were asked to manage this scenario by providing fluids and vasopressor medication at their discretion. The simulation program was also run 20 times with the LIR closed-loop algorithm managing fluids and an additional 20 times with no intervention., Measurements and Main Results: Simulated patient weight, height, heart rate, mean arterial pressure, and cardiac output (CO) were similar at baseline. The mean stroke volume, the mean arterial pressure, CO, and the final CO were higher in the closed-loop group than in the practitioners group, and the coefficient of variance was lower. The closed-loop group received slightly more fluid (2.1 v 1.9 L, p < 0.05) than the anesthesiologist group., Conclusions: Despite the roughly similar volumes of fluid given, the closed-loop maintained more stable hemodynamics than the practitioners primarily because the fluid was given earlier in the protocol and CO optimized before the hemorrhage began, whereas practitioners tended to resuscitate well but only after significant hemodynamic change indicated the need. Overall, these data support the potential usefulness of this closed-loop algorithm in clinical settings in which dynamic predictors are not available or applicable., (Published by Elsevier Inc.)

Objective: This study was designed to test the hypothesis that simulator-based transesophageal echocardiographic training was a more effective method of training anesthesia residents with no prior experience in echocardiography as compared with conventional methods of training (books, articles, and web-based resources)., Study Design: A prospective randomized study., Setting: An academic medical center (teaching hospital)., Participants: The participants consisted of first-year anesthesia residents., Intervention: The study design was composed of 2 groups: a control group (group 1, conventional group) and a study group (group 2, simulator group). The residents belonging to group 2 (simulator group) received a 90-minute simulator-based teaching session moderated by a faculty experienced in transesophageal echocardiography. Residents belonging to group 1 (conventional group) were asked to review the guidelines of the comprehensive intraoperative transesophageal echocardiographic examination published by the American Society of Echocardiography and the Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists. They also were encouraged to use other learning resources (eg, textbooks, electronic media, and web-based resources) to understand the underlying concepts of echocardiography. Written pre- and post-test was administered to both groups., Measurements and Main Results: The groups were compared for the pretest scores by the nonparametric Mann-Whitney U test. Pre- and post-test scores were compared with a Wilcoxon paired test in the individual groups. The results showed a statistically significant difference between the scores of the 2 groups with better scores in the simulation group in the post-training test., Conclusion: The simulator-based teaching model for transesophageal echocardiography is a better method of teaching the basic concepts of transesophageal echocardiography like anatomic correlation, structure identification, and image acquisition., (Copyright © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.)

There have been major advances in perioperative cardiothoracic and vascular medicine. Because of promising data, steroids, statins, and endothelin antagonists are being clinically tested in randomized trials with adult cardiac surgical patients. In vascular surgical patients, recent meta-analysis has revealed that interventions such as beta-blockade or endovascular stenting for peripheral vascular lesions may not improve outcome overall. Furthermore, a landmark trial has shown that anesthetic technique does not affect outcome after carotid endarterectomy. The surgical Apgar score may become part of routine clinical care of the vascular surgical patient because it predicts outcome and can be calculated at the bedside. Recent studies confirm that the serious perioperative risks of hyperglycemia also apply to nondiabetic and pediatric cardiac surgical patients. This has been highlighted in the new guidelines from the Society of Thoracic Surgeons. Perioperative myocardial protection is possible with ischemic preconditioning and omega-3 fatty acids. Pneumonia after lung resection may be reduced significantly by broadening antibiotic prophylaxis. Transfusion-related acute lung injury has immediate and delayed presentations that highlight the dangers of blood transfusion. Perioperative renal dysfunction after adult cardiac surgery is significantly reduced by the infusion of sodium bicarbonate. Although promising, further trials are required. Taken together, these recent advances will have significant influence on the future practice of cardiovascular and thoracic anesthesia as the ongoing search for perioperative outcome improvement achieves results.

"Expert" editorial opinion suggests that objective or quantitative neuromuscular monitors should be used whenever nondepolarizing blocking agents are administered. It is clear that this advice has by and large fallen on deaf ears. A sizeable number of clinicians here (North America) and abroad (Europe) fail to use even conventional peripheral nerve stimulators routinely. This chapter will explore potential reasons for and consequences of this disconnect between academia and "the real world." Along the way, we will examine such questions as how do we define and measure adequate recovery from nondepolarizing block. What are the limitations of clinical tests of recovery such as the "head-lift test?" What is the incidence of undetected postoperative residual curarization (PORC)? Does neuromuscular monitoring reduce the frequency of PORC? How will the availability of sugammadex alter the above discussion?

Sedation is often used in interventional procedures to minimize discomfort, improve the patient's experience, and reduce the risk of procedural complications by assuring nonmobility and compliance of the patient. Sedation, however, adds a new dimension to the procedure by compromising the patients' normal protective mechanisms and carries the potential of cardiac, respiratory, and cognitive complications. Interventional procedures could be performed under local anesthesia with or without sedation, or under general anesthesia. Sedation itself could be categorized into minimal, moderate, or deep sedation. The choice generally depends on patient factors such as age, cardiovascular stability, pain tolerance, and procedural factors such as complexity, extent, and degree of induced pain. In longer and more extensive procedures on more fragile patients, the assistance of an anesthesiologist will be required. The purpose of this article is to provide a basic understanding and a practical guideline for minimal and moderate sedation for the interventionalist contemplating to administer sedation for less involved procedures.

Safe and effective airway management techniques have become a hallmark of modern anesthesiology practice, but even such overwhelmingly successful and life-saving practices come with a cost. This cost is morbidity and mortality secondary to the techniques themselves. Closed claims analysis has shown that adverse outcomes secondary to respiratory events constitute the single largest source of injury to patients (75%). Airway management complications are a significant subset of these outcomes. Difficult intubation was shown to be a factor in only slightly more that one third (38%) of these claims. Six percent of closed claims were for airway trauma. These data indicate that injury frequently occurs without initial difficulty in management of the airway, may occur throughout the perioperative period, and can be unexpected when it occurs. Thorough knowledge of the mechanisms of airway injury associated with different airway management techniques may allow for better patient outcomes. This chapter reviews complications of airway management involving the placement of endotracheal tubes. In addition, because laryngeal mask airways (LMAs) have gained increasing prominence in airway management use in the past 10 years, complications relating to their use will also be reviewed.

Anesthesia personnel routinely perform procedures that put them at risk for contact with blood and body fluids. Some of these exposures are to skin and mucous membranes; many are percutaneous injuries associated with the frequent use of needled devices. The high risk in anesthesia procedures for contact with infected body fluids is associated with a high incidence rate of actual infection with bloodborne pathogens.

The evolution of anesthesia safety has paralleled the evolution of anesthesia over the last several hundred years. This article describes the introduction of safer practices of anesthesia and the impetus for these changes in practice that improved patient safety. It discusses both the role of technology in the advancement of safety and the policies developed by professional organizations of anesthesia care providers.