Search

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation is a fast-growing procedure. Expanding to low-risk patients, it has surpassed surgical aortic valve implantation in frequency and has been associated with excellent outcomes. Stroke is a devastating complication after transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Silent brain infarcts identified by diffusion-weighted magnetic resonance imaging are present in most patients following transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Postoperative delirium and cognitive dysfunction are common neurologic complications. The stroke and silent brain infarcts are likely caused by particulate emboli released during the procedure. Intravascularly positioned cerebral embolic protection devices are designed to prevent debris from entering the aortic arch vessels to avoid stroke. Despite promising design, randomized clinical trials have not demonstrated a reduction in stroke in patients receiving cerebral embolic protection devices. Similarly, the association of cerebral embolic protection devices with silent brain infarcts, post-operative delirium and cognitive dysfunction is uncertain. Monitored anesthesia care or conscious sedation is as safe as general anesthesia and is associated with lower cost but different anesthetic techniques have not been shown to decrease stroke risk, postoperative delirium, or cognitive dysfunction. Anesthesiologists play important roles in providing perioperative care including management of neurologic events in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve implantation. Large randomized clinical trials are needed that focus on the correlation between perioperative interventions and neurologic outcomes.

Mechanical circulatory support (MCS) is used in cardiogenic shock for periprocedural hemodynamic stability in high-risk patients and to support patients with symptomatic coronary artery disease. Depending on the MCS type, oxygenation and ventilation, in addition to increasing blood pressure by augmenting blood flow, can be achieved. MCS typically follows a failure of less invasive maneuvers or intolerance to them, such as significant ventricular arrhythmia burden from inotropic support. MCS options include intra-aortic balloon pump, transvalvular percutaneous left ventricular assist devices, venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation, and surgically implanted left ventricular assist devices. The number of MCS options has increased, and this has made the decision-making process complicated. MCS decision-making is complex, even in patients without valvular pathology. The presence of aortic valve (AV) abnormalities, such as aortic stenosis, aortic insufficiency, replaced AVs, or AV masses, adds even further to the challenge of selecting the appropriate support strategy. In this narrative review, a concise review of MCS options and the special considerations for various AV pathologies are presented.

Acute kidney injury (AKI) and chronic kidney disease (CKD) previously have been associated with in-hospital and long-term mortality of patients undergoing support with venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO). Patient selection criteria and survival prediction scores for VA-ECMO often include AKI or CKD, but exclude patients requiring renal replacement therapy (RRT). The need for RRT in ECMO patients is associated with increased intensive unit care and in-hospital mortality. The effect RRT has on mortality beyond hospital survival is not well-reported. The authors hypothesized that the timing of initiation (pre-ECMO v during ECMO) of RRT can have a significant impact on short- and long-term mortality.The authors categorized patients into 3 groups: those receiving RRT before initiation of ECMO, those initiated on RRT while on ECMO, and those who did not need RRT while on ECMO. The authors compared survival to decannulation, 30 days and 1 year between the 3 groups. A multivariate survival analysis also was conducted.This was a single center retrospective review of all patients receiving VA-ECMO.A total of 347 adult VA-ECMO extracorporeal membrane oxygenation patients.None, retrospective.The authors' cohort included 347 total patients, 39 required RRT before ECMO, 139 while on ECMO, and 169 did not require RRT while on ECMO. If RRT was initiated before ECMO, survival to decannulation was 48.72%, 46.6% if RRT was initiated on ECMO, and 73.96% for patients who did not need RRT while on ECMO. One-year survival was 25.64%, 23.74%, and 46.75%, respectively. There was no significant difference in survival between patients initiated on RRT before ECMO and those who required RRT while on ECMO.The authors demonstrated that the need for RRT before or while on ECMO has reduced short- and long-term survival when compared with those who did not need RRT while on ECMO. The authors believe that RRT is a marker for severe multiorgan failure and that, despite the benefits of RRT, high mortality will occur. This lack of mortality difference between patients previously on RRT and those newly requiring RRT may help clinicians in deciding to initiate ECMO for patients previously on RRT. Further investigation into complication rates between the groups is required.

Objective(s) Throughout the last several decades, the perioperative mortality rate from anesthesia care has declined, shifting focus to perioperative emergencies. Data on these emergencies, often referred to as “Anesthesia STAT” calls (STATs), are lacking at adult hospitals. The goal of this study was to determine the etiology of STATs at a major academic medical center and to determine surgical cases and patient comorbid conditions that increase the risk for STATs. Design This was a retrospective observational study. Setting This study took place at a large academic medical center. Participants Patients who underwent anesthesia care were included in this study. Interventions No interventions were performed during this study. Measurements and Main Results Data collected included the etiologies of STATs, patient demographic information, patient comorbid conditions, and surgeries during which STATs occurred. Between February 1, 2019, and January 31, 2020, 92 STATs occurred during 58,547 anesthetic cases, with an incidence rate of 0.16%. The most common etiology for a STAT was cardiac arrest, followed by respiratory compromise. Surgical services associated with a significant increase of STATs included general, thoracic, oral/maxillofacial, and vascular surgery. Comorbid conditions that significantly increased the risk of STATs included hypertension, coronary artery disease, congestive heart failure, obstructive sleep apnea, diabetes, and chronic kidney disease. Conclusions Cardiac arrest is the most common etiology of STATs. Specific surgical services and comorbid conditions are associated with an increased risk of STATs.

Objective Anesthesiologists increasingly are involved in the perioperative management of cardiac implantable electronic devices (CIEDs). The variety of devices available and the ongoing advancements in technology, programming capabilities, and responses to conventional management (eg, magnet application) complicate the management of these devices. As an aid to this clinical challenge, this manuscript reviews 469 interrogations performed by a single cardiac anesthesiologist during a 4.5-year period to derive useful information with which to guide anesthesiologists who have chosen to pursue training in this area of perioperative care. Design Retrospective review of prospectively collected data. Setting Single institution, quaternary care hospital. Participants Patients with CIEDs presenting for surgery; the quality assurance (QA) reports of 469 interrogations performed between May 2015 and September 2019 were reviewed. Interventions No intervention. Measurement and Main Results The distributions of surgical procedures, device types, device manufacturers, pacing modes, rate-response sensors, special functions, and performed interventions were reviewed and analyzed. The QA reports were evaluated to identify information or experiences that demonstrated important lessons for anesthesiologists engaging in perioperative CIED management. Conclusions This database review provides general guidance for anesthesiologists managing CIEDs in the perioperative period. Concepts germane to the operating room are emphasized.

Objective The treatment of refractory vasodilatory shock in patients undergoing extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) is an area in which there is minimal literature. Based on previous literature, the authors hypothesized that at least 40% of ECMO patients with vasoplegia would respond positively to methylene blue (MB) administration and that those who responded to MB would have increased survival. Design Retrospective observational study. Setting Single institution, quaternary care hospital. Participants The study comprised 45 patients who received MB for vasoplegia during ECMO. Interventions None. Measurements and Main Results Of the 45 patients who received MB, 25 patients (55.6%) experienced a ≥10% increase in mean arterial pressure (MAP) and a reduction in norepinephrine dosing in the one-to-two hour interval after MB administration. There was a trend for improvement in survival to discharge for those who responded to MB (32% v 10%; p = 0.15). In addition, patients who did not have at least a >5% increase in MAP (29 experienced a >5% increase and 16 experienced a ≤5% increase) after MB administration, experienced 100% mortality (p = 0.008). Conclusion This study suggested that approximately 50% of ECMO patients with vasoplegia can be expected to respond to MB with a >10% MAP improvement. The lack of a blood pressure response >5% after MB administration may portend poor survival. Larger prospective studies are needed to verify these preliminary results.

This article is the third in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors thank the Editor-in-Chief Dr. Kaplan, the Associate Editor-in-Chief Dr. Augoustides, and the editorial board for the opportunity to continue this series; namely, the highlights of the year that pertain to electrophysiology in relation to cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia. This third article focuses on the convergent procedure, His-bundle pacing, a comparison of subcutaneous and transvenous defibrillator therapies, the 2020 practice advisory update for the perioperative management of patients with cardiac implantable electronic devices, and a technology update regarding the Micra AV (Medtronic, Moundsview, MN), the EMPOWER leadless pacemaker (Boston Scientific, Marlborough, MA), WiSE-CRT (EBR Systems, Sunnyvale, CA), the Extravascular Implantable Cardioverter Defibrillator (Medtronic, Moundsview, MN), and the BAROSTIM NEO (CVRx Inc, Minneapolis, MN).

Despite advances in cardiac surgery and anesthesia, the rates of brain injury remain high in aortic arch surgery requiring circulatory arrest. The mechanisms of brain injury, including permanent and temporary neurologic dysfunction, are multifactorial, but intraoperative brain ischemia is likely a major contributor. Maintaining optimal cerebral perfusion during cardiopulmonary bypass and circulatory arrest is the key component of intraoperative management for aortic arch surgery. Various brain monitoring modalities provide different information to improve cerebral protection. Electroencephalography gives crucial data to ensure minimal cerebral metabolism during deep hypothermic circulatory arrest, transcranial Doppler directly measures cerebral arterial blood flow, and near-infrared spectroscopy monitors regional cerebral oxygen saturation. Various brain protection techniques, including hypothermia, cerebral perfusion, pharmacologic protection, and blood gas management, have been used during interruption of systemic circulation, but the optimal strategy remains elusive. Although deep hypothermic circulatory arrest and retrograde cerebral perfusion have their merits, there have been increasing reports about the use of antegrade cerebral perfusion, obviating the need for deep hypothermia. With controversy and variability of surgical practices, moderate hypothermia, when combined with unilateral antegrade cerebral perfusion, is considered safe for brain protection in aortic arch surgery performed with circulatory arrest. The neurologic outcomes of brain protection in aortic arch surgery largely depend on the following three major components: cerebral temperature, circulatory arrest time, and cerebral perfusion during circulatory arrest. The optimal brain protection strategy should be individualized based on comprehensive monitoring and stems from well-executed techniques that balance the major components contributing to brain injury.

Increasing cardiac procedural volume, a shortage of practicing cardiac anesthesiologists, and growth in specialist physician compensation would be expected to increase cardiac anesthesiologist compensation and work load. Additionally, more cardiac anesthesiologists are graduating from accredited fellowships and completing echocardiography certification. The Society of Cardiovascular Anesthesiologists (SCA) biannual salary survey longitudinally measures these data; we analyzed these data from 2010 to 2020 and hypothesized survey respondent inflation-adjusted total compensation, work load, and training would increase. For the primary outcome, we adjusted the median reported annual gross taxable income for inflation using the Consumer Price Index and then used linear regression to assess changes in inflation-adjusted median compensation. For the secondary outcomes, we analyzed the number of cardiac anesthetics managed annually and the most common care delivery staffing ratios. For the tertiary outcomes, we assessed changes in the proportion of respondents reporting transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) certification and completion of a 12-month cardiac anesthesia fellowship. We performed sensitivity analyses adjusting for yearly proportions of academic and private practice respondents. Annual survey response rates ranged from 8% to 17%. From 2010 to 2020, respondents reported a continuously compounded inflation-adjusted compensation decrease of 1.1% (95% confidence interval [CI], -1.6% to -0.6%; P = .003), equivalent to a total inflation-adjusted salary reduction of 10%. In sensitivity analysis, private practice respondents reported a continuously compounded compensation loss of -0.8% (95% CI, -1.4% to -0.2%; P = .022), while academic respondents reported no significant change (continuously compounded change, 0.4%; 95% CI, -0.4% to 1.1%; P = .23). The percentage of respondents managing more than 150 cardiac anesthetics per year increased from 26% in 2010 to 43% in 2020 (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 1.03 per year; 95% CI, 1.03-1.04; P.001). The proportion of respondents reporting high-ratio care models increased from 31% to 41% (aOR, 1.01 per year; 95% CI, 1.01-1.02; P.001). Reported TEE certification increased from 69% to 90% (aOR, 1.10 per year; 95% CI, 1.10-1.11; P.001); reported fellowship training increased from 63% to 82% (aOR, 1.15 per year; 95% CI, 1.14-1.16; P.001). After adjusting for the proportion of academic or private practice survey respondents, SCA salary survey respondents reported decreasing inflation-adjusted compensation, rising volumes of cardiac anesthetics, and increasing levels of formal training in the 2010 to 2020 period. Future surveys measuring burnout and job satisfaction are needed to assess the association of increasing work and lower compensation with attrition in cardiac anesthesiologists.

The use of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols among various surgical subspecialties is increasing, including in cardiac surgery. The goal of these protocols is to optimize patient outcomes and satisfaction and improve the value of healthcare delivered. Cardiac ERAS protocols are divided into the following 3 stages of perioperative care: preoperative, intraoperative, and postoperative. ERAS strategies have been shown to work synergistically to reduce the length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, hospital cost, and opioid consumption; increase patient satisfaction; and result in less and early extubation. The ERAS team should consist of clinicians involved in the patient's care throughout the entire ERAS process. A cardiac ERAS program is an example of value-based care applied to a specific surgical specialty with goals to improve patient satisfaction, provide earlier recovery, and reduce hospital cost. This narrative review details the updates and gaps in the literature regarding the efficacy and utility of an ERAS protocol in cardiac surgery, outlines the individual components of a cardiac surgery ERAS protocol, and describes the implementation science that can be used to execute a cardiac ERAS protocol successfully.

Objectives Rescue point-of-care ultrasound (r-POCUS) in critical care medicine has revolutionized the management of critically ill patients with hemodynamic instability. However, clinical studies on its use among high-risk cardiac patients still are limited. The authors aimed to assess the utility of r-POCUS for managing high-risk cardiac patients in a mixed cardiac-surgical and cardiac-medical intensive care unit (ICU) in a quaternary care hospital by reviewing the indications and findings of r-POCUS and subsequent effect on patient management. Design Retrospective observational study. Design Single institution, quaternary care hospital. Participants The study comprised 189 consecutive r-POCUS examinations performed in a cardiac medical and surgical ICU. Interventions None. Measurements and Main Results r-POCUS was performed on 141 patients. Common indications for r-POCUS included hypotension (n = 93 [49%]), assessment of extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) and ventricular assist devices (n = 33 [17%]), arrhythmias (n = 13 [7%]), abnormal pulmonary artery catheter values (n = 11 [6%]), and ischemic electrocardiogram changes (n = 10 [5%]). Cardiac pathology was positive in 129 (68%) of the rescue examinations. Common reported pathologies included left ventricular dysfunction (n = 47 [25%]), right ventricular dysfunction (n = 52 [28%]), hypervolemia (n = 13 [7%]), hypovolemia (n = 25 [13%]), pericardial effusion/tamponade (n = 21 [11%]), and ECMO/ventricular assist device cannula malposition (n = 9 [5%]). Seventy-five percent of the rescue examinations resulted in medical and surgical interventions, including fluid resuscitation (n = 25 [13%]), diuresis (n = 14 [7%]), ionotropic support (n = 23 [12%]), surgical intervention in the operating room (n = 21 [11%]), surgical intervention at the bedside (n = 8 [4%]), ECMO initiation (n = 15 [8%]), and ECMO/ventricular assist device cannula/setting adjustment (n = 12 [6%]). Conclusion In this retrospective study, r-POCUS performed by attending intensivists resulted in diverse findings and was associated with rapid changes in clinical management of patients in a high-acuity, mixed cardiac-surgical and cardiac-medical ICU.

Objectives This study describes the largest North American single-institution experience with adult patients requiring multiple extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) runs in the same admission and aims to describe outcomes of survival and complication rates in this patient population. Design A retrospective chart review–based study in a single quaternary care center of venoarterial (VA) ECMO patients cannulated multiple times on ECMO support to assess for outcomes and survival (both of ECMO therapy and survival to discharge). Setting Single quaternary academic center for ECMO. Participants All patients undergoing VA ECMO who were at least 18 years of age from 2011 to 2019, composed of a total of 14 patients requiring multiple cannulations. Interventions None, this was a retrospective chart review. Measurements and Main Results Of the 326 patients reviewed, 14 patients (4.3% of all patients in the database) had multiple ECMO therapies. The average patient age was 55.2 ± 10.99 years of age, and 57% were female; 4 of the 14 (28.6%) patients survived to hospital discharge. The top 2 indications for initial VA ECMO therapy were cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction (35.7%) and after cardiotomy shock (35.7%). For repeated cannulation, the most common cause was hypoxia (64%, 9 patients), with 6 of these patients requiring a right ventricular assist device plus oxygenator. Other causes for repeated cannulation included post-cardiotomy shock (14%), recurrent ventricular tachycardia (14%), and cardiogenic shock (7%). All patients who required continuous venovenous hemofiltration during their first run of ECMO did not survive to discharge. Conclusions Fourteen of 326 patients in the authors’ VA ECMO database required additional ECMO therapy after decannulation; this represents at least 1 to 2 cases per year at higher-volume centers. Despite the small number of patients in this retrospective review, it seems that certain patients are reasonable candidates for additional ECMO therapy should their cardiopulmonary function again decline. The findings of renal replacement therapy and infection being more common during a second ECMO run are logical, but larger cohorts (ideally multicenter or from within the Extracorporeal Life Support Organization registry) are required to validate these preliminary findings.

Perioperative physicians should be well versed in atrial fibrillation (AF) management because it is the most common sustained arrythmia in the United States. In this narrative review of the 2019 American Heart Association/American College of Cardiologists/Heart Rhythm Society Focused Update on Atrial Fibrillation, the authors detail the emergence of new evidence from completed studies that may affect the management of patients with AF presenting for surgery. Updates regarding non-vitamin K oral anticoagulants (NOACs) comprise the bulk of the update with newer evidence emerging regarding their equivalence and/or superiority compared to Coumadin. Apixaban is now the preferred drug of choice for first line stroke prevention in nonvalvular AF over Coumadin. Renal dysfunction and the management of patients with AF on hemodialysis is examined; in patients on hemodialysis with AF, the focused update recommends administration of either warfarin or dose-reduced apixaban. Evidence from new trials addressing the appropriate bridging of NOACs before surgery is discussed. Patients with nonvalvular AF may not exhibit an added benefit from bridging of anticoagulation, and perioperative physicians should balance the risks of stroke and major bleeding before surgery. Advances in nonpharmacologic treatment and management of AF are outlined, including left atrial appendage occlusion devices, catheter ablations, and electrical cardioversion. Anesthesiologists' understanding of these 2019 updated guidelines will allow for more adept optimization of patients with AF presenting for surgery.

This article is the second in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors thank the Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Kaplan, the Associate Editor-in-Chief, Dr. Augoustides, and the editorial board for the opportunity to continue this series, namely the highlights of the year that pertain to electrophysiology in relation to cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia. This second article focuses on cardiac sympathetic denervation, the management of patients with atrial fibrillation, cerebral oximetry for catheter ablation procedures, advancements in leadless pacemaker and subcutaneous implantable cardioverter defibrillator technology, and the emergence of pulsed field ablation for pulmonary vein isolation.

An extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) program is an important component in the management of patients with COVID-19, but it is imperative to implement a system that is well-supported by the institution and staffed with well-trained clinicians to both optimize patient outcomes and to keep providers safe. There are many unknowns related to COVID-19, and one of the most challenging aspects for clinicians is the lack of predictive knowledge as to why some patients fail medical therapy and require advanced support such as ECMO. These factors can create challenges during a time of resource scarcity and interruptions in the supply chain. In the current environment, in which resources are limited and an ongoing pandemic, healthcare practitioners need to focus on evidence-based best practice for supportive care of patients with COVID-19 in refractory respiratory or cardiac failure. with As experience is gained, a greater understanding will develop in this cohort of patients regarding need and timing of ECMO. As this pandemic continues, it will be important to compile and analyze multicentered data pertaining to patient-specific outcomes to help guide clinicians caring for patients with COVID-19 undergoing ECMO support. In this paper, the authors demonstrate the strategies utilized by a major quaternary care center in the utilization and management of ECMO for patients with COVID-19.

Surgical pulmonary embolectomy is a procedure that is often used to rescue patients with massive pulmonary embolism (PE) and circulatory collapse that have failed or may not be ideal candidates for other systemic and endovascular treatment modalities. This procedure typically involves a sternotomy and the use of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), which requires full systemic anticoagulation. Here, we report the case of a surgical pulmonary embolectomy performed on venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO) rather than CPB to minimize systemic anticoagulation. The patient had suffered a cardiac arrest due to a saddle PE and required VA-ECMO which was complicated by a concomitant intracranial hemorrhage. The patient tolerated the surgical pulmonary embolectomy performed on VA-ECMO without procedure-related complications, and the ECMO support did not substantially complicate the technical performance of the procedure. In contrast to surgical pulmonary embolectomy performed on CPB, greater attention must be paid to volume status when performing the procedure on VA-ECMO since there is no blood reservoir. This case suggests cardiopulmonary support on ECMO as a viable strategy for surgical embolectomy in patients with unstable PEs in whom thrombolysis or full systemic anticoagulation are contraindicated.

Left Ventricular Assist Devices (LVADs) are increasingly being used in patients with advanced heart failure as a bridge to transplant, destination therapy, and even as a bridge to recovery1-3. Current LVADs, in particular the HeartMate 2 and the newer generation HeartMate 3 and HeartWare, have evolved to be valveless which have markedly improved their durability, miniaturization, and reliability4. However, an underappreciated consequence of the valveless design is that they can lead to marked left ventricular (LV) dilatation and irreversible cardiac injury when they are turned off in emergencies such as injury to the outflow graft during sternotomy. This unintended consequence was the case in our patient who presented to the operating room for LVAD explantation after full recovery from her post-partum cardiomyopathy that ultimately culminated in her receiving a heart transplant. It is important that cardiac anesthesiologists, surgeons, and perfusionists understand the potential catastrophic consequences of turning off LVADs in emergent situations and mitigation strategies to avoid potentially irreversible cardiac and pulmonary injury.

This article is the first in an annual series for the Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia. The authors thank the editor-in-chief, Dr. Kaplan, the associate editor-in-chief, Dr. Augoustides, and the editorial board for the opportunity to start this series, namely the research highlights of the year that pertain to electrophysiology in relation to cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia. This first article focuses on esophageal thermal injury during radiofrequency ablation, perioperative management of patients presenting for ablation procedures, left atrial appendage occlusion devices, and, finally, heart failure diagnostic devices.

Objectives At the authors’ institution, prior to 2014, patients requiring care in the peri-extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (ECMO) period were treated by intensivists with specific training in ECMO but worked independently. This isolated form of care was addressed in late 2013 with the formal initiation of an ECMO team. The authors wanted to assess the difference in overall mortality for ECMO patients cared for prior to the initiation of a multidisciplinary team compared to after its establishment. Design This was a retrospective chart review-based study. Setting This was a single-center university-based hospital setting. Participants The study included all adult patients at the authors’ institution who required ECMO support between the years 2009 and 2017. Interventions The new multidisciplinary ECMO team established a set of protocols and guidelines to care for ECMO patients. The formal ECMO team consisted of cardiac surgery, cardiac anesthesia, intensivists, cardiology heart failure specialist, intensive care unit nursing (NP/RN), perfusion services, respiratory therapy, nutrition, physical and occupational therapy, and an ethics committee member. Measurements and Main Results Manual chart review was conducted and survival to discharge was collected and separated into 2 groups, 2009 to 2013 (pre-ECMO team) and 2014 to 2017 (post-ECMO team). In a total of 279 charts reviewed, patients required ECMO support. Survival to discharge for patients between 2009 and 2013 was 37.7% compared to a survival to discharge of 52.3% between 2014 and 2017 (p value = 0.02). Conclusions Patients cared for after the initiation of an ECMO team showed improved survival compared to patients cared for prior to the creation of the ECMO team.

The recently released American Heart Association (AHA) scientific statement on drug-induced arrhythmias discussed medications commonly associated with bradycardia, supraventricular tachycardias, and ventricular arrhythmias. The foundational data for this statement were collected from general outpatient and inpatient populations. Patients undergoing surgical and minimally invasive treatments are a unique subgroup, because they may experience hemodynamic changes associated with anesthesia and their procedure, receive multiple drug combinations not given in either inpatient or outpatient settings, or experience postprocedural inflammatory syndromes. Accordingly, the generalizability of the AHA scientific statement to this perioperative population is unclear. This focused review highlights important aspects of the new AHA scientific statement and their application to the perioperative setting. The authors review medications frequently encountered and given by anesthesiologists and their risk of drug-induced arrhythmias and discuss common anesthetic and adjunctive medications and their associated risks of bradycardia, atrial fibrillation, torsades de pointes, and drug-induced Brugada syndrome. In many instances, the risk of arrhythmia reported by the AHA scientific statement in the general population appeared to be higher than found in perioperative arenas. Furthermore, the authors discuss the arrhythmia risk of additional medications commonly ordered or administered by anesthesiologists that are not included in the AHA scientific statement. As patient and procedural complexity increases and novel anesthetic combinations propagate, further research and observational studies will be required to delineate further perioperative risks for drug-induced arrhythmia.

Objective Scheduling and staffing nonoperating room anesthesia (NORA) cases often require cross-service coordination and can result in significant delays in patient care, resource inefficiencies, and provider dissatisfaction. The objective of the present study was to reduce these delays and case cancellations for patients requiring cardiac anesthesia for their transesophageal echocardiography procedure. Design Preintervention and postintervention analysis of prospectively collected observational data. Setting Single institution, quaternary care hospital. Participants Patients requiring cardiac anesthesia for transesophageal echocardiography. Interventions The study included the following three interventions: outpatient transesophageal echocardiography order screening, identifying the daily NORA cardiac anesthesia attending, and centralizing the scheduling process among all cardiac NORA locations. Measurements and Main Results Before the interventions, the average delay time for echocardiography laboratory cases was 34.9 minutes (n = 38, standard deviation 30.6). In the two months after the aforementioned interventions were performed, the average delay time was 20.2 minutes (n = 50, standard deviation 10.0), representing a decrease in the wait time of 42%. In the preintervention period, two cases had delays of 60 minutes or more; in the postintervention group, there were zero cases with delays of 60 minutes or more. During the postintervention period, zero cases were rescheduled or cancelled because of lack of availability or scheduling conflicts by the cardiac anesthesia team as opposed to three cases that were rescheduled or cancelled in the preintervention period. Conclusion In the two months after implementing changes to the scheduling process for NORA cases in the echocardiography laboratory, a substantial reduction in average case delay, elimination of long delays lasting more than one hour, and avoidance of case cancellations were observed.

Background Pharmacists have become an integrated part of the cardiac arrest (Code Blue) response team in the emergency department and inpatient settings. However, the attendance of pharmacists at intraoperative codes is less established. Objective The purpose of this paper was to describe the creation of the Perioperative Pharmacy Attendance for Intraoperative Codes Safety Initiative, report the impact it had on the intraoperative emergency code team, and discuss the limitations and difficulties experienced by the pharmacy department so that other institutions may have a foundation on which to build similar programs. Practice description A large academic medical center successfully incorporated pharmacists into the intraoperative emergency code team. Practice innovation We began by obtaining collaborative leadership support by using a quality assurance and improvement focus. In an organized manner, we methodically developed workflow protocols, educational programming, and promotional material to ensure that our initiative was able to be effectively used by the institution. Evaluation methods A year after the implementation, clinicians evaluated the program and reported its impact on team performance. An evaluation regarding the difficulties experienced with the initiation of the program was also performed. Results Most clinicians stated that having pharmacists at intraoperative emergencies improved patient care as well as the code team’s performance. The difficulties experienced during the development of this program included workflow disruptions and the need for a continued effort to effectively advertise it to clinicians. Conclusion Our institution was able to create the successful Perioperative Pharmacy Attendance for Intraoperative Codes Safety Initiative. This paper describes the steps taken to create and implement this successful program as well as the integration of pharmacists into the intraoperative emergency setting.

There has been a recent shift in bradycardia pacing and defibrillation therapy to leadless pacemakers and extrathoracic cardioverter-defibrillator technology due to complications associated with transvenous devices. These innovations have implications for anesthesia care, as these novel devices have design and functionality features different from transvenous devices. Current perioperative guidelines do not address management of leadless pacemakers and the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, although implantation rates are increasing globally. This article addresses the features and capabilities of nontransvenous cardiac implantable electronic devices, such as the Micra and the subcutaneous implantable cardioverter-defibrillator, and provides guidance for perioperative management.

The objective of the present study, which was conducted in patients undergoing transcatheter aortic valve replacement, was to compare continuous noninvasive arterial pressure measured with the ClearSight device (Edwards Lifesciences, Irvine, CA) with invasive radial artery pressure used as the reference method. The authors hypothesized that the ClearSight device is an accurate, precise, safe, and efficient method for arterial blood pressure measurement comparable with an invasive radial arterial line.The study included the retrospective review of 20 consecutive patients scheduled for elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement with the SAPIEN 3 transcatheter heart valve (Edwards Lifesciences) at a single tertiary academic hospital, who underwent monitoring with both the ClearSight device and an invasive radial arterial pressure line. The patients underwent transcatheter aortic valve replacement from October to December 2019.Single tertiary academic medical center.The study comprised 20 patients, with 2,243 unique blood pressure data points.None.A statistically significant correlation between the invasive radial arterial pressure line and the ClearSight device was observed for systolic blood pressure (correlation coefficient 0.86; p0.001), diastolic blood pressure (correlation coefficient 0.56; p0.001), and mean arterial pressure (correlation coefficient 0.78; p0.001). Bland-Altman analysis was used to assess the agreement of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure between the two methods. Results for systolic blood pressure between the arterial line and ClearSight device were as follows: bias = 9.8 ± 10.1, percentage bias = 7.6%, and mean error = 15.8%. Results for diastolic blood pressure between the arterial line and ClearSight device were as follows: bias = -5.9 ± 7.8, percentage bias = 10.7%, and mean error = 28.4%. Results for mean arterial pressure between the arterial line and ClearSight device were as follows: bias = 0.3 ± 7.4, percentage bias = 0.4%, and mean error = 18.3%. The concordance rates of systolic blood pressure, diastolic blood pressure, and mean arterial pressure were 100%, 95.1%, and 98.8%, respectively.The accuracy, agreement, and precision of the ClearSight device were convincing for mean arterial pressure, systolic blood pressure, and diastolic blood pressure for patients with severe aortic stenosis undergoing elective transcatheter aortic valve replacement.

Acute heart failure (AHF) is an under recognized yet potentially lethal complication after liver transplantation (LT) surgery. The increase in incidence of liver transplantation amongst high-risk patients and the leniency in the criteria for transplantation, predisposes these patients to postoperative AHF and the antecedent morbidity and mortality. The inability of conventional preoperative cardiovascular testing to accurately identify patients at risk for post-LT AHF poses a considerable challenge to clinicians caring for these patients. Even if high-risk patients are identified, there is considerable ambiguity in the candidacy for transplantation as well as optimization strategies that could potentially prevent the development of AHF in the postoperative period. The intraoperative and postoperative management of patients who develop AHF is also challenging and requires a well-coordinated multidisciplinary approach. The use of mechanical circulatory support in patients with refractory heart failure has the potential to improve outcomes but its use in this complex patient population can be associated with significant complications and requires a stringent risk-benefit analysis on a case-by-case basis.

Orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) is characterized by significant hemodynamic disturbances and anesthetic challenges. Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) can be used to guide management during these procedures. This review examines the role of echocardiography during OLT, presents common TEE findings during each phase of OLT, and discusses the benefits demonstrated with TEE use and the safety of TEE in this patient population. Finally, the authors propose an algorithm for the safe use of TEE during OLT.