Perfusion index for early identification of regional anesthesia effectiveness: a narrative review.

Regional anesthesia (RA) is a common and irreplaceable technique in clinical, which can be used in different surgery sites and control of acute and chronic pain, especially for outpatients, pediatrics and the elderly. RA demands are increasing during COVID-19 pandemic because many surgeries could be performed under RA to reduce the risk of cross-infection between patients and health care workers. Early and accurate identification of the effects of RA can help physicians make timely decisions about whether to supplement analgesics or switch to general anesthesia, which will save time and improve patient satisfaction in a busy operating room. Perfusion index (PI) is a parameter derived from photoplethysmography (PPG) and represents the ratio of pulsatile and non-pulsatile blood flow at monitoring sites. It reflects local perfusion and is mainly affected by stroke volume and vascular tone. With characteristics of non-invasive, rapid, simple, and objective, PI is widely used in clinical practice, such as fluid responsiveness prediction, nociceptive assessment, etc. Recently, many studies have assessed the accuracy of PI in early prediction of RA success, including brachial plexus block, sciatic nerve block, neuraxial anesthesia, paravertebral block, caudal block and stellate ganglion block. Successful RA often parallels increased PI. In this narrative review, we describe the principles and influencing factors of PI, and introduce the effects of PI on early identification of RA effectiveness.

The effect of the COVID-19 pandemic on anesthesia techniques in tertiary hospital: general anesthesia or regional anesthesia - a retrospective cohort study.

OBJECTIVE: We aimed to find out how the pandemic process changed the anesthesia methods applied in Çorum Single Tertiary Region Hospital. In our hospital, we investigated the anesthesia methods used for surgical procedures before and during the pandemic, the number of cases, and the impact of the pandemic on emergency and elective surgeries. MATERIALS AND METHODS: This is a retrospective cohort study comparing COVID-19 pandemic's effect on the number of surgical operations and anesthesia techniques. The 22-month surgeries during the pandemic period and the 22-month pre-pandemic surgeries were compared in terms of anesthesia methods, branch-specific, and overall case changes. The data obtained were analyzed comparatively in terms of anesthetic techniques, branch-specific and overall case changes of the patients operated on in the operating room before and during the pandemic. RESULTS: While 65,984 surgical procedures were performed in the pre-pandemic period, only 54,352 were performed during the COVID-19 pandemic. The total number of surgical procedures decreased by 17.63% during the pandemic. While there was a 21.1% decrease in elective surgeries due to the pandemic, there was a 71.43% increase in emergency surgeries during the pandemic period. There was a significant disparity in the distribution of both elective and emergency cases by surgical specialty. It was found that the surgical specialties that received the most cases during the pandemic were General Surgery, Obstetrics-Gynecologic Surgery, Urologic Surgery and Orthopedic Surgery. During the COVID-19 pandemic, regional anesthesia (RA) was used in 16.95% of cases (as the primary technique). The use of RA as the primary anesthetic technique was significantly higher (10.61%) than in the pre-pandemic data. It was observed that specialties such as General Surgery, Obstetrics-Gynecologic Surgery, Urologic Surgery, And Orthopedic Surgery were prominent in the distribution of regional anesthesia. CONCLUSIONS: The COVID-19 pandemic was not the first and will not be the last and during this period we saw how important the personnel and material management are. Our study plays an important role in showing the uneven distribution of expected surgical procedures in operating rooms during the pandemic situation. It may provide guidance on the distribution of limited and essential personnel and personal protective equipment (PPE, medications, etc.) during the pandemic period. In this context, regional anesthesia may play an important role in the future because it can provide high-quality perioperative care to patients while minimizing the preference for general anesthesia during surgical procedures, thus minimizing personnel burden and limited resource use.

Bespoke regional blocks for axillary sentinel node biopsy.

INTRODUCTION: Axillary sentinel node biopsy for melanoma is routinely performed under general anaesthesia. Emerging evidence has shown general anaesthetics are associated with increased mortality in the context of the COVID-19 pandemic. In the interest of patient safety, we have designed a series of bespoke axillary regional blocks enabling surgeons to remove nodes up to and including level III without the need for a general anaesthetic. The aim of this study was to assess the feasibility of performing axillary sentinel node biopsy under such blocks. METHODS: Approval was granted by the Joint Study Review Committee on behalf of the Research and Ethics Department. Ten consecutive patients having axillary sentinel node biopsy for melanoma were included in this prospective study. Patients completed a Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR15) questionnaire preoperatively and 24 h postoperatively. DISCUSSION: One patient had a positive sentinel node, the remining were negative. A significant reduction in time spent in hospital post-operatively (p = 0.0008) was observed. QoR15 patient reported outcome measures demonstrated high levels of satisfaction evidenced by lack of statistical difference between pre and post-operative scores (p = 0.0118). 80% of patients were happy to have a regional block and 90% were happy to attend hospital during the pandemic. CONCLUSION: ASNB under regional block is safe, negates risks associated with performing GAs during the COVID-19 pandemic and facilitates quicker theatre turnover and discharge from hospital. Collaboration between anaesthetic and surgical teams has enabled this change in practice. There is a learning curve with both patient selection, education and development of technique.

Awake Major Abdominal Surgeries in the COVID-19 Era.

Background: During the outbreak of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19), allocating intensive care beds to patients needing acute care surgery became a very difficult task. Moreover, since general anesthesia is an aerosol-generating procedure, its use became controversial. This strongly restricted therapeutic strategies. Here, we report a series of undeferrable surgical cases treated with awake surgery under neuraxial anesthesia. Contextual benefits of this approach are deepened. Methods: During the first pandemic surge, thirteen patients (5 men and 8 women) with a mean age of 80 years, needing undelayable surgery due to abdominal emergencies, underwent awake open surgery at our Hospital. Prior to surgery, all patients underwent nasopharyngeal swab tests for COVID-19 diagnosis. In all cases, regional anesthesia (spinal, epidural, or combined spinal-epidural anesthesia) was performed. Intraoperative and postoperative pain intensities have been monitored and regularly assessed. A distinct pathway has been set up to keep patients of uncertain COVID-19 diagnosis separated from all other patients. Postoperative course has been examined. Results: The mean operative time was 87 minutes (minimum 60 minutes; maximum 165 minutes). In one case, conversion to general anesthesia was necessary. Postoperative pain was always well controlled. None of them required postoperative intensive care support. No perioperative major complications (Clavien-Dindo ≥3) occurred. Early readmission after surgery never occurred. All nasopharyngeal swabs resulted negative. Conclusions: In our experience, awake laparotomy under regional anesthesia resulted feasible, safe, painless, and, in specific cases, was the only viable option. This approach allowed prevention of the need of postoperative intensive monitoring during the COVID-19 era. In such a peculiar time, we believe it could become part of an ICU-preserving strategy and could limit viral transmission inside theatres.

Resurgence of combined intravenous Ketamine and regional anesthesia in pediatric ocular surgery in COVID-19 pandemic.

PURPOSE: The current pandemic of COVID-19 has made airway procedures like intubation and extubation, potential sources of virus transmission among health care workers. The aim of this work was to study the safety profile of combined ketamine and regional anesthesia in pediatric ocular surgeries during the COVID-19 pandemic. METHODS: This prospective study included pediatric patients undergoing ocular surgery under general anesthesia from April to October 2020. Children were premedicated with oral midazolam (0.25-0.50 mg/kg) or intramuscular ketamine (7-10 mg/kg), ondensetron (0.1 mg/kg) and atropine (0.02 mg/kg). Anesthesia was achieved with intravenous ketamine (4-5 mg/kg) and local anesthesia (peribulbar block or local infiltration). The patient's vital signs were monitored. Serious complications and postoperative adverse reactions related to anesthesia were documented. RESULTS: A total of 55 children (62 eyes) were operated. Lid tear was the most common surgical procedure performed [n = 18 (32.7%)]. Dose of ketamine needed ranged from 30 to 120 mg (66.67 ± 30.45). No intubation or resuscitation was needed. Four children complained of nausea and two needed an additional dose of intravenous ondansetron due to vomiting in the post-operative period. Incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was not affected by age, duration of surgery or dose of ketamine used (P > 0.05). There was no correlation between increase in pulse and dose of ketamine. CONCLUSION: Combined ketamine and regional anesthesia is a safe and effective alternative to administer anesthesia in a child during ocular surgeries.

Practical considerations for performing regional anesthesia: lessons learned from the COVID-19 pandemic.

Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) was declared a pandemic by the World Health Organization on 11 March 2020 because of its rapid worldwide spread. In the operating room, as part of hospital outbreak response measures, anesthesiologists are required to have heightened precautions and tailor anesthetic practices to individual patients. In particular, by minimizing the many aerosol-generating procedures performed during general anesthesia, anesthesiologists can reduce exposure to patients' respiratory secretions and the risk of perioperative viral transmission to healthcare workers and other patients. To avoid any airway manipulation, regional anesthesia should be considered whenever surgery is planned for a suspect or confirmed COVID-19 patient or any patient who poses an infection risk. Regional anesthesia has benefits of preservation of respiratory function, avoidance of aerosolization and hence viral transmission. This article explores the practical considerations and recommended measures for performing regional anesthesia in this group of patients, focusing on control measures geared towards ensuring patient and staff safety, equipment protection, and infection prevention. By doing so, we hope to address an issue that may have downstream implications in the way we practice infection control in anesthesia, with particular relevance to this new era of emerging infectious diseases and novel pathogens. The severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus 2 (SARS-CoV-2) is not the first, and certainly will not be the last novel virus that will lead to worldwide outbreaks. Having a well thought out regional anesthesia plan to manage these patients in this new normal will ensure the best possible outcome for both the patient and the perioperative management team.

RéSUMé: Le 11 mars 2020, l'Organisation mondiale de la Santé déclarait que la nouvelle maladie du coronavirus 2019 (COVID-19) était une pandémie en raison de sa propagation mondiale rapide. En salle d'opération, dans le cadre des mesures de réponse aux épidémies, les anesthésiologistes doivent prendre des précautions supplémentaires et adapter les pratiques anesthésiques au cas par cas selon chaque patient. Plus particulièrement, en minimisant les nombreuses interventions générant des aérosols pendant la réalisation de l'anesthésie générale, les anesthésiologistes peuvent réduire l'exposition aux sécrétions respiratoires des patients et le risque de transmission virale périopératoire aux travailleurs de la santé et aux autres patients. Afin d'éviter toute manipulation des voies aériennes, il convient d'envisager la réalisation d'une anesthésie régionale si une chirurgie est prévue chez un patient sous enquête de COVID-19 ou confirmé, ou chez tout patient posant un risque infectieux. L'anesthésie régionale comporte des avantages en matière de maintien de la fonction respiratoire et ce, tout en évitant la production d'aérosols et par conséquent la transmission virale. Cet article explore les considérations pratiques et les mesures recommandées pour réaliser une anesthésie régionale dans ce groupe de patients, en se concentrant sur les mesures de surveillance visant à garantir la sécurité des patients et du personnel soignant, la protection des équipements et la prévention des infections. Ce faisant, nous espérons répondre à des interrogations qui pourraient avoir des implications à plus long terme dans la manière dont nous pratiquerons la prévention de la contagion en anesthésie, avec une pertinence toute particulière pour cette nouvelle ère de maladies infectieuses émergentes et de nouveaux pathogènes. Le coronavirus du syndrome respiratoire aigu sévère 2 (SARS-CoV-2) n'est pas le premier et ne sera certainement pas le dernier nouveau virus qui entraînera des épidémies mondiales. En disposant d'un plan bien conçu d'anesthésie régionale pour prendre en charge ces patients dans cette nouvelle ère, les meilleures issues possibles seront assurées tant pour le patient que pour l'équipe de prise en charge périopératoire.

Implications of COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) for the anesthesiological practice. / Implicaciones del COVID-19 (SARS-CoV-2) para la práctica anestesiológica.

The purpose of this article is to review the characteristics of SARS-CoV-2, the clinical-epidemiological aspects of COVID-19, and the implications anesthesiologists when performing aerosol-generating procedures. A search of PubMed/MEDLINE, Scopus, SciELO, and Web of Science databases was performed until April 9, 2020, using the words: "COVID-19 or COVID19 or SARS-CoV-2 and anesthesiology or anesthesia". Forty-eight articles with information on the management of the patient in the perioperative period or the intensive care unit when suspected or confirmed SARS-CoV-2 infection were included. In general, the postponement of elective surgeries for no more than 6 to 8 weeks, depending on the clinical condition of the patients is recommended. In the case of urgent or emergency surgeries, we review the use of personal protection gear, as well as the recommended strategies for carrying out the procedure.

El objetivo de este artículo es revisar las características del SARS-CoV-2, los aspectos clínico-epidemiológicos de COVID-19 y las implicaciones que tienen para los anestesiólogos al realizar procedimientos generadores de aerosoles. Se realizó una búsqueda en las bases de datos PubMed, Scopus, SciELO y Web of Science hasta el 9 de abril de 2020, utilizando las palabras: “COVID-19 or COVID19 or SARS-CoV-2 and anesthesiology or anesthesia”. Se incluyeron 48 artículos con información sobre el manejo del paciente en el perioperatorio o en la unidad de cuidados intensivos ante la sospecha o confirmación de infección por SARS-CoV-2. En general, se recomienda el aplazamiento de las cirugías electivas por no más de seis a ocho semanas, de acuerdo a las condiciones clínicas de los pacientes. En el caso de cirugías de urgencia o emergencia, se revisan tópicos del sistema de protección personal así como las estrategias recomendadas para la realización de los procedimientos.

[Recommendations for local-regional anesthesia during the COVID-19 pandemic]. / Recomendações para realização de anestesia loco­regional durante a pandemia de COVID­19.

Since the beginning of the COVID-19 pandemic, many questions have come up regarding safe anesthesia management of patients with the disease. Regional anesthesia, whether peripheral nerve or neuraxial, is a safe alternative for managing patients with COVID-19, by choosing modalities that mitigate pulmonary function involvement. Adopting regional anesthesia mitigates adverse effects in the postoperative period and provides safety to pati ents and teams, as long as there is compliance with individual protection and interpersonal transmission care measures. Respecting contra-indications and judicial use of safety techniques and norms are essential. The present manuscript aims to review the evidence available on regional anesthesia for patients with COVID-19 and offer practical recommendations for safe and efficient performance.

Daring discourse: are we ready to recommend neuraxial anesthesia and peripheral nerve blocks during the COVID-19 pandemic? A pro-con.

The recent joint statement from the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) and the European Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Therapy (ESRA) recommends neuraxial and peripheral nerve blocks for patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-2019) illness. The benefits of regional anesthetic and analgesic techniques on patient outcomes and healthcare systems are evident. Regional techniques are now additionally promoted as a mechanism to reduce aerosolizing procedures. However, caring for patients with COVID-19 illness requires rapid redefinition of risks and benefits-both for patients and practitioners. These should be fully considered within the context of available evidence and expert opinion. In this Daring Discourse, we present two opposing perspectives on adopting the ASRA/ESRA recommendation. Areas of controversy in the literature and opportunities for research to address knowledge gaps are highlighted. We hope this will stimulate dialogue and research into the optimal techniques to improve patient outcomes and ensure practitioner safety during the pandemic.

Neuraxial anaesthesia and peripheral nerve blocks during the COVID-19 pandemic: a literature review and practice recommendations.

Coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) has had a significant impact on global healthcare services. In an attempt to limit the spread of infection and to preserve healthcare resources, one commonly used strategy has been to postpone elective surgery, whilst maintaining the provision of anaesthetic care for urgent and emergency surgery. General anaesthesia with airway intervention leads to aerosol generation, which increases the risk of COVID-19 contamination in operating rooms and significantly exposes the healthcare teams to COVID-19 infection during both tracheal intubation and extubation. Therefore, the provision of regional anaesthesia may be key during this pandemic, as it may reduce the need for general anaesthesia and the associated risk from aerosol-generating procedures. However, guidelines on the safe performance of regional anaesthesia in light of the COVID-19 pandemic are limited. The goal of this review is to provide up-to-date, evidence-based recommendations or expert opinion when evidence is limited, for performing regional anaesthesia procedures in patients with suspected or confirmed COVID-19 infection. These recommendations focus on seven specific domains including: planning of resources and staffing; modifying the clinical environment; preparing equipment, supplies and drugs; selecting appropriate personal protective equipment; providing adequate oxygen therapy; assessing for and safely performing regional anaesthesia procedures; and monitoring during the conduct of anaesthesia and post-anaesthetic care. Implicit in these recommendations is preserving patient safety whilst protecting healthcare providers from possible exposure.