Non-intubated general anesthesia in prone position for advanced biliopancreatic therapeutic endoscopy: A single tertiary referral center experience.

Background and Study Aim: Advance biliopancreatic endoscopies are nowadays performed in non-operating room anesthesia (NORA) under general anesthesia (GA). We evaluate the outcomes of non-intubated patients in prone position who received GA for endoscopic ultrasound (EUS) and endoscopic retrograde cholangiopancreatography (ERCP) in a tertiary referral center for digestive endoscopy. Patients and Methods: Anesthesiological records, anamnestic, and intraoperative data of patients who underwent advanced therapeutic biliopancreatic endoscopies at our tertiary referral center from January 2019 until January 2020 were collected in the present observational study. Results: One hundred fifty-three patients (93 M; median age: 68-year-old; mean ASA status: 2) were considered eligible for a procedure in the prone position with GA in spontaneous breathing. Prone position was always the initial setting. Propofol administration through a target-controlled infusion (TCI) pump was the choice to achieve GA. In our experience, desaturation appears to be the most frequent adverse event, accounting for 35% of cases (55/153). Treatment foresaw additional oxygen through a nasopharyngeal catheter, which proved to be a sufficient measure in almost all patients (52/55). Other adverse events (i.e., inadequate sedative plan, pain, and bradycardia) accounted for 2.6% of cases (4/153). Conclusions: Non-intubated GA in the prone position may be regarded as a safe procedure, as long as the anesthesiological criteria of exclusion are respected and the anesthesiological team has become acquainted with the peculiar NORA setting and familiar with the management of possible adverse events.

Current concepts of perioperative monitoring in high-risk surgical patients: a review.

A substantial number of patients are at high-risk of intra- or post-operative complications or both. Most perioperative deaths are represented by patients who present insufficient physiological reserve to meet the demands of major surgery. Recognition and management of critical high-risk surgical patients require dedicated and effective teams, capable of preventing, recognize, start treatment with adequate support in time to refer patients to the satisfactory ICU level provision. The main task for health-care planners and managers is to identify and reduce this severe risk and to encourage patient's safety practices. Inadequate tissue perfusion and decreased cellular oxygenation due to hypovolemia, heart dysfunction, reduced cardiovascular reserve, and concomitant diseases are the most common causes of perioperative complications. Hemodynamic, respiratory and careful sequential monitoring have become essential aspects of the clinical practice both for surgeons and intensivists. New monitoring techniques have changed significantly over the past few years and are now able to rapidly identify shock states earlier, define the etiology, and monitor the response to different therapies. Many of these techniques are now minimally invasive or non-invasive. Advanced hemodynamic and respiratory monitoring combines invasive, non-invasive monitoring skills. Non-invasive ultrasound has emerged during the last years as an essential operative and perioperative evaluation tool, and its use is now rapidly growing. Perioperative management guided by appropriate sequential clinical evaluation combined with respiratory and hemodynamic monitoring is an established tool to help clinicians to identify those patients at higher risk in the attempt to reduce the complications rate and potentially improve patient outcomes. This review aims to provide an update of currently available standard concepts and evolving technologies of the various respiratory and hemodynamic monitoring systems for the high-risk surgical patients, highlighting their potential usefulness when integrated with careful clinical evaluation.

Intensive multidisciplinary management in critical care patients affected by severe necrotizing soft tissue infections: a cooperative method to improve the efficacy of treatment.

To illustrate the effectiveness of our intensive multidisciplinary management (IMM) in the treatment of severely ill patients with necrotizing soft tissue infections (NSTIs). A retrospective observational study was conducted in a general ICU. Thirty-two consecutive patients undergoing IMM were carefully compared with 30 consecutive patients receiving a standard management (SM). IMM combined intensive care management, early surgical debridement followed by daily inspection of surgical wounds, close microbiological surveillance, and targeted high-dose antibiotics. IMM was associated with the better decrease of daily SOFA score (p = 0.04). Also, IMM caused + 12% increase in the overall number of surgical procedures (p = 0.022) and a higher number of tissue biopsies/per day (median 0.63 versus 0.32; p = 0.025), leading to a more targeted antimicrobial changes (89.6% vs 51.6%; p < 0.00001). High-dose daptomycin (75% vs 36.7%; p = 0.002) and extended/continuous infusion of beta-lactams (75% vs 43.3%; p = 0.011) were more frequently utilized. A specific efficiency score correlated with the decrease of SOFA score (efficacy) in IMM patients only (p = 0.027). Finally, IMM was associated with a significant lower ICU mortality rate (15.6% vs 40%; p = 0.032). IMM was more effective than SM as it allowed the earlier control of infection and the faster reduction of multiple organ-dysfunction.

Myocardial infarction rate in acute pulmonary edema: noninvasive pressure support ventilation versus continuous positive airway pressure.

OBJECTIVE: Noninvasive pressure support ventilation (NIPSV) delivered by face mask has proved an effective treatment for patients with acute pulmonary edema. However, an increase in acute myocardial infarction rate has been reported with this ventilation modality. We investigated whether the use of NIPSV increases the incidence of acute myocardial infarction compared with continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) in patients with acute pulmonary edema. DESIGN: Randomized, prospective, controlled study. SETTING: Emergency Department, Niguarda Hospital of Milano (Italy). PATIENTS: Forty-six patients affected by acute pulmonary edema. INTERVENTIONS: The patients received either NIPSV (24 patients) or CPAP (22 patients) through a face mask. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Cardiac enzymes (myoglobin, creatine kinase isoenzyme MB, and troponin I) were determined and electrocardiographic and physiologic measurements made over the subsequent 36 hrs. No significant differences were observed in the incidence of acute myocardial infarction in the CPAP group (13.6%) compared with the NIPSV group (8.3%). Both modalities of noninvasive ventilation improved ventilation and vital signs in patients with acute pulmonary edema. Two patients of the NIPSV group (8.3%) and one of the CPAP group (4.5%) required endotracheal intubation because vital signs and arterial blood gases worsened 1 hr after the start of noninvasive ventilation. No significant differences were found in in-hospital mortality rate. CONCLUSIONS: NIPSV proved to be equally effective in improving vital signs and ventilation without increasing acute myocardial infarction rate in patients with nonischemic acute pulmonary edema in comparison to CPAP alone. However, because the study lacked statistical power and excluded patients with acute coronary syndromes, caution is still advised when applying NIPSV to the latter subgroup of patients.