Inferior vena cava filter removal - Hope for the best and prepare for the worst: An anesthesiology perspective.

A patient presented to our institution for an elective removal of an inferior vena cava (IVC) filter under local anesthesia. Once removed, it was noticed that the filter had a missing secondary leg. The patient had a chest CT done which showed a hyper-attenuating structure in the region of the tricuspid valve highly suspicious for the fractured strut of the filter. Upon these findings, the patient was taken once again to the surgical suite for an endovascular retrieval of the strut. For fear of a possible cardiac injury and a potential need for a sternotomy, the patient received general anesthesia and was placed with appropriate IV access and full cardiac monitors. The strut was removed successfully without any complications. Despite the relative benign nature of this endovascular procedure, one should always be prepared for an appropriate resuscitation in case of an occurrence of a surgical complication.

Aortic valve replacement in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% performed via a minimally invasive right thoracotomy.

BACKGROUND: We evaluated the outcomes of patients with aortic valve pathology in the setting of a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35% who underwent minimally invasive aortic valve replacement (AVR), with or without concomitant mitral valve (MV) surgery. METHODS: All minimally invasive AVR in patients with a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, performed via a right thoracotomy for aortic stenosis or regurgitation between January 2009 and March 2013, were retrospectively evaluated. The operative characteristics, perioperative outcomes, and 30-day mortality were analyzed. RESULTS: There were 75 patients identified: 51 who underwent isolated AVR, and 24 who had combined AVR plus MV surgery for moderate to severe mitral regurgitation. In patients undergoing MV surgery, there were 22 (91.7%) MV repairs [ring annuloplasty =7 (37.5%), transaortic edge-to-edge repair =15 (62.5%)], and 2 (8.3%) replacements. No patient required conversion to sternotomy for inadequate surgical field exposure. The median total mechanical ventilation time and intensive care unit length of stay were 14 (IQR, 8-20) and 42 hours (IQR, 26-93 hours) in the isolated AVR group, and 16.5 hours (IQR, 12-61.5 hours) and 95.5 hours (IQR, 43.5-159 hours) in the AVR plus MV surgery group, respectively. The most common post-operative complication was new-onset atrial fibrillation, which occurred in 15 (29.4%) isolated AVR and 4 (16.7%) AVR plus MV surgery patients. The median hospital length of stay and 30-day mortality was 7 days (IQR, 5-12 days) and 1 (2%) in the isolated AVR group, and 10.5 days (IQR, 5-21 days) and 1 (4.3%) for AVR plus MV surgery. CONCLUSIONS: In patients with aortic valve pathology in the setting of a left ventricular ejection fraction ≤35%, minimally invasive AVR can be performed, with or without concomitant MV surgery, with a low morbidity and mortality.

Effectiveness of a Perioperative Transthoracic Ultrasound Training Program for Students and Residents.

OBJECTIVE: Focused ultrasound (US) is being incorporated across all levels of medical education. Although many comprehensive US courses exist, their scope is broad, requiring expert instructors, access to simulation, and extensive time commitment by the learner. We aim to compare learning across levels of training and specialties using a goal-directed, web-based course without live skills training. DESIGN: A prospective observational study of students and residents from medicine, surgery, and anesthesiology. Analysis compared pretests and posttests assessing 3 competencies. Individual mean score improvement (MSI) was compared by paired-sample t-tests and MSI among cohorts by analysis of variance, with significance set at p ≤ 0.05. McNemar test compared those who agreed or strongly agreed with survey items with those who did not before and after intervention. SETTING: Jackson Memorial Hospital, Miami, FL residency training programs in Medicine, Surgery, and Anesthesiology. RESULTS: A total of 180 trainees participated. A significant MSI was noted in each of 3 competencies in all 3 cohorts. Students' (S) MSI was significantly higher than residents' (R) and interns' (I) in US "knobology" and window recognition [S = 2.28 ± 1.29/5 vs R = 1.63 ± 1.21/5 (p = 0.014); vs I = 1.59 ± 1.12/5 (p = 0.032)]; students' total score MSI was significantly higher than residents [7.60 ± 3.43/20 vs 5.78 ± 3.08/20 (p < 0.008)]. All cohorts reported improved comfort in using transthoracic US and improved ability to recognize indications for use. More than 81% of all participants reported improved confidence in performing transthoracic US; more than 91% reported interest in additional training; and more than 88% believed course length was appropriate. CONCLUSIONS: Learners across levels of medical training and specialties can benefit from a brief, goal-directed, web-based training with early incorporation producing maximal yield.

The Ryder Cognitive Aid Checklist for Trauma Anesthesia.

Despite mixed results regarding the clinical utility of checklists, the anesthesia community is increasingly interested in advancing research around this important topic. Although several checklists have been developed to address routine perioperative care, few checklists in the anesthesia literature specifically target the management of trauma patients. We adapted a recently published "trauma and emergency checklist" for the initial phase of resuscitation and anesthesia of critically ill trauma patients into an applicable perioperative cognitive aid in the form of a pictogram that can be downloaded by the medical community. The Ryder Cognitive Aid Checklist for Trauma Anesthesia is a letter-sized, full-color document consisting of 2 pages and 5 sections. This cognitive aid describes the essential steps to be performed: before patient arrival to the hospital, on patient arrival to the hospital, during the initial assessment and management, during the resuscitation phase, and for postoperative care. A brief online survey is also presented to obtain feedback for improvement of this tool. The variability in utility of cognitive aids may be because of the specific clinical task being performed, the skill level of the individuals using the cognitive aid, overall quality of the cognitive aid, or organizational challenges. Once optimized, future research should be focused at ensuring successful implementation and customization of this tool.

A matrix model for valuing anesthesia service with the resource-based relative value system.

BACKGROUND: The purpose of this study was to propose a new crosswalk using the resource-based relative value system (RBRVS) that preserves the time unit component of the anesthesia service and disaggregates anesthesia billing into component parts (preoperative evaluation, intraoperative management, and postoperative evaluation). The study was designed as an observational chart and billing data review of current and proposed payments, in the setting of a preoperative holing area, intraoperative suite, and post anesthesia care unit. In total, 1,195 charts of American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) physical status 1 through 5 patients were reviewed. No direct patient interventions were undertaken. RESULTS: Spearman correlations between the proposed RBRVS billing matrix payments and the current ASA relative value guide methodology payments were strong (r=0.94-0.96, P<0.001 for training, test, and overall). The proposed RBRVS-based billing matrix yielded payments that were 3.0%±1.34% less than would have been expected from commercial insurers, using standard rates for commercial ASA relative value units and RBRVS relative value units. Compared with current Medicare reimbursement under the ASA relative value guide, reimbursement would almost double when converting to an RBRVS billing model. The greatest increases in Medicare reimbursement between the current system and proposed billing model occurred as anesthetic management complexity increased. CONCLUSION: The new crosswalk correlates with existing evaluation and management and intensive care medicine codes in an essentially revenue neutral manner when applied to the market-based rates of commercial insurers. The new system more highly values delivery of care to more complex patients undergoing more complex surgery and better represents the true value of anesthetic case management.

Perioperative cardiac evaluation of simulated patients by practicing anesthesiologists is not consistent with 2007 ACC/AHA guidelines.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To determine if practicing anesthesiologists recommend preoperative evaluations consistent with the 2007 ACC/AHA guidelines on perioperative care. DESIGN: Survey instrument. SETTING: Academic medical center. SUBJECTS: ASA membership. MEASUREMENTS: In this Web-based survey, participants were presented with 6 clinical scenarios characterized by surgical procedure and the patient's clinical condition (ie, clinical risk factors and functional capacity). Scenarios and possible recommendations were presented randomly. Participants were asked to select the recommendation they considered to be most consistent with the Guidelines. The percentage of participants selecting the recommendation most consistent with the 2007 Guidelines was recorded. MAIN RESULTS: Of the 22,504 actively practicing members of the ASA who were sent a survey, 1,595 actively practicing self-selected anesthesiologists responded. For one of 6 scenarios, patients with an active cardiac condition, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent selecting a recommendation consistent with the Guidelines was 82%. For the remaining 5 scenarios, the upper 95% confidence bound for the percent of anesthesiologists with an appropriate recommendation did not exceed 40%. With the exception of the scenario describing a patient with an active cardiac condition, respondents were more likely to provide recommendations consistent with the Guidelines if they had been in practice less than 5 years or worked in a teaching environment. CONCLUSION: When evaluating simulated patients, practicing anesthesiologists who are ASA members did not recommend preoperative evaluations that were consistent with the 2007 ACC/AHA Guidelines.