Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Show: 20 | 50 | 100
Results 1 - 3 de 3
Filter
1.
Anaesthesia ; 78(4): 491-500, 2023 04.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-36632006

ABSTRACT

This review of 19 studies (39,783 patients) of atrial fibrillation after thoracic surgery addresses the pathophysiology, incidence, and consequences of atrial fibrillation in this population, as well as its prevention and management. Interestingly, atrial fibrillation was most often identified in patients not previously known to have the disease. Rhythm control with amiodarone was the most commonly used treatment and nearly all patients were discharged in sinus rhythm. Major predictors were age; male sex; history of atrial fibrillation; congestive heart failure; left atrial enlargement; elevated brain natriuretic peptide level; and the invasiveness of procedures. Overall, patients with atrial fibrillation stayed 3 days longer in hospital. We also discuss the importance of standardising research on this subject and provide recommendations that might mitigate the impact postoperative atrial fibrillation on hospital resources.


Subject(s)
Amiodarone , Atrial Fibrillation , Thoracic Surgery , Thoracic Surgical Procedures , Humans , Male , Atrial Fibrillation/epidemiology , Atrial Fibrillation/etiology , Anti-Arrhythmia Agents/therapeutic use , Thoracic Surgical Procedures/adverse effects
2.
Br J Anaesth ; 123(4): 421-429, 2019 Oct.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-31256916

ABSTRACT

BACKGROUND: The National Surgical Quality Improvement Program Myocardial Infarction & Cardiac Arrest (NSQIP MICA) calculator and the Revised Cardiac Risk Index (RCRI) were derived using currently outdated methods of diagnosing perioperative myocardial infarctions. We tested the external validity of these tools in a setting of a systematic perioperative cardiac biomarker measurement. METHODS: Analysis of routinely collected data nested in the Vascular Events In Noncardiac Surgery Patients Cohort Evaluation Study. A consecutive sample of patients ≥45 yr old undergoing in-hospital noncardiac surgery in a single tertiary care centre was enrolled. The predictive performance of the models was tested in terms of the occurrence of major cardiac complications defined as a composite of a nonfatal myocardial infarction, a nonfatal cardiac arrest, or a cardiac death within 30 days after surgery. The plasma concentration of high-sensitivity troponin T was measured before surgery, 6-12 h after operation, and on the first, second, and third days after surgery. Myocardial infarction was diagnosed according to the Third Universal Definition. RESULTS: The median age was 65 (59-72) yr, and 704/870 (80.9%) subjects were male. The primary outcome occurred in 76/870 (8.7%; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.9-10.8%) patients. The c-statistic was 0.64 (95% CI, 0.57-0.70) for the NSQIP MICA and 0.60 (95% CI, 0.54-0.65) for the RCRI. Predicted risks were systematically underestimated in calibration belts (P<0.001). The RCRI and the NSQIP MICA showed no clinical utility before recalibration. CONCLUSIONS: The NSQIP and RCRI models had limited predictive performance in this at-risk population. The recently updated version of the RCRI was more reliable than the original index.


Subject(s)
Heart Arrest/etiology , Heart Arrest/therapy , Heart Diseases/epidemiology , Intraoperative Complications/therapy , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Myocardial Infarction/therapy , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Risk Assessment/standards , Vascular Surgical Procedures/methods , Aged , Cohort Studies , Death, Sudden, Cardiac/prevention & control , Female , Humans , Male , Middle Aged , Models, Statistical , Predictive Value of Tests , Quality Improvement , Treatment Outcome , Vascular Surgical Procedures/adverse effects
3.
J Thromb Haemost ; 13 Suppl 1: S297-303, 2015 Jun.
Article in English | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26149039

ABSTRACT

Among adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery who are at risk of a myocardial infarction, a long-standing question has been whether these patients should receive aspirin throughout the perioperative period. A large (n = 10,010 patients) international trial (POISE-2) demonstrated that perioperative aspirin did not prevent myocardial infarction, and the result was consistent both for patients who had been taking aspirin before the trial (continuation stratum, 4382 patients) and for patients who had not been taking aspirin before the trial (initiation stratum, 5628 patients). Aspirin did, however, increase the risk of major bleeding. Therefore, the best evidence does not support the use of aspirin for the prevention of myocardial infarction in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery. In patients who have an indication for long-term aspirin usage and have their aspirin held during the perioperative period, it is important to ensure aspirin is restarted after the high-risk period for bleeding has passed (i.e., 8-10 days after surgery).


Subject(s)
Aspirin/administration & dosage , Cardiovascular Agents/administration & dosage , Myocardial Infarction/prevention & control , Surgical Procedures, Operative/adverse effects , Animals , Aspirin/adverse effects , Cardiovascular Agents/adverse effects , Drug Administration Schedule , Hemorrhage/chemically induced , Humans , Myocardial Infarction/etiology , Myocardial Infarction/mortality , Perioperative Period , Risk Assessment , Risk Factors , Surgical Procedures, Operative/mortality , Time Factors , Treatment Outcome
SELECTION OF CITATIONS
SEARCH DETAIL