Is hypotensive anaesthesia guided by invasive intraarterial monitoring required for orthognathic surgery? - A retrospective review of anaesthetic practice and intraoperative blood loss in orthognathic surgery in a tertiary hospital.

BACKGROUND AND AIMS: Orthognathic surgeries for maxillofacial deformities are commonly performed globally and are associated with significant blood loss. This can distort the surgical field and necessitate blood transfusion with its concomitant risks. We aimed to review if invasive intraarterial (IA) line monitoring and/or hypotensive anaesthesia is required for orthognathic surgeries, and their effects on intraoperative blood loss and transfusion requirements. METHODS: This was a retrospective observational study conducted in patients admitted for orthognathic surgeries in a public tertiary hospital. Anaesthetic techniques and intraoperative haemodynamics were studied for their effects on intraoperative blood loss. RESULTS: The data from 269 patients who underwent orthognathic-bimaxillary surgeries was analysed. Inhalational anaesthetic combined with remifentanil was administered for 86.6%, total intravenous anesthesia to 11.2% patients, while the rest received inhalational anaesthesia. Hypotensive anaesthesia was achieved in 48 subjects (17.8%) and associated with shorter duration of surgery (349 vs 378 min, P = 0.02) and a trend towards lower blood loss (874 mL vs 1000 mL, P = 0.058) but higher transfusion requirement (81.3% vs 58.8%, P = 0.004). An IA line was used in 119 patients (44.2%) and was not associated with a higher probability of achieving hypotensive anaesthesia (19.3% vs 16.7%, P = 0.06). However, less blood loss (911 vs 1029 mL, P = 0.05) occurred compared to noninvasive blood pressure monitoring. CONCLUSION: Invasive blood pressure monitoring is as effective as noninvasive methods to achieve hypotensive anaesthesia. It does not aid in achieving lower target blood pressure. There is a lack of association between a reduction in blood loss and higher blood transfusion during hypotensive anaesthesiaand thiswill require further evaluation.

Short-Course Systemic and Topical Non-Steroidal Anti-Inflammatory Drugs: Impact on Adverse Renal Events in Older Adults with Co-Morbid Disease.

BACKGROUND: Prolonged systemic non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) have been associated with adverse renal outcomes among older adults. However, there is scant data regarding the renal safety of topical and short-course systemic NSAIDs. We aimed to evaluate the risk of acute adverse renal outcomes among older adults prescribed topical and short-term systemic NSAIDs. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective cohort study of all older adults, age 60 years and above, who received prescriptions between July 2015 and December 2017 from the largest tertiary hospital and a major public primary care institution in Singapore. Data from 6 months before until 30 days after the first prescription were retrieved from electronic medical records. The primary outcome was the incidence of acute kidney injury (serum creatinine increased >26.5 µmol/L or >50% from baseline) and/or hyperkalemia within 30 days. A multi-variate analysis taking into account age, sex, co-morbidities, baseline-estimated glomerular filtration rate and serum potassium, NSAID route of administration, and concurrent renin-angiotensin-aldosterone system blocker and diuretic prescription was performed to evaluate factors associated with the primary outcome. RESULTS: We identified 12,773 older adults with incident prescriptions: 3982 (31.2%) received short-course systemic NSAIDs, 3784 (29.6%) received topical NSAIDs, and 5007 (39.2%) did not receive any NSAID. Both short-course systemic NSAIDs (adjusted odds ratio [OR] 1.59, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.41-1.80, p < 0.001) and topical NSAIDs (adjusted OR 1.48, 95% CI 1.31-1.67, p < 0.001), compared with the no-NSAID group, were independently associated with the primary outcome. Among older adults with co-morbid conditions and prescribed NSAIDs, topical NSAIDs had a reduced odds of 30-day incident acute kidney injury and/or hyperkalemia in diabetes mellitus (adjusted OR 0.78, 95% CI 0.65-1.06, p = 0.007), chronic kidney disease (adjusted OR 0.74, 95% CI 0.60-0.90, p = 0.003), and cardiovascular disease (adjusted OR 0.54, 95% CI 0.37-0.79, p < 0.001), compared with short-course systemic NSAIDs. CONCLUSIONS: NSAIDs increased the risk of acute adverse renal events. Topical NSAIDs, compared with short-course systemic NSAIDs, were associated with a reduced incidence of acute kidney injury and/or hyperkalemia among older adults with additional risk factors.

Achieving 100 percent compliance to perioperative antibiotic administration: a quality improvement initiative.

INTRODUCTION: Timely administration of prophylactic antibiotics within 60 minutes before surgical incision is important for reducing surgical site infections. This quality improvement initiative aimed to work towards achieving 100% compliance with perioperative antibiotic administration. METHODS: We examined the workflow in our Anaesthesia Information Management System (AIMS) and proposed interventions using cause-and-effect analysis of anonymised anaesthetic records from eligible surgical cases extracted from AIMS. This ultimately led to the implementation of an antibiotic pop-up reminder. The overall process was done in a few small plan-do-study-act cycles involving raising awareness, education and reorganisation of AIMS before implementation of the antibiotic pop-up reminder. Data analysis took place from August 2014 to September 2016. Compliance was defined as documented antibiotic administration within 60 minutes before surgical incision, or as documented reason for omission. RESULTS: The median monthly compliance rate, for 33,038 cases before and 28,315 cases after the reminder was implemented, increased from 67.0% at baseline to 94.5%. This increase was consistent and sustained for a year despite frequent personnel turnover. Documentation of antibiotic administration also improved from 81.7% to 99.3%, allowing us to identify and address novel problems that were initially not apparent, and resulting in several department recommendations. These included administering antibiotics later for cases with predicted longer-than-expected preparation times and bringing forward antibiotic administration in lower-segment Caesarean sections. CONCLUSION: The use of information technology and implementation of an antibiotic pop-up reminder on AIMS streamlined our work processes and brought us closer to achieving 100% on-time compliance with perioperative antibiotic administration.