Anesthesia Techniques for Vitreoretinal Surgery in the United States: A Report from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group Research Consortium.

PURPOSE: To explore the patterns of anesthesia use and their determinants during vitreoretinal (VR) surgeries in academic and community hospitals across the US, using data from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG). DESIGN: A retrospective, multicenter, cohort study. METHODS: We queried the MPOG database of 107,066 patients undergoing VR surgeries. Patients (≥18 years) undergoing VR surgery with monitored anesthesia care (MAC) or general anesthesia (GA) from January 1, 2015 to December 31, 2021 were included. Patient-level, case-based, and institutional-level covariates were collected. We performed multivariable mixed-effects models to determine predictors of anesthesia type use. The primary outcome was the type of anesthesia (MAC or GA) used during VR surgeries. As a secondary outcome, MAC cases were further classified based on the additional use of sedation into MAC with or without sedation. RESULTS: We found that 67.45% of VR surgery cases received MAC, and 73.63% of institutions administered MAC to more than half of cases. Random effect modeling revealed that 47.76% of the variation in MAC use was attributed to institutions. A trend toward increased use of MAC with increasing age was observed. Patients diagnosed with chronic pulmonary disease, liver disease, or a history of drug abuse were less likely to receive MAC. Conversely, we found that patients with reported alcohol abuse disorder, diabetes with complications, and those with American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status of 4 (vs. 1, 2, or 3) were more likely to use MAC. Compared to non-complex VR surgeries, there was a notably decreased likelihood of MAC use in complex PPV (P = .004), PPV + scleral buckle (SB) for retinal detachment (P < .0001), and primary SB surgery (P < .0001). CONCLUSIONS: Approximately 2/3 of VR anesthesia is under MAC, but GA is still preferred for SBs, complex vitrectomy, and younger patients. We show that large interinstitutional variation for using MAC in practice exists.

Cardiometabolic disease and obesity patterns differentially predict acute kidney injury after total joint replacement: a retrospective analysis.

BACKGROUND: Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a frequent yet understudied postoperative total joint arthroplasty complication. This study aimed to describe cardiometabolic disease co-occurrence using latent class analysis, and associated postoperative AKI risk. METHODS: This retrospective analysis examined patients ≥18 years old undergoing primary total knee or hip arthroplasties within the US Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group of hospitals from 2008 to 2019. AKI was defined using modified Kidney Disease: Improving Global Outcomes (KDIGO) criteria. Latent classes were constructed from eight cardiometabolic diseases including hypertension, diabetes, and coronary artery disease, excluding obesity. A mixed-effects logistic regression model was constructed for the outcome of any AKI and the exposure of interaction between latent class and obesity status adjusting for preoperative and intraoperative covariates. RESULTS: Of 81 639 cases, 4007 (4.9%) developed AKI. Patients with AKI were more commonly older and non-Hispanic Black, with more significant comorbidity. A latent class model selected three groups of cardiometabolic patterning, labelled 'hypertension only' (n=37 223), 'metabolic syndrome (MetS)' (n=36 503), and 'MetS+cardiovascular disease (CVD)' (n=7913). After adjustment, latent class/obesity interaction groups had differential risk of AKI compared with those in 'hypertension only'/non-obese. Those 'hypertension only'/obese had 1.7-fold increased odds of AKI (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1.5-2.0). Compared with 'hypertension only'/non-obese, those 'MetS+CVD'/obese had the highest odds of AKI (odds ratio 3.1, 95% CI: 2.6-3.7), whereas 'MetS+CVD'/non-obese had 2.2 times the odds of AKI (95% CI: 1.8-2.7; model area under the curve 0.76). CONCLUSIONS: The risk of postoperative AKI varies widely between patients. The current study suggests that the co-occurrence of metabolic conditions (diabetes mellitus, hypertension), with or without obesity, is a more important risk factor for acute kidney injury than individual comorbid diseases.

Prolonged Opioid Use and Pain Outcome and Associated Factors after Surgery under General Anesthesia: A Prospective Cohort Association Multicenter Study.

BACKGROUND: There is insufficient prospective evidence regarding the relationship between surgical experience and prolonged opioid use and pain. The authors investigated the association of patient characteristics, surgical procedure, and perioperative anesthetic course with postoperative opioid consumption and pain 3 months postsurgery. The authors hypothesized that patient characteristics and intraoperative factors predict opioid consumption and pain 3 months postsurgery. METHODS: Eleven U.S. and one European institution enrolled patients scheduled for spine, open thoracic, knee, hip, or abdominal surgery, or mastectomy, in this multicenter, prospective observational study. Preoperative and postoperative data were collected using patient surveys and electronic medical records. Intraoperative data were collected from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group database. The association between postoperative opioid consumption and surgical site pain at 3 months, elicited from a telephone survey conducted at 3 months postoperatively, and demographics, psychosocial scores, pain scores, pain management, and case characteristics, was analyzed. RESULTS: Between September and October 2017, 3,505 surgical procedures met inclusion criteria. A total of 1,093 cases were included; 413 patients were lost to follow-up, leaving 680 (64%) for outcome analysis. Preoperatively, 135 (20%) patients were taking opioids. Three months postsurgery, 96 (14%) patients were taking opioids, including 23 patients (4%) who had not taken opioids preoperatively. A total of 177 patients (27%) reported surgical site pain, including 45 (13%) patients who had not reported pain preoperatively. The adjusted odds ratio for 3-month opioid use was 18.6 (credible interval, 10.3 to 34.5) for patients who had taken opioids preoperatively. The adjusted odds ratio for 3-month surgical site pain was 2.58 (1.45 to 4.4), 4.1 (1.73 to 8.9), and 2.75 (1.39 to 5.0) for patients who had site pain preoperatively, knee replacement, or spine surgery, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative opioid use was the strongest predictor of opioid use 3 months postsurgery. None of the other variables showed clinically significant association with opioid use at 3 months after surgery.

Scheduled, Simultaneous Dosing of Pregabalin, Celecoxib, and Acetaminophen Markedly Reduces or Eliminates Opioid Use After ACL Reconstruction Using Allograft or Hamstring Tendon Autograft: A Randomized Clinical Trial.

Background: Opioid analgesics continue to be prescribed after ambulatory surgery despite untoward adverse effects, risk of overdose, and association with substance use disorder. Purpose/Hypothesis: The purpose was to investigate the use of a novel system to provide scheduled and simultaneous dosing of acetaminophen, celecoxib, and pregabalin after anterior cruciate ligament reconstruction (ACLR). It was hypothesized that this system would markedly reduce pain and opioid use compared with existing best practice. Study Design: Randomized controlled trial; Level of evidence, 1. Methods: Included were 100 patients scheduled for elective, primary ACLR using allograft or hamstring tendon autograft. Selection criteria included age between 18 and 65 years and weight between 65 and 120 kg. Exclusion criteria were a known allergy to any drug used in the study or the use of opioid analgesics before surgery. Patients in the intervention group received a blister pack with scheduled, simultaneous doses of acetaminophen, celecoxib, and pregabalin; patients were also given oxycodone 5 mg as needed for breakthrough pain. Patients in the control group were prescribed ibuprofen and oxycodone 5 mg/acetaminophen 325 mg as needed for pain. The primary outcome measure was pain. Secondary outcomes were nausea, itching, and daily oxycodone use. Patients were asked to quantify their average pain at rest, nausea, and itching on an 11-point verbal scale (from 0 to 10). These data were recorded for 6 days during daily telephone contacts with patients after hospital discharge. Results: Cumulative results for 6 days showed significantly lower values in the intervention group compared with the control group for pain (median [interquartile range], 28 [14-35] vs 35 [28-41], respectively; P = .009) and oxycodone use (median [interquartile range] number of tablets, 0 [0-2] vs 8 [1.25-16], respectively; P < .001). Based on these data, the upper tolerance limits for the number of oxycodone tablets required by 90% of patients in the intervention and control groups were 8 tablets and 30 tablets, respectively. Cumulative results for nausea and itching were also significantly lower for the intervention group. Most patients in the intervention group used no opioids during recovery. Conclusion: Simultaneous dosing of 3 nonopioid analgesics resulted in reduced postoperative pain and markedly lower opioid use. Registration: NCT04015908 (ClinicalTrials.gov identifier).

Demonstration and Performance Evaluation of Two Novel Algorithms for Removing Artifacts From Automated Intraoperative Temperature Data Sets: Multicenter, Observational, Retrospective Study.

BACKGROUND: The automated acquisition of intraoperative patient temperature data via temperature probes leads to the possibility of producing a number of artifacts related to probe positioning that may impact these probes' utility for observational research. OBJECTIVE: We sought to compare the performance of two de novo algorithms for filtering such artifacts. METHODS: In this observational retrospective study, the intraoperative temperature data of adults who received general anesthesia for noncardiac surgery were extracted from the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group registry. Two algorithms were developed and then compared to the reference standard-anesthesiologists' manual artifact detection process. Algorithm 1 (a slope-based algorithm) was based on the linear curve fit of 3 adjacent temperature data points. Algorithm 2 (an interval-based algorithm) assessed for time gaps between contiguous temperature recordings. Sensitivity and specificity values for artifact detection were calculated for each algorithm, as were mean temperatures and areas under the curve for hypothermia (temperatures below 36 C) for each patient, after artifact removal via each methodology. RESULTS: A total of 27,683 temperature readings from 200 anesthetic records were analyzed. The overall agreement among the anesthesiologists was 92.1%. Both algorithms had high specificity but moderate sensitivity (specificity: 99.02% for algorithm 1 vs 99.54% for algorithm 2; sensitivity: 49.13% for algorithm 1 vs 37.72% for algorithm 2; F-score: 0.65 for algorithm 1 vs 0.55 for algorithm 2). The areas under the curve for time × hypothermic temperature and the mean temperatures recorded for each case after artifact removal were similar between the algorithms and the anesthesiologists. CONCLUSIONS: The tested algorithms provide an automated way to filter intraoperative temperature artifacts that closely approximates manual sorting by anesthesiologists. Our study provides evidence demonstrating the efficacy of highly generalizable artifact reduction algorithms that can be readily used by observational studies that rely on automated intraoperative data acquisition.

Carbon Dioxide, Blood Pressure, and Perioperative Stroke: A Retrospective Case-Control Study.

BACKGROUND: The relationship between intraoperative physiology and postoperative stroke is incompletely understood. Preliminary data suggest that either hypo- or hypercapnia coupled with reduced cerebrovascular inflow (e.g., due to hypotension) can lead to ischemia. This study tested the hypothesis that the combination of intraoperative hypotension and either hypo- or hypercarbia is associated with postoperative ischemic stroke. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective, case-control study via the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group. Noncardiac, nonintracranial, and nonmajor vascular surgical cases (18 yr or older) were extracted from five major academic centers between January 2004 and December 2015. Ischemic stroke cases were identified via manual chart review and matched to controls (1:4). Time and reduction below key mean arterial blood pressure thresholds (less than 55 mmHg, less than 60 mmHg, less than 65 mmHg) and outside of specific end-tidal carbon dioxide thresholds (30 mmHg or less, 35 mmHg or less, 45 mmHg or greater) were calculated based on total area under the curve. The association between stroke and total area under the curve values was then tested while adjusting for relevant confounders. RESULTS: In total, 1,244,881 cases were analyzed. Among the cases that screened positive for stroke (n = 1,702), 126 were confirmed and successfully matched with 500 corresponding controls. Total area under the curve was significantly associated with stroke for all thresholds tested, with the strongest combination observed with mean arterial pressure less than 55 mmHg (adjusted odds ratio per 10 mmHg-min, 1.17 [95% CI, 1.10 to 1.23], P < 0.0001) and end-tidal carbon dioxide 45 mmHg or greater (adjusted odds ratio per 10 mmHg-min, 1.11 [95% CI, 1.10 to 1.11], P < 0.0001). There was no interaction effect observed between blood pressure and carbon dioxide. CONCLUSIONS: Intraoperative hypotension and carbon dioxide dysregulation may each independently increase postoperative stroke risk.

Practice Patterns and Variability in Intraoperative Opioid Utilization: A Report From the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group.

BACKGROUND: Opioids remain the primary mode of analgesia intraoperatively. There are limited data on how patient, procedural, and institutional characteristics influence intraoperative opioid administration. The aim of this retrospective, longitudinal study from 2012 to 2016 was to assess how intraoperative opioid dosing varies by patient and clinical care factors and across multiple institutions over time. METHODS: Demographic, surgical procedural, anesthetic technique, and intraoperative analgesia data as putative variables of intraoperative opioid utilization were collected from 10 institutions. Log parenteral morphine equivalents (PME) was modeled in a multivariable linear regression model as a function of 15 covariates: 3 continuous covariates (age, anesthesia duration, year) and 12 factor covariates (peripheral block, neuraxial block, general anesthesia, emergency status, race, sex, remifentanil infusion, major surgery, American Society of Anesthesiologists [ASA] physical status, non-opioid analgesic count, Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group [MPOG] institution, surgery category). One interaction (year by MPOG institution) was included in the model. The regression model adjusted simultaneously for all included variables. Comparison of levels within a factor were reported as a ratio of medians with 95% credible intervals (CrI). RESULTS: A total of 1,104,324 cases between January 2012 and December 2016 were analyzed. The median (interquartile range) PME and standardized by weight PME per case for the study period were 15 (10-28) mg and 200 (111-347) µg/kg, respectively. As estimated in the multivariable model, there was a sustained decrease in opioid use (mean, 95% CrI) dropping from 152 (151-153) µg/kg in 2012 to 129 (129-130) µg/kg in 2016. The percent of variability in PME due to institution was 25.6% (24.8%-26.5%). Less opioids were prescribed in men (130 [129-130] µg/kg) than women (144 [143-145] µg/kg). The men to women PME ratio was 0.90 (0.89-0.90). There was substantial variability in PME administration among institutions, with the lowest being 80 (79-81) µg/kg and the highest being 186 (184-187) µg/kg; this is a PME ratio of 0.43 (0.42-0.43). CONCLUSIONS: We observed a reduction in intraoperative opioid administration over time, with variability in dose ranging between sexes and by procedure type. Furthermore, there was substantial variability in opioid use between institutions even when adjusting for multiple variables.

Airway driving pressure is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications after major abdominal surgery: a multicentre retrospective observational cohort study.

Background: High airway driving pressure is associated with adverse outcomes in critically ill patients receiving mechanical ventilation, but large multicentre studies investigating airway driving pressure during major surgery are lacking. We hypothesised that increased driving pressure is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery. Methods: In this preregistered multicentre retrospective observational cohort study, the authors reviewed major abdominal surgical procedures in 11 hospitals from 2004 to 2018. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications, defined as postoperative pneumonia, unplanned tracheal intubation, or prolonged mechanical ventilation for more than 48 h. Associations between intraoperative dynamic driving pressure and outcomes, adjusted for patient and procedural factors, were evaluated. Results: Among 14 218 qualifying cases, 389 (2.7%) experienced postoperative pulmonary complications. After adjustment, the mean dynamic driving pressure was associated with postoperative pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio for every 1 cm H2O increase: 1.04; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.02-1.06; P<0.001). Neither tidal volume nor PEEP was associated with postoperative pulmonary complications. Increased BMI, shorter height, and female sex were predictors for higher dynamic driving pressure (ß=0.35, 95% CI 0.32-0.39, P<0.001; ß=-0.01, 95% CI -0.02 to 0.00, P=0.005; and ß=0.74, 95% CI 0.63-0.86, P<0.001, respectively). Conclusions: Dynamic airway driving pressure, but not tidal volume or PEEP, is associated with postoperative pulmonary complications in models controlling for a large number of risk predictors and covariates. Such models are capable of risk prediction applicable to individual patients.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anesthesia: An abridged Cochrane network meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: In this abridged version of the recently published Cochrane review on antiemetic drugs, we summarize its most important findings and discuss the challenges and the time needed to prepare what is now the largest Cochrane review with network meta-analysis in terms of the number of included studies and pages in its full printed form. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review with network meta-analyses to compare and rank single antiemetic drugs and their combinations belonging to 5HT3-, D2-, NK1-receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics used to prevent postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anesthesia. RESULTS: 585 studies (97 516 participants) testing 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were included. The studies' overall risk of bias was assessed as low in only 27% of the studies. In 282 studies, 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs lowered the risk of vomiting at least 20% compared to placebo. In the ranking of treatments, combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs. Single NK1 receptor antagonists were as effective as other drug combinations. Of the 10 effective single drugs, certainty of evidence was high for aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron, while moderate for fosaprepitant and droperidol. For serious adverse events (SAEs), any adverse event (AE), and drug-class specific side effects evidence for intervention effects was mostly not convincing. CONCLUSIONS: There is high or moderate evidence for at least seven single drugs preventing postoperative vomiting. However, there is still considerable lack of evidence regarding safety aspects that does warrant investigation.

A Lower Tidal Volume Regimen during One-lung Ventilation for Lung Resection Surgery Is Not Associated with Reduced Postoperative Pulmonary Complications.

BACKGROUND: Protective ventilation may improve outcomes after major surgery. However, in the context of one-lung ventilation, such a strategy is incompletely defined. The authors hypothesized that a putative one-lung protective ventilation regimen would be independently associated with decreased odds of pulmonary complications after thoracic surgery. METHODS: The authors merged Society of Thoracic Surgeons Database and Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group intraoperative data for lung resection procedures using one-lung ventilation across five institutions from 2012 to 2016. They defined one-lung protective ventilation as the combination of both median tidal volume 5 ml/kg or lower predicted body weight and positive end-expiratory pressure 5 cm H2O or greater. The primary outcome was a composite of 30-day major postoperative pulmonary complications. RESULTS: A total of 3,232 cases were available for analysis. Tidal volumes decreased modestly during the study period (6.7 to 6.0 ml/kg; P < 0.001), and positive end-expiratory pressure increased from 4 to 5 cm H2O (P < 0.001). Despite increasing adoption of a "protective ventilation" strategy (5.7% in 2012 vs. 17.9% in 2016), the prevalence of pulmonary complications did not change significantly (11.4 to 15.7%; P = 0.147). In a propensity score matched cohort (381 matched pairs), protective ventilation (mean tidal volume 6.4 vs. 4.4 ml/kg) was not associated with a reduction in pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.86; 95% CI, 0.56 to 1.32). In an unmatched cohort, the authors were unable to define a specific alternative combination of positive end-expiratory pressure and tidal volume that was associated with decreased risk of pulmonary complications. CONCLUSIONS: In this multicenter retrospective observational analysis of patients undergoing one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery, the authors did not detect an independent association between a low tidal volume lung-protective ventilation regimen and a composite of postoperative pulmonary complications.

A pharmacokinetic-pharmacodynamic real-time display may change anesthesiologists' behavior.

We have developed a real-time graphical display that presents anesthetic pharmacology data (drug effect site concentrations (Ce) and probability of anesthetic effects including hypnosis, loss of response to tracheal intubation), improving a previous prototype. We hypothesized that the use of the display alters (1) clinical behavior of anesthesiologists (i.e., Ce of isoflurane and fentanyl at the end of anesthesia), (2) fentanyl dose during the first 30 min of recovery in the post anesthesia care unit (PACU), and that the response of clinicians to the display in terms of workload and utility is favorable. The display was evaluated in a two-group, non-randomized prospective observational study of 30 patients undergoing general anesthesia using isoflurane and fentanyl. The isoflurane-predicted Ce was lower in the display group (without-display: 0.64% ± 0.06%; with-display: 0.42 ± 0.04%; t23.9 = 3.17, P = 0.004 < adjusted alpha 0.05/2). The difference in fentanyl-predicted Ce did not achieve statistical significance (without-display: 1.5 ± 0.1 ng/ml; with-display: 2.0 ± 0.2 ng/ml; t25.5 = 2.26, P = 0.03 > adjusted alpha 0.05/2) (means ± standard error). A joint test of isoflurane and fentanyl Ce with respect to the display condition rejected the null hypothesis of no differences (Hotelling T2, P = 0.01), supporting our primary hypothesis. The total fentanyl per patient during the first 30 min in the PACU with the display was 75.0 ± 62.7 µg and that without the display was 83.0 ± 74.7 µg. There was no significant difference between the groups (means ± standard deviation, P = 0.75). There were no differences in perceived workload. Use of the display does not appear to be cognitively burdensome and may change the anesthesiologist's dosing regimen.

Drugs for preventing postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults after general anaesthesia: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is a common adverse effect of anaesthesia and surgery. Up to 80% of patients may be affected. These outcomes are a major cause of patient dissatisfaction and may lead to prolonged hospital stay and higher costs of care along with more severe complications. Many antiemetic drugs are available for prophylaxis. They have various mechanisms of action and side effects, but there is still uncertainty about which drugs are most effective with the fewest side effects. OBJECTIVES: • To compare the efficacy and safety of different prophylactic pharmacologic interventions (antiemetic drugs) against no treatment, against placebo, or against each other (as monotherapy or combination prophylaxis) for prevention of postoperative nausea and vomiting in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia • To generate a clinically useful ranking of antiemetic drugs (monotherapy and combination prophylaxis) based on efficacy and safety • To identify the best dose or dose range of antiemetic drugs in terms of efficacy and safety SEARCH METHODS: We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), MEDLINE, Embase, the Cumulative Index to Nursing and Allied Health Literature (CINAHL), the World Health Organization International Clinical Trials Registry Platform (WHO ICTRP), ClinicalTrials.gov, and reference lists of relevant systematic reviews. The first search was performed in November 2017 and was updated in April 2020. In the update of the search, 39 eligible studies were found that were not included in the analysis (listed as awaiting classification). SELECTION CRITERIA: Randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing effectiveness or side effects of single antiemetic drugs in any dose or combination against each other or against an inactive control in adults undergoing any type of surgery under general anaesthesia. All antiemetic drugs belonged to one of the following substance classes: 5-HT3 receptor antagonists, D2 receptor antagonists, NK1 receptor antagonists, corticosteroids, antihistamines, and anticholinergics. No language restrictions were applied. Abstract publications were excluded. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: A review team of 11 authors independently assessed trials for inclusion and risk of bias and subsequently extracted data. We performed pair-wise meta-analyses for drugs of direct interest (amisulpride, aprepitant, casopitant, dexamethasone, dimenhydrinate, dolasetron, droperidol, fosaprepitant, granisetron, haloperidol, meclizine, methylprednisolone, metoclopramide, ondansetron, palonosetron, perphenazine, promethazine, ramosetron, rolapitant, scopolamine, and tropisetron) compared to placebo (inactive control). We performed network meta-analyses (NMAs) to estimate the relative effects and ranking (with placebo as reference) of all available single drugs and combinations. Primary outcomes were vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively, serious adverse events (SAEs), and any adverse event (AE). Secondary outcomes were drug class-specific side effects (e.g. headache), mortality, early and late vomiting, nausea, and complete response. We performed subgroup network meta-analysis with dose of drugs as a moderator variable using dose ranges based on previous consensus recommendations. We assessed certainty of evidence of NMA treatment effects for all primary outcomes and drug class-specific side effects according to GRADE (CINeMA, Confidence in Network Meta-Analysis). We restricted GRADE assessment to single drugs of direct interest compared to placebo. MAIN RESULTS: We included 585 studies (97,516 randomized participants). Most of these studies were small (median sample size of 100); they were published between 1965 and 2017 and were primarily conducted in Asia (51%), Europe (25%), and North America (16%). Mean age of the overall population was 42 years. Most participants were women (83%), had American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status I and II (70%), received perioperative opioids (88%), and underwent gynaecologic (32%) or gastrointestinal surgery (19%) under general anaesthesia using volatile anaesthetics (88%). In this review, 44 single drugs and 51 drug combinations were compared. Most studies investigated only single drugs (72%) and included an inactive control arm (66%). The three most investigated single drugs in this review were ondansetron (246 studies), dexamethasone (120 studies), and droperidol (97 studies). Almost all studies (89%) reported at least one efficacy outcome relevant for this review. However, only 56% reported at least one relevant safety outcome. Altogether, 157 studies (27%) were assessed as having overall low risk of bias, 101 studies (17%) overall high risk of bias, and 327 studies (56%) overall unclear risk of bias. Vomiting within 24 hours postoperatively Relative effects from NMA for vomiting within 24 hours (282 RCTs, 50,812 participants, 28 single drugs, and 36 drug combinations) suggest that 29 out of 36 drug combinations and 10 out of 28 single drugs showed a clinically important benefit (defined as the upper end of the 95% confidence interval (CI) below a risk ratio (RR) of 0.8) compared to placebo. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than single drugs in preventing vomiting. However, single NK1 receptor antagonists showed treatment effects similar to most of the drug combinations. High-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs reduce vomiting (ordered by decreasing efficacy): aprepitant (RR 0.26, 95% CI 0.18 to 0.38, high certainty, rank 3/28 of single drugs); ramosetron (RR 0.44, 95% CI 0.32 to 0.59, high certainty, rank 5/28); granisetron (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.38 to 0.54, high certainty, rank 6/28); dexamethasone (RR 0.51, 95% CI 0.44 to 0.57, high certainty, rank 8/28); and ondansetron (RR 0.55, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.60, high certainty, rank 13/28). Moderate-certainty evidence suggests that the following single drugs probably reduce vomiting: fosaprepitant (RR 0.06, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.21, moderate certainty, rank 1/28) and droperidol (RR 0.61, 95% CI 0.54 to 0.69, moderate certainty, rank 20/28). Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol showed clinically important benefit, but low doses showed no clinically important benefit. Aprepitant was used mainly at high doses, ramosetron at recommended doses, and fosaprepitant at doses of 150 mg (with no dose recommendation available). Frequency of SAEs Twenty-eight RCTs were included in the NMA for SAEs (10,766 participants, 13 single drugs, and eight drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for SAEs when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to low. Droperidol (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.08 to 9.71, low certainty, rank 6/13) may reduce SAEs. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 1.39, 95% CI 0.26 to 7.36, very low certainty, rank 11/13), ramosetron (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.05 to 15.74, very low certainty, rank 7/13), granisetron (RR 1.21, 95% CI 0.11 to 13.15, very low certainty, rank 10/13), dexamethasone (RR 1.16, 95% CI 0.28 to 4.85, very low certainty, rank 9/13), and ondansetron (RR 1.62, 95% CI 0.32 to 8.10, very low certainty, rank 12/13). No studies reporting SAEs were available for fosaprepitant. Frequency of any AE Sixty-one RCTs were included in the NMA for any AE (19,423 participants, 15 single drugs, and 11 drug combinations). The certainty of evidence for any AE when using one of the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol compared to placebo) ranged from very low to moderate. Granisetron (RR 0.92, 95% CI 0.80 to 1.05, moderate certainty, rank 7/15) probably has no or little effect on any AE. Dexamethasone (RR 0.77, 95% CI 0.55 to 1.08, low certainty, rank 2/15) and droperidol (RR 0.89, 95% CI 0.81 to 0.98, low certainty, rank 6/15) may reduce any AE. Ondansetron (RR 0.95, 95% CI 0.88 to 1.01, low certainty, rank 9/15) may have little or no effect on any AE. We are uncertain about the effects of aprepitant (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.78 to 0.97, very low certainty, rank 3/15) and ramosetron (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.54, very low certainty, rank 11/15) on any AE. No studies reporting any AE were available for fosaprepitant. Class-specific side effects For class-specific side effects (headache, constipation, wound infection, extrapyramidal symptoms, sedation, arrhythmia, and QT prolongation) of relevant substances, the certainty of evidence for the best and most reliable anti-vomiting drugs mostly ranged from very low to low. Exceptions were that ondansetron probably increases headache (RR 1.16, 95% CI 1.06 to 1.28, moderate certainty, rank 18/23) and probably reduces sedation (RR 0.87, 95% CI 0.79 to 0.96, moderate certainty, rank 5/24) compared to placebo. The latter effect is limited to recommended and high doses of ondansetron. Droperidol probably reduces headache (RR 0.76, 95% CI 0.67 to 0.86, moderate certainty, rank 5/23) compared to placebo. We have high-certainty evidence that dexamethasone (RR 1.00, 95% CI 0.91 to 1.09, high certainty, rank 16/24) has no effect on sedation compared to placebo. No studies assessed substance class-specific side effects for fosaprepitant. Direction and magnitude of network effect estimates together with level of evidence certainty are graphically summarized for all pre-defined GRADE-relevant outcomes and all drugs of direct interest compared to placebo in http://doi.org/10.5281/zenodo.4066353. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: We found high-certainty evidence that five single drugs (aprepitant, ramosetron, granisetron, dexamethasone, and ondansetron) reduce vomiting, and moderate-certainty evidence that two other single drugs (fosaprepitant and droperidol) probably reducevomiting, compared to placebo. Four of the six substance classes (5-HT3 receptor antagonists, D2 receptor antagonists, NK1 receptor antagonists, and corticosteroids) were thus represented by at least one drug with important benefit for prevention of vomiting. Combinations of drugs were generally more effective than the corresponding single drugs in preventing vomiting. NK1 receptor antagonists were the most effective drug class and had comparable efficacy to most of the drug combinations. 5-HT3 receptor antagonists were the best studied substance class. For most of the single drugs of direct interest, we found only very low to low certainty evidence for safety outcomes such as occurrence of SAEs, any AE, and substance class-specific side effects. Recommended and high doses of granisetron, dexamethasone, ondansetron, and droperidol were more effective than low doses for prevention of vomiting. Dose dependency of side effects was rarely found due to the limited number of studies, except for the less sedating effect of recommended and high doses of ondansetron. The results of the review are transferable mainly to patients at higher risk of nausea and vomiting (i.e. healthy women undergoing inhalational anaesthesia and receiving perioperative opioids). Overall study quality was limited, but certainty assessments of effect estimates consider this limitation. No further efficacy studies are needed as there is evidence of moderate to high certainty for seven single drugs with relevant benefit for prevention of vomiting. However, additional studies are needed to investigate potential side effects of these drugs and to examine higher-risk patient populations (e.g. individuals with diabetes and heart disease).

Erythropoietin plus iron versus control treatment including placebo or iron for preoperative anaemic adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

BACKGROUND: Approximately 30% of adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery suffer from preoperative anaemia. Preoperative anaemia is a risk factor for mortality and adverse outcomes in different surgical specialties and is frequently the reason for blood transfusion. The most common causes are renal, chronic diseases, and iron deficiency. International guidelines recommend that the cause of anaemia guide preoperative anaemia treatment. Recombinant human erythropoietin (rHuEPO) with iron supplementation has frequently been used to increase preoperative haemoglobin concentrations in patients in order to avoid the need for perioperative allogeneic red blood cell (RBC) transfusion. OBJECTIVES: To evaluate the efficacy of preoperative rHuEPO therapy (subcutaneous or parenteral) with iron (enteral or parenteral) in reducing the need for allogeneic RBC transfusions in preoperatively anaemic adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, Ovid MEDLINE(R), Ovid Embase, ISI Web of Science: SCI-EXPANDED and CPCI-S, and clinical trial registries WHO ICTRP and ClinicalTrials.gov on 29 August 2019. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included all randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared preoperative rHuEPO + iron therapy to control treatment (placebo, no treatment, or standard of care with or without iron) for preoperatively anaemic adults undergoing non-cardiac surgery. We used the World Health Organization (WHO) definition of anaemia: haemoglobin concentration (g/dL) less than 13 g/dL for males, and 12 g/dL for non-pregnant females (decision of inclusion based on mean haemoglobin concentration). We defined two subgroups of rHuEPO dosage: 'low' for 150 to 300 international units (IU)/kg body weight, and 'high' for 500 to 600 IU/kg body weight. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Two review authors collected data from the included studies. Our primary outcome was the need for RBC transfusion (no autologous transfusion, fresh frozen plasma or platelets), measured in transfused participants during surgery (intraoperative) and up to five days after surgery. Secondary outcomes of interest were: haemoglobin concentration (directly before surgery), number of RBC units (where one unit contains 250 to 450 mL) transfused per participant (intraoperative and up to five days after surgery), mortality (within 30 days after surgery), length of hospital stay, and adverse events (e.g. renal dysfunction, thromboembolism, hypertension, allergic reaction, headache, fever, constipation). MAIN RESULTS: Most of the included trials were in orthopaedic, gastrointestinal, and gynaecological surgery and included participants with mild and moderate preoperative anaemia (haemoglobin from 10 to 12 g/dL). The duration of preoperative rHuEPO treatment varied across the trials, ranging from once a week to daily or a 5-to-10-day period, and in one trial preoperative rHuEPO was given on the morning of surgery and for five days postoperatively. We included 12 trials (participants = 1880) in the quantitative analysis of the need for RBC transfusion following preoperative treatment with rHuEPO + iron to correct preoperative anaemia in non-cardiac surgery; two studies were multiarmed trials with two different dose regimens. Preoperative rHuEPO + iron given to anaemic adults reduced the need RBC transfusion (risk ratio (RR) 0.55, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.38 to 0.80; participants = 1880; studies = 12; I2 = 84%; moderate-quality evidence due to inconsistency). This analysis suggests that on average, the combined administration of rHuEPO + iron will mean 231 fewer individuals will need transfusion for every 1000 individuals compared to the control group. Preoperative high-dose rHuEPO + iron given to anaemic adults increased the haemoglobin concentration (mean difference (MD) 1.87 g/dL, 95% CI 1.26 to 2.49; participants = 852; studies = 3; I2 = 89%; low-quality evidence due to inconsistency and risk of bias) but not low-dose rHuEPO + iron (MD 0.11 g/dL, 95% CI -0.46 to 0.69; participants = 334; studies = 4; I2 = 69%; low-quality evidence due to inconsistency and risk of bias). There was probably little or no difference in the number of RBC units when rHuEPO + iron was given preoperatively (MD -0.09, 95% CI -0.23 to 0.05; participants = 1420; studies = 6; I2 = 2%; moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision).  There was probably little or no difference in the risk of mortality within 30 days of surgery (RR 1.19, 95% CI 0.39 to 3.63; participants = 230; studies = 2; I2 = 0%; moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision) or of adverse events including local rash, fever, constipation, or transient hypertension (RR 0.93, 95% CI 0.68 to 1.28; participants = 1722; studies = 10; I2 = 0%; moderate-quality evidence due to imprecision). The administration of rHuEPO + iron before non-cardiac surgery did not clearly reduce the length of hospital stay of preoperative anaemic adults (MD -1.07, 95% CI -4.12 to 1.98; participants = 293; studies = 3; I2 = 87%; low-quality evidence due to inconsistency and imprecision). AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Moderate-quality evidence suggests that preoperative rHuEPO + iron therapy for anaemic adults prior to non-cardiac surgery reduces the need for RBC transfusion and, when given at higher doses, increases the haemoglobin concentration preoperatively. The administration of rHuEPO + iron treatment did not decrease the mean number of units of RBC transfused per patient. There were no important differences in the risk of adverse events or mortality within 30 days, nor in length of hospital stay. Further, well-designed, adequately powered RCTs are required to estimate the impact of this combined treatment more precisely.

Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group Enhanced Observation Study Postoperative Pain Profiles, Analgesic Use, and Transition to Chronic Pain and Excessive and Prolonged Opioid Use Patterns Methodology.

To study the impact of anesthesia opioid-related outcomes and acute and chronic postsurgical pain, we organized a multicenter study that comprehensively combined detailed perioperative data elements from multiple institutions. By combining pre- and postoperative patient-reported outcomes with automatically extracted high-resolution intraoperative data obtained through the Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG), the authors sought to describe the impact of patient characteristics, preoperative psychological factors, surgical procedure, anesthetic course, postoperative pain management, and postdischarge pain management on postdischarge pain profiles and opioid consumption patterns. This study is unique in that it utilized multicenter prospective data collection using a digital case report form integrated with the MPOG framework and database. Therefore, the study serves as a model for future studies using this innovative method. Full results will be reported in future articles; the purpose of this article is to describe the methods of this study.

Transient neurological symptoms (TNS) following spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine versus other local anaesthetics in adult surgical patients: a network meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Spinal anaesthesia has been implicated as one of the possible causes of neurological complications following surgical procedures. This painful condition, occurring during the immediate postoperative period, is termed transient neurological symptoms (TNS) and is typically observed after the use of spinal lidocaine. Alternatives to lidocaine that can provide high-quality anaesthesia without TNS development are needed. This review was originally published in 2005, and last updated in 2009. OBJECTIVES: To determine the frequency of TNS after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine and compare it with other types of local anaesthetics by performing a meta-analysis for all pair-wise comparisons, and conducting network meta-analysis (NMA) to rank interventions. SEARCH METHODS: We searched CENTRAL, MEDLINE, Elsevier Embase, and LILACS on 25 November 2018. We searched clinical trial registries and handsearched the reference lists of trials and review articles. SELECTION CRITERIA: We included randomized and quasi-randomized controlled trials comparing the frequency of TNS after spinal anaesthesia with lidocaine to other local anaesthetics. Studies had to have two or more arms that used distinct local anaesthetics (irrespective of the concentration and baricity of the solution) for spinal anaesthesia in preparation for surgery. We included adults who received spinal anaesthesia and considered all pregnant participants as a subgroup. The follow-up period for TNS was at least 24 hours. DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS: Four review authors independently assessed studies for inclusion. Three review authors independently evaluated the quality of the relevant studies and extracted the data from the included studies. We performed meta-analysis for all pair-wise comparisons of local anaesthetics, as well as NMA. We used an inverse variance weighting for summary statistics and a random-effects model as we expected methodological and clinical heterogeneity across the included studies resulting in varying effect sizes between studies of pair-wise comparisons. The NMA used all included studies based on a graph theoretical approach within a frequentist framework. Finally, we ranked the competing treatments by P scores. MAIN RESULTS: The analysis included 24 trials reporting on 2226 participants of whom 239 developed TNS. Two studies are awaiting classification and one is ongoing. Included studies mostly had unclear to high risk of bias. The NMA included 24 studies and eight different local anaesthetics; the number of pair-wise comparisons was 32 and the number of different pair-wise comparisons was 11. This analysis showed that, compared to lidocaine, the risk ratio (RR) of TNS was lower for bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, prilocaine, procaine, and ropivacaine with RRs in the range of 0.10 to 0.23 while 2-chloroprocaine and mepivacaine did not differ in terms of RR of TNS development compared to lidocaine. Pair-wise meta-analysis showed that compared with lidocaine, most local anaesthetics were associated with a reduced risk of TNS development (except 2-chloroprocaine and mepivacaine) (bupivacaine: RR 0.16, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.09 to 0.28; 12 studies; moderate-quality evidence; 2-chloroprocaine: RR 0.09, 95% CI 0.01 to 1.51; 2 studies; low-quality evidence; levobupivacaine: RR 0.13, 95% CI 0.02 to 0.69; 2 studies; low-quality evidence; mepivacaine: RR 1.01, 95% CI 0.18 to 5.82; 4 studies; very low-quality evidence; prilocaine: RR 0.18, 95% CI 0.07 to 0.49; 4 studies; moderate-quality evidence; procaine: RR 0.14, 95% CI 0.04 to 0.52; 2 studies; moderate-quality evidence; ropivacaine: RR 0.10, 95% CI 0.01 to 0.78; 2 studies; low-quality evidence). We were unable to perform any of our planned subgroup analyses due to the low number of TNS events. AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS: Results from both NMA and pair-wise meta-analysis indicate that the risk of developing TNS after spinal anaesthesia is lower when bupivacaine, levobupivacaine, prilocaine, procaine, and ropivacaine are used compared to lidocaine. The use of 2-chloroprocaine and mepivacaine had a similar risk to lidocaine in terms of TNS development after spinal anaesthesia. Patients should be informed of TNS as a possible adverse effect of local anaesthesia with lidocaine and the choice of anaesthetic agent should be based on the specific clinical context and parameters such as the expected duration of the procedure and the quality of anaesthesia. Due to the very low- to moderate-quality evidence (GRADE), future research efforts in this field are required to assess alternatives to lidocaine that would be able to provide high-quality anaesthesia without TNS development. The two studies awaiting classification and one ongoing study may alter the conclusions of the review once assessed.

Protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis of the management of new onset atrial fibrillation in critically unwell adult patients.

BACKGROUND: New onset atrial fibrillation is the most commonly encountered arrhythmia in critically unwell patients with a reported incidence of 4% to 29%. The occurrence of new onset atrial fibrillation may precipitate acute heart failure and lead to thromboembolic complications as well as being associated with increased in-hospital and in intensive care unit (ICU) mortality. Despite being common, much of our current knowledge regarding the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation comes from patients with chronic atrial fibrillation or post cardiac surgery. It is unclear if management strategies in these patient cohorts can be applied to new onset atrial fibrillation in the general ICU. This protocol for a systematic review and network meta-analysis aims to address this uncertainty and define what is the most effective management strategy for the treatment of new onset atrial fibrillation (NOAF) in acutely unwell adult patients. METHODS: In this systematic review and network meta-analysis, we plan to search electronic databases (Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials [CENTRAL], MEDLINE, EMBASE, Science Citation Index Expanded on Web of Science and relevant trial registries) for relevant randomised and non-randomised trials. Citations will be reviewed by title, abstract and full text by two independent reviewers and disagreement resolved by discussion and a third independent reviewer, if necessary. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool will be used to assess risk of bias in randomised trials and the Risk of Bias in Nonrandomised Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tool will be used for non-randomised studies. Statistical analysis will be carried out using R package meta and netmeta. We will first conduct a pairwise meta-analysis. If conditions for indirect comparison are satisfied and suitable data are available, we will conduct network meta-analysis using frequentist methodology. Treatments will be ranked according to efficacy with associated P-scores. We will assess the quality of the evidence in the pairwise using GRADE methodology and network meta-analysis comparisons in the CINeMA module in R package meta. DISCUSSION: Our review will be the first to assess direct and indirect evidence to assess the efficacy and rank the treatments available for new onset atrial fibrillation in critically unwell patients. Our review findings will be applicable to the care of people in a range of acute settings including, ICU, the emergency department and acute medical units. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION: PROSPERO registry number: CRD42019121739.

Randomized controlled trial of a simplified adductor canal block performed for analgesia following total knee arthroplasty.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The objective of the study was to determine if injection of local anesthetic into the vastus medialis and sartorius muscles adjacent to the adductor canal produces sensory changes comparable with adductor canal block (ACB). This could result in a technically easier and potentially safer alternative to ACB. METHODS: In this randomized controlled trial, patients received either ACB (n=20) or a simplified adductor canal (SAC) block performed using a new fenestrated nerve block needle (n=20). The time to perform each block as well as the number of attempts to position the needle were evaluated. A non-inferiority test was used to compare pain scores and opioid requirements for the ACB and the SAC block. RESULTS: The SAC block was performed more rapidly, with fewer needle passes, and had a higher success rate than the ACB. Three block failures and two vessel punctures were observed in the ACB group, while none of these events occurred in SAC block patients. Analgesia and opioid consumption for patients treated with the SAC block were not inferior to ACB. CONCLUSION: The SAC block is technically easier to perform and potentially safer than ACB. This procedure can be performed using easily visible ultrasound landmarks and has the potential for use among a wide range of healthcare providers. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: NCT02786888.

Serum ropivacaine levels after local infiltration analgesia during total knee arthroplasty with and without adductor canal block.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: A common analgesic technique for total knee arthroplasty (TKA) is to inject local anesthetic into the periarticular tissue during surgery, known as local infiltration analgesia (LIA). Since the solution used typically contains a large amount of local anesthetic, concerns arise about exceeding the maximum dosage when adding a peripheral nerve block. Little research exists that addresses serum ropivacaine concentrations following LIA combined with peripheral nerve block. We hypothesized that after combining LIA and adductor canal blockade (ACB), serum ropivacaine concentrations would remain below levels associated with local anesthetic toxicity. METHODS: This was a prospective observational study that included 14 subjects undergoing TKA with intraoperative LIA containing 270 mg ropivacaine with epinephrine. Patients weighing less than 80 kg were excluded due to standardized dosing by our pharmacy. Seven patients were assigned consecutively to receive LIA alone (Group LIA) and seven were assigned to receive LIA plus ACB with 100 mg ropivacaine with epinephrine (Group LIA+ACB). Venous serum ropivacaine concentrations were measured over 24 hours. RESULTS: Peak serum concentrations (Cmax) in Group LIA ranged from 0.23 to 0.75 µg/mL and occurred at times from 4 to 24 hours. Cmax in Group LIA+ACB ranged from 0.46 to 1.00 µg/mL and occurred at times from 4 to 8 hours. No participants demonstrated signs or symptoms of local anesthetic toxicity. CONCLUSIONS: Total serum concentration of ropivacaine after LIA using 270 mg ropivacaine with and without an additional 100 mg perineural ropivacaine remained well below the toxicity threshold of 3.0 µg/mL at all time points. Additional studies are needed to ascertain the safety of combining LIA with peripheral nerve blockade.