Vasoplegic syndrome during heart transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Vasoplegic syndrome (VS) is a common occurrence during heart transplantation (HT). It currently lacks a uniform definition between transplant centers, and its pathophysiology and treatment remain enigmatic. This systematic review summarizes the available published clinical data regarding VS during HT. METHODS: We searched databases for all published reports on VS during HT. Data collected included the incidence of VS in the HT population, patient and intraoperative characteristics, and postoperative outcomes. RESULTS: Twenty-two publications were included in this review. The prevalence of VS during HT was 28.72% (95% confidence interval: 27.37%, 30.10%). Factors associated with VS included male sex, higher body mass index, hypothyroidism, pre-HT left ventricular assist device or venoarterial extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VA-ECMO), pre-HT calcium channel blocker or amiodarone usage, longer cardiopulmonary bypass time, and higher blood product transfusion requirement. Patients who developed VS were more likely to require postoperative VA-ECMO support, renal replacement therapy, reoperation for bleeding, longer mechanical ventilation, and a greater 30-day and 1-year mortality. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our systematic review are an initial step for providing clinicians with data that can help identify high-risk patients and avenues for potential risk mitigation. Establishing guidelines that officially define VS will aid in the precise diagnosis of these patients during HT and guide treatment. Future studies of treatment strategies for refractory VS are needed in this high-risk patient population.

The analgesic effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for acute and chronic persistent postsurgical pain in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common cancer among women and tumour resection carries a high prevalence of chronic persistent postsurgical pain (CPSP). Perioperative i.v. lidocaine infusion has been proposed as protective against CPSP; however, evidence of its benefits is conflicting. This review evaluates the effectiveness of perioperative lidocaine infusions for breast cancer surgery. METHODS: Randomised trials comparing perioperative lidocaine infusions with parenteral analgesia in breast cancer surgery patients were sought. The two co-primary outcomes were the odds of CPSP at 3 and 6 months after operation. Secondary outcomes included rest pain at 1, 6, 12, and 24 h; analgesic consumption at 0-24 and 25-48 h; quality of recovery; opioid-related side-effects; and lidocaine infusion side-effects. Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) random effects modelling was used. RESULTS: Thirteen trials (1039 patients; lidocaine: 518, control: 521) were included. Compared with control, perioperative lidocaine infusion did not decrease the odds of developing CPSP at 3 and 6 months. Lidocaine infusion improved postoperative pain at 1 h by a mean difference (95% confidence interval) of -0.65 cm (-0.73 to -0.57 cm) (P<0.0001); however, this difference was not clinically important (1.1 cm threshold). Similarly, lidocaine infusion reduced oral morphine consumption by 7.06 mg (-13.19 to -0.93) (P=0.029) over the first 24 h only; however, this difference was not clinically important (30 mg threshold). The groups were not different for any of the remaining outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: Our results provide moderate-quality evidence that perioperative lidocaine infusion does not reduce CPSP in patients undergoing breast cancer surgery. Routine use of lidocaine infusions for perioperative analgesia and CPSP prevention is not supported in this population. SYSTEMATIC REVIEW PROTOCOL: PROSPERO CRD42023420888.

Left-Sided Double-Lumen Tube vs EZ-Blocker for One-Lung Ventilation in Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

Background. The EZ-Blocker is the newest generation of bronchial blocker and offers a potential alternative to left-sided double lumen tubes for lung isolation and one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery. Methods. Databases were searched for randomized controlled trials comparing left-sided double lumen tube to the EZ-Blocker for one-lung ventilation during thoracic surgery. The time for placement, incidence of intraoperative displacement, and surgeons' rating of lung collapse quality were designated as coprimary outcomes. The safety profiles of the two devices, including the incidence of airway trauma and post-extubation discomfort were also examined. Results. Six randomized controlled trials (495 patients) were analyzed. Compared to the EZ-Blocker, the left-sided double lumen tube was faster to place by a weighted mean difference of [95% CI] of -61.24 seconds [-102.48, -20.00] (P = .004) and was much less likely to become displaced during lung isolation with an odds ratio [95% CI] of .56 [.34, .91] (P = .02). The left-sided double lumen tube and the EZ-Blocker provided similar surgeon-rated quality of lung isolation. Although the left-sided double lumen tube caused a greater degree of post-extubation sore throat, there was a similar incidence of carinal trauma and post-extubation hoarseness compared to the EZ-Blocker. Conclusion. Our analysis suggests that the left-sided double lumen tube can be placed more quickly and is less prone to intraoperative displacement compared to the EZ-Blocker; the quality of lung collapse is similar. Thus, evidence appears to support the continued utilization of the left-sided double lumen tube for routine thoracic surgery requiring one-lung ventilation.

Analgesic Effectiveness of Motor-sparing Nerve Blocks for Total Knee Arthroplasty: A Network Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: The analgesic effectiveness of contemporary motor-sparing nerve blocks used in combination for analgesia in total knee arthroplasty is unclear. This network meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the analgesic effectiveness of adding single-injection or continuous adductor canal block (ACB) with or without infiltration of the interspace between the popliteal artery and the capsule of the posterior knee (iPACK) to intraoperative local infiltration analgesia (LIA), compared to LIA alone, after total knee arthroplasty. METHODS: Randomized trials examining the addition of single-injection or continuous ACB with or without single-injection block at the iPACK to LIA for total knee arthroplasty were considered. The two primary outcomes were area-under-the-curve pain scores over 24 to 48 h and postoperative function at greater than 24 h. Secondary outcomes included rest pain scores at 0, 6, 12, and 24 h; opioid consumption (from 0 to 24 h and from 25 to 48 h); and incidence of nausea/vomiting. Network meta-analysis was conducted using a frequentist approach. RESULTS: A total of 27 studies (2,317 patients) investigating the addition of (1) single-injection ACB, (2) continuous ACB, (3) single-injection ACB and single-injection block at the iPACK, and (4) continuous ACB and single-injection block at the iPACK to LIA, as compared to LIA alone, were included. For area-under-the-curve 24- to 48-h pain, the addition of continuous ACB with single-injection block at the iPACK displayed the highest P-score probability (89%) of being most effective for pain control. The addition of continuous ACB without single-injection block at the iPACK displayed the highest P-score probability (87%) of being most effective for postoperative function. CONCLUSIONS: The results suggest that continuous ACB, but not single-injection ACB and/or single-injection block at the iPACK, provides statistically superior analgesia when added to LIA for total knee arthroplasty compared to LIA alone. However, the magnitude of these additional analgesic benefits is clinically questionable.

Intracardiac thrombosis and pulmonary thromboembolism during liver transplantation: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

Intracardiac thrombosis and/or pulmonary thromboembolism (ICT/PE) is a rare but devastating complication during liver transplantation. Its pathophysiology remains poorly understood, and successful treatment remains a challenge. This systematic review summarizes the available published clinical data regarding ICT/PE during liver transplantation. Databases were searched for all publications reporting on ICT/PE during liver transplantation. Data collected included its incidence, patient characteristics, the timing of diagnosis, treatment strategies, and patient outcomes. This review included 59 full-text citations. The point prevalence of ICT/PE was 1.42%. Thrombi were most often diagnosed during the neohepatic phase, particularly at allograft reperfusion. Intravenous heparin was effective in preventing early-stage thrombus from progressing further and restoring hemodynamics in 76.32% of patients it was utilized for; however, the addition of tissue plasminogen activator or sole use of tissue plasminogen activator offered diminishing returns. Despite all resuscitation efforts, the in-hospital mortality rate of an intraoperative ICT/PE was 40.42%, with nearly half of these patients dying intraoperatively. The results of our systematic review are an initial step for providing clinicians with data that can help identify higher-risk patients. The clinical implications of our results warrant the development of identification and management strategies for the timely and effective treatment of these tragic occurrences during liver transplantation.

Analgesic benefits of single-shot versus continuous adductor canal block for total knee arthroplasty: a systemic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials.

BACKGROUND: Adductor canal block (ACB) can provide important analgesic benefits following total knee arthroplasty (TKA), however, the extent to which these benefits can be enhanced or prolonged by a continuous catheter-based infusion compared with a single-shot injection of local anesthetic is unclear. OBJECTIVES: This systematic review and meta-analysis (PROSPERO: CRD42021292738) review sought to compare the analgesic effectiveness of single shot to continuous ACB following TKA. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We sought randomized trials from the US National Library of Medicine database (MEDLINE), Excerpta Medica database (EMBASE), and Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews from inception to November 1, 2021, that compared single-shot to continuous ACB in adult patients undergoing TKA. The primary outcomes were (1) area under the curve (AUC) pain severity at rest and (2) cumulative opioid (oral morphine equivalent) consumption during the first 48 hours postoperatively. Secondary outcomes included postoperative pain severity scores up to 48 hours, cumulative opioid consumption at 24 hours, functional recovery, opioid-related side effects, and block-related complications. Risk of bias of included studies was assessed using the Cochrane risk of bias tool. Statistical pooling was conducted using the Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman method for random effects. No funding was obtained for this review. FINDINGS: Eleven trials (1185 patients) were included. No differences were observed in rest pain severity (AUC) or cumulative opioid consumption up to 48 hours postoperatively. In addition, no differences were observed in individual postoperative rest pain scores in the recovery room and at 12 and 24 hours, or in cumulative opioid consumption at 24 hours, functional recovery, and opioid-related side effects. Finally, fewer block-related complications were observed with single-shot ACB, with an OR (95% CI) of 0.24 (0.14 to 0.41) (p=0.002). CONCLUSIONS: Our results suggest that continuous catheter-based ACB does not enhance or prolong the analgesic benefits when compared with single-shot ACB for TKA over the first 48 hours postoperatively. Overall, the results of our meta-analysis do not support the routine use of continuous ACB for postoperative analgesia after TKA.

Pulmonary artery pulsatility index as a predictor of right ventricular failure in left ventricular assist device recipients: A systematic review.

BACKGROUND: It is critical to identify patients at increased risk of right ventricular failure (RVF) before left ventricular assist device (LVAD) implantation. Pulmonary artery pulsatility index (PAPi) is a hemodynamic parameter that is a specific measure of right ventricular function and may better identify LVAD recipients at risk for RVF. This systematic review analyzes the predictive value of preoperative PAPi to RVF in the setting of LVAD implantation. METHODS: Databases were searched for all studies reporting on PAPi and RVF after LVAD implantation. Data collected included: number of patients, patient characteristics, incidences of RVF, PAPi, central venous pressure (CVP), CVP/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure, tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion, and right ventricular stroke work index. RESULTS: Thirty-two studies (4,756 patients) were included in this review. The incidence of RVF was found to be 27.48% (1,307 patients). The weighted mean (standard deviation) of preoperative PAPi associated with RVF vs No RVF was 2.17 (2.36) and 2.87 (3.21), respectively. When comparing LVAD recipients with RVF and No RVF, patients who developed RVF had a significantly lower preoperative PAPi by a WMD (95% CI) of -0.74 [-1.00, -0.49] (p < .001). The remaining variables (CVP; CVP/pulmonary capillary wedge pressure; tricuspid annular plane systolic excursion; and right ventricular stroke work index) were also confirmed as predictors of RVF after LVAD implantation. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review demonstrates the utility of PAPi as a clinical predictor of RVF after LVAD implantation. Based on our findings, we recommend that PAPi be used in conjunction with traditional hemodynamic parameters when risk stratifying LVAD recipients for RVF.

Efficacy of perineural versus intravenous dexmedetomidine as a peripheral nerve block adjunct: a systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Dexmedetomidine is an effective local anesthetic adjunct for peripheral nerve blocks. The intravenous route for administering dexmedetomidine has been suggested to be equally effective to the perineural route; but comparative evidence is conflicting. OBJECTIVES: This evidence-based review evaluated trials comparing the effects of intravenous to perineural dexmedetomidine on peripheral nerve block characteristics in adult surgical patients. Our primary aim was to evaluate the durations of sensory and motor blockade. Duration of analgesia, onset times of sensory and motor blockade, analgesic consumption, rest pain, and dexmedetomidine-related adverse events were evaluated as secondary outcomes. EVIDENCE REVIEW: We sought randomized trials comparing the effects of intravenous to perineural dexmedetomidine on peripheral nerve block characteristics. The Cochrane Risk of Bias tool and the Grades of Recommendation, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation criteria was used to evaluate the quality of evidence for when an outcome was reported by at least three studies. RESULTS: Ten studies compared intravenous and perineural dexmedetomidine in the setting of upper extremity blocks (seven), lower extremity blocks (two), and truncal block (one). The doses of dexmedetomidine supplementing long-acting local anesthetics varied between a predetermined dose (50 µg) and a weight-based dose (0.5 µg/kg-1.0 µg/kg). Clinical diversity precluded quantitative pooling; and evidence is presented as a systematic review. Compared with the intravenous route, moderate quality evidence found that perineural dexmedetomidine prolonged the duration of sensory blockade in four of six trials and motor blockade in five of seven trials. Perineural dexmedetomidine also hastened the onset of sensory and motor blockade in three of six trials. No differences were reported for the remaining outcomes; and intravenous dexmedetomidine was not superior for any outcome in any of the trials. CONCLUSIONS: Moderate quality evidence appears to suggest that intravenous dexmedetomidine is an inferior peripheral nerve block adjunct compared with perineural dexmedetomidine. Perineural dexmedetomidine is associated with longer durations and faster onset of sensory and motor blockade.

New or Worsened Mitral Regurgitation After Surgical Aortic Valve Replacement: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: New or worsened mitral regurgitation (MR) is an uncommon yet serious complication after surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR). While there have been numerous reports of its occurrence, there is little consensus regarding its presentation and management. This systematic review summarizes the evidence in the current literature surrounding new or worsened MR after SAVR and analyzes its potential implications. METHODS: Databases were examined for all articles and abstracts reporting on new or worsened MR after SAVR. Data collected included number of patients studied; patient characteristics; incidences of new or worsened MR; timing of diagnosis; and treatment. RESULTS: Thirty-six full-text citations were included in this review. The prevalence of new or worsened MR after SAVR was 8.4%. Sixteen percent of new MR occurrences were from an organic etiology, and 83% of new MR occurrences were that of a functional etiology. Most diagnoses were made in the late or unspecified postoperative period using echocardiography (range: 0 minutes to 18 years postoperatively). While no patients died from this complication, 7.7% of patients (16 out of 207) required emergent procedural re-intervention. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review underscores the importance of identifying new or worsened MR following SAVR and accurate scoring of MR severity to guide treatment. It also outlines the associated clinical measures commonly documented following this complication, and the usefulness of transesophageal echocardiography for the detection of significant MR. These results reflect the current, limited state of the literature on this topic and warrant further investigation into MR detection and management strategies in SAVR patients.

Pectoralis-II Myofascial Block and Analgesia in Breast Cancer Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic paravertebral block is the preferred regional anesthetic technique for breast cancer surgery, but concerns over its invasiveness and risks have prompted search for alternatives. Pectoralis-II block is a promising analgesic technique and potential alternative to paravertebral block, but evidence of its absolute and relative effectiveness versus systemic analgesia (Control) and paravertebral block, respectively, is conflicting. This meta-analysis evaluates the analgesic effectiveness of Pectoralis-II versus Control and paravertebral block for breast cancer surgery. METHODS: Databases were searched for breast cancer surgery trials comparing Pectoralis-II with Control or paravertebral block. Postoperative oral morphine consumption and difference in area under curve for pooled rest pain scores more than 24 h were designated as coprimary outcomes. Opioid-related side effects, effects on long-term outcomes, such as chronic pain and opioid dependence, were also examined. Results were pooled using random-effects modeling. RESULTS: Fourteen randomized trials (887 patients) were analyzed. Compared with Control, Pectoralis-II provided clinically important reductions in 24-h morphine consumption (at least 30.0 mg), by a weighted mean difference [95% CI] of -30.5 mg [-42.2, -18.8] (P < 0.00001), and in rest pain area under the curve more than 24 h, by -4.7cm · h [-5.1, -4.2] or -1.2cm [-1.3, -1.1] per measurement. Compared with paravertebral block, Pectoralis-II was not statistically worse (not different) for 24-h morphine consumption, and not clinically worse for rest pain area under curve more than 24 h. No differences were observed in opioid-related side effects or any other outcomes. CONCLUSIONS: We found that Pectoralis-II reduces pain intensity and morphine consumption during the first 24 h postoperatively when compared with systemic analgesia alone; and it also offers analgesic benefits noninferior to those of paravertebral block after breast cancer surgery. Evidence supports incorporating Pectoralis-II into multimodal analgesia and also using it as a paravertebral block alternative in this population.

Pulmonary cuff dysfunction after lung transplant surgery: A systematic review of the evidence and analysis of its clinical implications.

BACKGROUND: Pulmonary cuff dysfunction, either due to pulmonary vein obstruction, pulmonary vein stenosis, or pulmonary vein thrombosis, is an uncommon, yet serious complication after lung transplantation. Although there have been numerous reports of its occurrence, there is little consensus regarding the hemodynamic parameters associated with its presentation and diagnostic considerations. This systematic review summarizes the evidence surrounding pulmonary cuff dysfunction after lung transplantation surgery and empirically analyzes its implications. METHODS: Databases were examined for all articles and abstracts reporting on pulmonary cuff dysfunction. Data collected included: number of patients studied; patients' characteristics; incidences of pulmonary vein stenosis and pulmonary vein thrombosis; and timing and imaging modality utilized for diagnosis. RESULTS: Thirty-four full-text citations were included in this review. The point prevalence of pulmonary vein stenosis and thrombosis were 1.4% and 2.5%, respectively. The peak pulmonary cuff velocity associated with dysfunction was found to be 1.59 ± 0.66 m/sec. The diameter of the dysfunctional pulmonary vein was noted to be 0.48 ± 0.20 cm. The majority of diagnoses were made in the early post-operative period using transesophageal echocardiography. Overall, 41.3% of patients (26 of 63) required emergent procedural reintervention, and 32% of patients (20 of 63) diagnosed with pulmonary cuff dysfunction died during their hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: This systematic review underscores the importance of identifying pulmonary cuff dysfunction after lung transplant surgery, and the usefulness of transesophageal echocardiography for detection of this complication. The clinical implications of these results warrant the further development of identification and management strategies for lung transplant patients.

Equivalent analgesic effectiveness between perineural and intravenous dexamethasone as adjuvants for peripheral nerve blockade: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

PURPOSE: Dexamethasone is commonly used as an adjuvant to local anesthetics for peripheral nerve blockade; however, uncertainty persists regarding its optimal route of administration and safety. A systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized-controlled trials (RCTs) was conducted to compare the incremental benefits of intravenous (IV) vs perineural (PN) dexamethasone when used as adjuvants for peripheral nerve blockade to improve analgesia. SOURCES: A search strategy was developed to identify eligible articles from the Cochrane and National Library of Medicine databases from inception until June 2017. The National Center for Biotechnology Information Medical Subject Headings browser thesaurus was used to identify search terms and combinations of keywords. Any clinical trial that randomly allocated adult patients (≥ 18 yr old) to receive either IV or PN dexamethasone for peripheral nerve blockade was considered for inclusion. PRINCIPAL FINDINGS: After full-text screening of potentially eligible articles, 14 RCTs were included in this review. Overall, the use of PN dexamethasone did not provide a significant incremental benefit to the duration of analgesia [ratio of means (ROM), 1.23; Hartung-Knapp-Sidik-Jonkman (HKSJ) 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.85 to 1.85; P = 0.23] or to motor block duration (ROM, 1.14; HKSJ 95% CI, 0.98 to 1.31; P = 0.07). Also, at 24-hr follow-up, there was no significant difference between the two groups regarding pain scores (standardized mean difference, 0.36; HKSJ 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.80; I2 = 75%; P = 0.09) and cumulative opioid consumption (mean difference, 5.23 mg; HKSJ 95% CI, -4.60 to 15.06; P = 0.15). Lastly, no long-term nerve-related complications were observed with the use of PN dexamethasone. CONCLUSIONS: The results of our meta-analysis suggest that PN and IV dexamethasone provide equivalent analgesic benefits and have similar safety profiles, when used as adjuvants, for peripheral nerve blockade.