Targeted temperature control following traumatic brain injury: ESICM/NACCS best practice consensus recommendations.

AIMS AND SCOPE: The aim of this panel was to develop consensus recommendations on targeted temperature control (TTC) in patients with severe traumatic brain injury (TBI) and in patients with moderate TBI who deteriorate and require admission to the intensive care unit for intracranial pressure (ICP) management. METHODS: A group of 18 international neuro-intensive care experts in the acute management of TBI participated in a modified Delphi process. An online anonymised survey based on a systematic literature review was completed ahead of the meeting, before the group convened to explore the level of consensus on TTC following TBI. Outputs from the meeting were combined into a further anonymous online survey round to finalise recommendations. Thresholds of ≥ 16 out of 18 panel members in agreement (≥ 88%) for strong consensus and ≥ 14 out of 18 (≥ 78%) for moderate consensus were prospectively set for all statements. RESULTS: Strong consensus was reached on TTC being essential for high-quality TBI care. It was recommended that temperature should be monitored continuously, and that fever should be promptly identified and managed in patients perceived to be at risk of secondary brain injury. Controlled normothermia (36.0-37.5 °C) was strongly recommended as a therapeutic option to be considered in tier 1 and 2 of the Seattle International Severe Traumatic Brain Injury Consensus Conference ICP management protocol. Temperature control targets should be individualised based on the perceived risk of secondary brain injury and fever aetiology. CONCLUSIONS: Based on a modified Delphi expert consensus process, this report aims to inform on best practices for TTC delivery for patients following TBI, and to highlight areas of need for further research to improve clinical guidelines in this setting.

Association of preoperative beta-blocker use and cardiac complications after major noncardiac surgery: a prospective cohort study.

INTRODUCTION: Cardiac complications after major noncardiac surgery are common and associated with high morbidity and mortality. How preoperative use of beta-blockers may impact perioperative cardiac complications remains unclear. METHODS: In a multicentre prospective cohort study, preoperative beta-blocker use was ascertained in consecutive patients at elevated cardiovascular risk undergoing major noncardiac surgery. Cardiac complications were prospectively monitored and centrally adjudicated by two independent experts. The primary endpoint was perioperative myocardial infarction or injury attributable to a cardiac cause (cardiac PMI) within the first three postoperative days. The secondary endpoints were major adverse cardiac events (MACE), defined as a composite of myocardial infarction, acute heart failure, life-threatening arrhythmia, and cardiovascular death and all-cause death after 365 days. We used inverse probability of treatment weighting to account for differences between patients receiving beta-blockers and those who did not. RESULTS: A total of 3839/10 272 (37.4%) patients (mean age 74 yr; 44.8% female) received beta-blockers before surgery. Patients on beta-blockers were older, and more likely to be male with established cardiorespiratory and chronic kidney disease. Cardiac PMI occurred in 1077 patients, with a weighted odds ratio of 1.03 (95% confidence interval [CI] 0.94-1.12, P=0.55) for patients on beta-blockers. Within 365 days of surgery, 971/10 272 (9.5%) MACE had occurred, with a weighted hazard ratio of 0.99 (95% CI 0.83-1.18, P=0.90) for patients on beta-blockers. CONCLUSION: Preoperative use of beta-blockers was not associated with decreased cardiac complications including cardiac perioperative myocardial infarction or injury and major adverse cardiac event. Additionally, preoperative use of beta-blockers was not associated with increased all-cause death within 30 and 365 days. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02573532.

How to avoid intraoperative complications of active paragangliomas?

Background: Paragangliomas (PGs) are very rare neuroendocrine tumors that can be found in unusual locations such as the spinal canal. Some PGs may be endocrinologically active, containing neurotransmitters such as noradrenaline, adrenaline, and serotonin. This can lead to unexpected neurotransmitter release during the removal of PGs, leading to a hypertensive crisis. Case Description: We present two patients who underwent surgical removal of a secretory filum terminale PG. Conclusion: If laboratory tests are suggestive of a secretory tumor, surgery should include anesthesiologic preparation similar to cases of pheochromocytoma.

Guideline adherence to statin therapy and association with short-term and long-term cardiac complications following noncardiac surgery: A cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Peri-operative complications are common and associated with high morbidity and mortality. Optimising the use of statins might be of important benefit in peri-operative care and reduce morbidity and mortality. OBJECTIVE: To evaluate adherence to current guideline recommendations regarding statin therapy and its association with peri-operative and long-term cardiac complications. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: Multicentre study with enrolment from October 2014 to February 2018. PATIENTS: Eight thousand one hundred and sixteen high-risk inpatients undergoing major noncardiac surgery who were eligible for the institutional peri-operative myocardial injury/infarction (PMI) active surveillance and response program. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Class I indications for statin therapy were derived from the current ESC Clinical Practice Guidelines during the time of enrolment. PMI was prospectively defined as an absolute increase in cTn concentration of the 99th percentile in healthy individuals above the preoperative concentration within the first three postoperative days. Long-term cardiac complications included cardiovascular death and spontaneous myocardial infarction (MI) within 120 days. RESULTS: The mean age was 73.7 years; 45.2% were women. Four thousand two hundred and twenty-seven of 8116 patients (52.1%) had a class I indication for statin therapy. Of these, 2440 of 4227 patients (57.7%) were on statins preoperatively. Adherence to statins was lower in women than in men (46.9 versus 63.9%, P  < 0.001). PMI due to type 1 myocardial infarction/injury (T1MI; n  = 42), or likely type 2 MI (lT2MI; n  = 466) occurred in 508 of 4170 (12.2%) patients. The weighted odds ratio in patients on statin therapy was 1.15 [95% confidence interval (CI) 1.01 to 1.31, P  = 0.036]. During the 120-day follow-up, 192 patients (4.6%) suffered cardiovascular death and spontaneous MI. After multivariable adjustment, preoperative use of statins was associated with reduced risk; weighted hazard ratio 0.59 (95% CI 0.41 to 0.86, P  = 0.006). CONCLUSION: Adherence to guideline-recommended statin therapy was suboptimal, particularly in women. Statin use was associated with an increased risk of PMI due to T1MI and lT2MI but reduced risk of cardiovascular death and spontaneous MI within 120 days. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Clinicaltrials.gov identifier NCT02573532.

Patient blood management programmes: keeping the ball rolling.

Patient blood management programmes have been endorsed by the World Health Organization and multiple medical societies. It seems important to review the progress and results of patient blood management programmes so necessary modifications or new initiatives can be added to achieve their major goals. In this issue of the British Journal of Anaesthesia, Meybohm and colleagues show that a nationwide patient blood management programme had an impact and was potentially cost-effective in centres that previously utilised large amounts of allogeneic blood transfusions. Before implementing a programme, each institution might need to identify the area(s) of deficiency with respect to established patient blood management methods, which will warrant specific focus in subsequent clinical practice reviews.

Discrepancy in Reporting of Perioperative Complications: A Retrospective Observational Study.

OBJECTIVE: To assess the discrepancy between perioperative complications, prospectively recorded during a cohort study versus retrospectively from health records. BACKGROUND: Perioperative adverse events are relevant for patient outcome, but incomplete reporting is common. METHODS: Two physicians independently recorded all intraoperative adverse events according to ClassIntra and all postoperative complications according to the Clavien-Dindo classification based on all available health records. These retrospective assessments were compared with the number and severity of those prospectively assessed in the same patients during their inclusion in 1 center of a prospective multicenter cohort study. RESULTS: Interrater agreement between both physicians for retrospective recording was high [intraclass correlation coefficient: 0.89 (95% CI, 0.86, 0.91) for intraoperative and 0.88 (95% CI, 0.85, 0.90) for postoperative complications]. In 320 patients, the incidence rate was higher retrospectively than prospectively for any intraoperative complication (incidence rate ratio: 1.79; 95% CI, 1.50, 2.13) and for any postoperative complication (incidence rate ratio: 2.21; 95% CI, 1.90, 2.56). In 71 patients, the severity of the most severe intraoperative complication was higher in the retrospective than in the prospective data collection, whereas in 69 the grading was lower. In 106 patients, the severity of the most severe postoperative complication was higher in the retrospective than in the prospective data collection, whereas in 19 the grading was lower. CONCLUSIONS: There is a noticeable discrepancy in the number and severity of reported perioperative complications between these 2 data collection methods. On the basis of the double-blinded assessment of 2 independent raters, our study renders prospective underreporting more likely than retrospective overreporting.

Long-term outcomes of perioperative myocardial infarction/injury after non-cardiac surgery.

AIMS: Perioperative myocardial infarction/injury (PMI) following non-cardiac surgery is a frequent cardiac complication. Better understanding of the underlying aetiologies and outcomes is urgently needed. METHODS AND RESULTS: Aetiologies of PMIs detected within an active surveillance and response programme were centrally adjudicated by two independent physicians based on all information obtained during clinically indicated PMI work-up including cardiac imaging among consecutive high-risk patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery in a prospective multicentre study. PMI aetiologies were hierarchically classified into 'extra-cardiac' if caused by a primarily extra-cardiac disease such as severe sepsis or pulmonary embolism; and 'cardiac', further subtyped into type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI), tachyarrhythmia, acute heart failure (AHF), or likely type 2 myocardial infarction (lT2MI). Major adverse cardiac events (MACEs) including acute myocardial infarction, AHF (both only from day 3 to avoid inclusion bias), life-threatening arrhythmia, and cardiovascular death as well as all-cause death were assessed during 1-year follow-up. Among 7754 patients (age 45-98 years, 45% women), PMI occurred in 1016 (13.1%). At least one MACE occurred in 684/7754 patients (8.8%) and 818/7754 patients died (10.5%) within 1 year. Outcomes differed starkly according to aetiology: in patients with extra-cardiac PMI, T1MI, tachyarrhythmia, AHF, and lT2MI 51%, 41%, 57%, 64%, and 25% had MACE, and 38%, 27%, 40%, 49%, and 17% patients died within 1 year, respectively, compared to 7% and 9% in patients without PMI. These associations persisted in multivariable analysis. CONCLUSION: At 1 year, most PMI aetiologies have unacceptably high rates of MACE and all-cause death, highlighting the urgent need for more intensive treatments. STUDY REGISTRATION: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02573532.

Acute heart failure after non-cardiac surgery: incidence, phenotypes, determinants and outcomes.

AIMS: Primary acute heart failure (AHF) is a common cause of hospitalization. AHF may also develop postoperatively (pAHF). The aim of this study was to assess the incidence, phenotypes, determinants and outcomes of pAHF following non-cardiac surgery. METHODS AND RESULTS: A total of 9164 consecutive high-risk patients undergoing 11 262 non-cardiac inpatient surgeries were prospectively included. The incidence, phenotypes, determinants and outcome of pAHF, centrally adjudicated by independent cardiologists, were determined. The incidence of pAHF was 2.5% (95% confidence interval [CI] 2.2-2.8%); 51% of pAHF occurred in patients without known heart failure (de novo pAHF), and 49% in patients with chronic heart failure. Among patients with chronic heart failure, 10% developed pAHF, and among patients without a history of heart failure, 1.5% developed pAHF. Chronic heart failure, diabetes, urgent/emergent surgery, atrial fibrillation, cardiac troponin elevations above the 99th percentile, chronic obstructive pulmonary disease, anaemia, peripheral artery disease, coronary artery disease, and age, were independent predictors of pAHF in the logistic regression model. Patients with pAHF had significantly higher all-cause mortality (44% vs. 11%, p < 0.001) and AHF readmission (15% vs. 2%, p < 0.001) within 1 year than patients without pAHF. After Cox regression analysis, pAHF was an independent predictor of all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 1.7 [95% CI 1.3-2.2]; p < 0.001) and AHF readmission (aHR 2.3 [95% CI 1.5-3.7]; p < 0.001). Findings were confirmed in an external validation cohort using a prospective multicentre cohort of 1250 patients (incidence of pAHF 2.4% [95% CI 1.6-3.3%]). CONCLUSIONS: Postoperative AHF frequently developed following non-cardiac surgery, being de novo in half of cases, and associated with a very high mortality.

Independent External Validation of a Preoperative Prediction Model for Delirium After Cardiac Surgery: A Prospective Observational Cohort Study.

OBJECTIVE: This investigation provided independent external validation of an existing preoperative risk prediction model. DESIGN: A prospective observational cohort study of patients undergoing cardiac surgery covering the period between April 16, 2018 and January 18, 2022. SETTING: Two academic hospitals in Switzerland. PARTICIPANTS: Adult patients (≥60 years of age) who underwent elective cardiac surgery, including coronary artery bypass graft, mitral or aortic valve replacement or repair, and combined procedures. INTERVENTIONS: None. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: The primary outcome measure was the incidence of postoperative delirium (POD) in the intensive or intermediate care unit, diagnosed using the Intensive Care Delirium Screening Checklist. The prediction model contained 4 preoperative risk factors to which the following points were assigned: Mini-Mental State Examination (MMSE) score ≤23 received 2 points; MMSE 24-27, Geriatric Depression Scale (GDS) >4, prior stroke and/or transient ischemic attack (TIA), and abnormal serum albumin (≤3.5 or ≥4.5 g/dL) received 1 point each. The missing data were handled using multiple imputation. In total, 348 patients were included in the study. Sixty patients (17.4%) developed POD. For point levels in the prediction model of 0, 1, 2, and ≥3, the cumulative incidence of POD was 12.6%, 22.8%, 25.8%, and 35%, respectively. The validation resulted in a pooled area under the receiver operating characteristics curve of 0.60 (median CI, 0.525-0.679). CONCLUSIONS: The evaluated predictive model for delirium after cardiac surgery in this patient cohort showed only poor discriminative capacity but fair calibration.

Conversion between the Montreal Cognitive Assessment and the Mini-Mental Status Examination.

BACKGROUND: Early and accurate detection of cognitive changes using simple tools is essential for an appropriate referral to a more detailed neurocognitive assessment and for the implementation of therapeutic strategies. The Mini-Mental Status Examination (MMSE) and the Montreal Cognitive Assessment (MoCA) are two commonly used psychometric tests for cognitive screening. Both tests have different strengths and weaknesses. Preferences regarding test selection may therefore differ among clinicians. The aim of this retrospective observational cohort study was to define corresponding scores for the MMSE and the MoCA. METHODS: We examined the relationship between the cognitive screening tests in 803 German-speaking Memory Clinic outpatients, encompassing a wide range of neurocognitive disorders. We produced a conversion table using the equipercentile equating method with log-linear smoothing. In addition, we conducted a systematic review of existing MMSE-MoCA conversions to create a table allowing for the conversion of MoCA scores into MMSE scores and vice versa using the weighted mean method. RESULTS: The Memory Clinic sample showed that the prediction of MMSE to MoCA was overall less accurate compared to the conversion from MoCA to MMSE. The 19 studies included after thorough literature search showed that MoCA scores were consistently lower than MMSE scores. Eleven of 19 conversion studies had addressed the conversion of the MoCA to the MMSE, while two studies converted MMSE to MoCA scores. Another six studies applied bi-directional conversions. We provide an easy-to-use table covering the entire range of scores and taking into account all currently existing conversion formulas. CONCLUSION: The comprehensive MMSE-MoCA conversion table enables a direct comparison of cognitive test scores at screening examinations and over the course of disease in patients with neurocognitive disorders.

Comparing propofol anaesthesia guided by Bispectral Index monitoring and frontal EEG wave analysis with standard monitoring in laparoscopic surgery: protocol for the 'EEG in General Anaesthesia - More Than Only a Bispectral Index' Trial, a multicentre, double-blind, randomised controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The use of Bispectral Index (BIS) monitors for assessing depth of sedation has led to a reduction in both the incidence of awareness and anaesthetic consumption in total intravenous anaesthesia. However, these monitors are vulnerable to artefacts. In addition to the processed number, the raw frontal electroencephalogram (EEG) can be displayed as a curve on the same monitor. Anaesthesia practitioners can learn to interpret the EEG in a short tutorial and may be quicker and more accurate thanBIS in assessing anaesthesia depth by recognising EEG patterns. We hypothesise that quality of recovery (QoR) in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery is better, if propofol is titrated by anaesthesia practitioners able to interpret the EEG. METHODS AND ANALYSIS: This is a multicentre, double-blind (patients and outcome assessors) randomised controlled trial taking place in four Swiss hospitals. Patients aged 18 years or older undergoing laparoscopic procedures with general anaesthesia using propofol and anaesthesia practitioners with more than 2 years experience will be eligible. The primary study outcome is the difference in QoR 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes are propofol consumption, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postoperative delirium.QoR and propofol consumption are compared between both groups using a two-sample t-test. Fisher's exact test is used to compare the incidences of PONV and delirium. A total of 200 anaesthesia practitioners (and 200 patients) are required to have an 80% chance of detecting the minimum relevant difference for the QoR-15 as significant at the 5% level assuming a SD of 20. ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION: Ethical approval has been obtained from all responsible ethics committees (lead committee: Ethikkommission Nordwest- und Zentralschweiz, 16 January 2021). The findings of the trial will be published in a peer-reviewed journal, presented at international conferences, and may lead to a change in titrating propofol in clinical practice. TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER: www. CLINICALTRIALS: gov:NCT04105660.

Number of comorbidities and their impact on perioperative outcome and costs - a single centre cohort study.

AIMS OF THE STUDY: Multimorbidity is a growing global health problem, resulting in an increased perioperative risk for surgical patients. Data on both the prevalence of multimorbidity and its impact on perioperative outcome are limited. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification uses only the single most severe systemic disease to define the ASA class and ignores multimorbidity. This study aimed to assess the number and type of all anaesthesia-relevant comorbidities and to analyse their impact on outcome and hospital costs. METHODS: This cohort study is nested in the ClassIntra® validation study and includes only patients enrolled at the University Hospital of Basel. Approximately 30 patients per surgical discipline undergoing any type of in-hospital surgery were followed up until hospital discharge to record all intra- and postoperative adverse events. In addition, the type and severity of all perioperatively relevant comorbidities were extracted from the electronic medical record according to a predefined list. The primary endpoint was the number of all anaesthesia-relevant comorbidities by ASA class. Using structural equation models, the direct and indirect effects of comorbidities on costs were estimated after adjustment for the ASA class and further relevant confounders and mediators. RESULTS: Of 320 enrolled patients, 27 were ASA I (8%), 150 ASA II (47%), 116 ASA III (36%) and 27 ASA IV (8%). The median number of comorbidities per patient was 5 (range 0-18), this number significantly increasing with higher ASA class: 1 comorbidity (95% CI 0.0-2.0) in ASA I, 4 comorbidities (3.8-4.2) in ASA II, 9 (8.1-9.9) in ASA III and 12 (10-14) in ASA IV patients. Independent of ASA class, each additional comorbidity increased hospital costs by EUR 1,198 (95% CI 288-2108) with almost identical proportions of direct and indirect effects. The number of anaesthesia-relevant comorbidities also increased postoperative complications and postoperative length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: Multimorbidity in perioperative patients is highly prevalent and has a relevant impact on hospital costs, independent of the ASA class. Incorporating multimorbidity into the ASA classification might be warranted to improve its predictive ability and support adequate reimbursement.

Cardiovascular imaging following perioperative myocardial infarction/injury.

Patients developing perioperative myocardial infarction/injury (PMI) have a high mortality. PMI work-up and therapy remain poorly defined. This prospective multicenter study included high-risk patients undergoing major non-cardiac surgery within a systematic PMI screening and clinical response program. The frequency of cardiovascular imaging during PMI work-up and its yield for possible type 1 myocardial infarction (T1MI) was assessed. Automated PMI detection triggered evaluation by the treating physician/cardiologist, who determined selection/timing of cardiovascular imaging. T1M1 was considered with the presence of a new wall motion abnormality within 30 days in transthoracic echocardiography (TTE), a new scar or ischemia within 90 days in myocardial perfusion imaging (MPI), and Ambrose-Type II or complex lesions within 7 days of PMI in coronary angiography (CA). In patients with PMI, 21% (268/1269) underwent at least one cardiac imaging modality. TTE was used in 13% (163/1269), MPI in 3% (37/1269), and CA in 5% (68/1269). Cardiology consultation was associated with higher use of cardiovascular imaging (27% versus 13%). Signs indicative of T1MI were found in 8% of TTE, 46% of MPI, and 63% of CA. Most patients with PMI did not undergo any cardiovascular imaging within their PMI work-up. If performed, MPI and CA showed high yield for signs indicative of T1MI.Trial registration: https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT02573532 .

Patient- and procedure-related factors in the pathophysiology of perioperative myocardial infarction/injury.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative myocardial infarction/injury (PMI) is a frequent, often missed and incompletely understood complication of noncardiac surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate whether patient- or procedure-related factors are more strongly associated to the development of PMI in patients undergoing repeated noncardiac surgery. METHODS: In this prospective observational study, patient- and procedure-related factors were evaluated for contribution to PMI using: 1) logistic regression modelling with PMI as primary endpoint, 2) evaluation of concordance of PMI occurrence in the first and the second noncardiac surgery (surgery 1 and 2). and 3) the correlation of the extent of cardiomyocyte injury quantified by high-sensitivity cardiac troponin T between surgery 1 and 2. The secondary endpoint was all-cause mortality associated with PMI reoccurrence in surgery 2. RESULTS: Among 784 patients undergoing repeated noncardiac surgery (in total 1'923 surgical procedures), 116 patients (14.8%) experienced PMI during surgery 1. Among these, PMI occurred again in surgery 2 in 35/116 (30.2%) patients. However, the vast majority of patients developing PMI during surgery 2 (96/131, 73.3%) had not developed PMI during surgery 1 (phi-coefficient 0.150, p < 0.001). The correlation between the extent of cardiomyocyte injury occurring during surgery 1 and 2 was 0.153. All-cause mortality following a second PMI in surgery 2 was dependent on time since surgery (adjusted hazard ratio 5.6 within 30 days and 2.4 within 360 days). CONCLUSIONS: In high-risk patients, procedural factors are more strongly associated with occurrence of PMI than patient factors, but patient factors are also contributors to the occurrence of PMI.

Adherence to the European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Anaesthesiology recommendations on preoperative cardiac testing and association with positive results and cardiac events: a cohort study.

BACKGROUND: European Society of Cardiology/European Society of Anaesthesiology (ESC/ESA) guidelines inform cardiac workup before noncardiac surgery based on an algorithm. Our primary hypotheses were that there would be associations between (i) the groups stratified according to the algorithms and major adverse cardiac events (MACE), and (ii) over- and underuse of cardiac testing and MACE. METHODS: This is a secondary analysis of a multicentre prospective cohort. Major adverse cardiac events were a composite of cardiac death, myocardial infarction, acute heart failure, and life-threatening arrhythmia at 30 days. For each cardiac test, pathological findings were defined a priori. We used multivariable logistic regression to measure associations. RESULTS: We registered 359 MACE at 30 days amongst 6976 patients; classification in a higher-risk group using the ESC/ESA algorithm was associated with 30-day MACE; however, discrimination of the ESC/ESA algorithms for 30-day MACE was modest; area under the curve 0.64 (95% confidence interval: 0.61-0.67). After adjustment for sex, age, and ASA physical status, discrimination was 0.72 (0.70-0.75). Overuse or underuse of cardiac tests were not consistently associated with MACE. There was no independent association between test recommendation class and pathological findings (P=0.14 for stress imaging; P=0.35 for transthoracic echocardiography; P=0.52 for coronary angiography). CONCLUSIONS: Discrimination for MACE using the ESC/ESA guidelines algorithms was limited. Overuse or underuse of cardiac tests was not consistently associated with cardiovascular events. The recommendation class of preoperative cardiac tests did not influence their yield. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT02573532.

[Prospective Cohort Study of In-Hospital Patients Undergoing Ophthalmic Surgery for the Validation of ClassIntra: Classification of Intraoperative Adverse Events]. / Prospektive Kohortenstudie bei stationären augenchirurgischen Patienten für die Validierung der ClassIntra-Klassifikation für unerwünschte intraoperative Ereignisse.

BACKGROUND: To the best of our knowledge, there is no validated classification to assess intraoperative adverse events (iAEs) in ophthalmic surgery. ClassIntra is a newly developed classification for surgery- and anaesthesia-related iAEs that has been recently validated in various surgical disciplines, but not in ophthalmic surgery. We aim to assess the validity and practicability of ClassIntra in patients undergoing ophthalmic surgery. METHODS: A consecutive sample of in-hospital patients undergoing any type of ophthalmic surgery was included in this single-centre prospective cohort study. iAEs were classified using ClassIntra, consisting of 5 severity grades according to the symptoms of the patient and the required treatment. All patients were followed for two weeks to record all postoperative adverse events according to Clavien-Dindo. The primary endpoint was the risk-adjusted association between the most severe iAE and the weighted sum of all postoperative adverse events within the two-week follow-up using the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). In addition, ophthalmologists and anaesthesiologists were asked to complete an online survey assessing the severity of iAEs for 10 fictitious clinical case scenarios. Reliability was assessed by comparing the clinicians' ratings to the prespecified benchmark rating of the study team. RESULTS: In this study, 100 in-hospital patients with an average age of 64 years (SD 15) were included. The majority of all patients were ASA II (n = 53, 53%) or III (n = 42, 42%). Thirty-two iAEs were recorded in 22 patients (17 grade I, 12 grade II, 3 grade III). Ninety-four postoperative adverse events occurred in 50 patients (44 grade I, 36 grade II, 14 grade IIIa). We found a mean difference in CCI of 2,1 (95% confidence interval [CI] - 2,5 to 6,8) per one unit increase in severity grades of ClassIntra. Fifty ophthalmologists and anaesthesiologists completed the online survey (response rate 54%). The intraclass correlation coefficient was 0,79 (95% CI 0,64 to 0,94). CONCLUSIONS: The application of ClassIntra during daily routine in ophthalmic surgery showed the usefulness and practicability of this classification for the standardised assessment of intraoperative adverse events. Although construct validity could not be demonstrated, the good reliability in the survey's rating underlines the criterion validity of this newly developed classification in ophthalmic surgery.

Incidence and outcomes of perioperative myocardial infarction/injury diagnosed by high-sensitivity cardiac troponin I.

BACKGROUND:  Perioperative myocardial infarction/injury (PMI) diagnosed by high-sensitivity troponin (hs-cTn) T is frequent and a prognostically important complication of non-cardiac surgery. We aimed to evaluate the incidence and outcome of PMI diagnosed using hs-cTnI, and compare it to PMI diagnosed using hs-cTnT. METHODS: We prospectively included 2455 patients at high cardiovascular risk undergoing 3111 non-cardiac surgeries, for whom hs-cTnI and hs-cTnT concentrations were measured before surgery and on postoperative days 1 and 2. PMI was defined as a composite of perioperative myocardial infarction (PMIInfarct) and perioperative myocardial injury (PMIInjury), according to the Fourth Universal Definition of Myocardial Infarction. All-cause mortality was the primary endpoint. RESULTS: Using hs-cTnI, the incidence of overall PMI was 9% (95% confidence interval [CI] 8-10%), including PMIInfarct 2.6% (95% CI 2.0-3.2) and PMIInjury 6.1% (95% CI 5.3-6.9%), which was lower versus using hs-cTnT: overall PMI 15% (95% CI 14-16%), PMIInfarct 3.7% (95% CI 3.0-4.4) and PMIInjury 11.3% (95% CI 10.2-12.4%). All-cause mortality occurred in 52 (2%) patients within 30 days and 217 (9%) within 1 year. Using hs-cTnI, both PMIInfarct and PMIInjury were independent predictors of 30-day all-cause mortality (adjusted hazard ratio [aHR] 2.5 [95% CI 1.1-6.0], and aHR 2.8 [95% CI 1.4-5.5], respectively) and, 1-year all-cause mortality (aHR 2.0 [95% CI 1.2-3.3], and aHR 1.8 [95% CI 1.2-2.7], respectively). Overall, the prognostic impact of PMI diagnosed by hs-cTnI was comparable to the prognostic impact of PMI using hs-cTnT. CONCLUSIONS: Using hs-cTnI, PMI is less common versus using hs-cTnT. Using hs-cTnI, both PMIInfarct and PMIInjury remain independent predictors of 30-day and 1-year mortality.

Association between self-reported functional capacity and major adverse cardiac events in patients at elevated risk undergoing noncardiac surgery: a prospective diagnostic cohort study.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative cardiovascular guidelines endorse functional capacity estimation, based on 'cut-off' daily activities for risk assessment and climbing two flights of stairs to approximate 4 metabolic equivalents. We assessed the association between self-reported functional capacity and postoperative cardiac events. METHODS: Consecutive patients at elevated cardiovascular risk undergoing in-patient noncardiac surgery were included in this predefined secondary analysis. Self-reported ability to walk up two flights of stairs was extracted from electronic charts. The primary endpoint was a composite of cardiac death and cardiac events at 30 days. Secondary endpoints included the same composite at 1 yr, all-cause mortality, and myocardial injury. RESULTS: Among the 4560 patients, mean (standard deviation) age 73 (SD 8 yr) yr, classified as American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status ≥3 in 61% (n=2786/4560), the 30-day and 1-yr incidences of major adverse cardiac events were 5.7% (258/4560) and 11.2% (509/4560), respectively. Functional capacity less than two flights of stairs was associated with the 30-day composite endpoint (adjusted hazard ratio 1.63, 95% confidence interval [CI] 1.23-2.15) and all other endpoints. The addition of functional capacity information to the revised cardiac risk index (RCRI) significantly improved risk classification (functional capacity plus RCRI vs RCRI: net reclassification improvement [NRI]Events 6.2 [95% CI 3.6-9.9], NRINonevents19.2 [95% CI 18.1-20.0]). CONCLUSIONS: In patients at high cardiovascular risk undergoing noncardiac surgery, self-reported functional capacity less than two flights of stairs was independently associated with major adverse cardiac events and all-cause mortality at 30 days and 1 yr. The addition of self-reported functional capacity to surgical and clinical risk improved risk classification. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: INCT 02573532.