A retrospective observational study of neuromuscular monitoring practice in 30,430 cases from six Danish hospitals.

Timely application of objective neuromuscular monitoring can avoid residual neuromuscular blockade. We assessed the frequency of objective neuromuscular monitoring with acceleromyography and the last recorded train-of-four ratio in a cohort of Danish patients. We extracted data from all patients receiving general anaesthesia from November 2014 to November 2016 at six hospitals in the Zealand Region of Denmark. Acceleromyography was available in all operating rooms and data were recorded automatically. The primary outcome measure was acceleromyography use in patients receiving neuromuscular blocking agents, divided into non-depolarising agents and succinylcholine only. The dataset included 76,743 cases, of which 30,430 received a neuromuscular blocking drug. Non-depolarising drugs were used in 16,525 (54%) and succinylcholine as the sole drug in 13,905 (46%) cases. Acceleromyography was used in 14,463 (88%) patients who received a non-depolarising neuromuscular blocking drug and in 4224 (30%) receiving succinylcholine alone. Acceleromyography use varied between the departments from 58% to 99% for non-depolarising drugs and from 3% to 79% for succinylcholine alone. The median (IQR [range]) of the last recorded train-of-four ratio before tracheal extubation was 0.97 (0.90-1.06 [0.01-2.20]) when non-depolarising drugs were used, and was less than 0.9 in 22% of cases. The OR for oxygen desaturation was higher with the use of succinylcholine [2.51 (95%CI 2.33-2.70) p < 0.001] and non-depolarising drugs [2.57 (95%CI 2.32-2.84) p < 0.001] as compared with cases where no neuromuscular blockade drug was used. In conclusion, acceleromyography was almost always used in cases where non-depolarising neuromuscular blocking drugs were used, but a train-of-four ratio of 0.9 was not always achieved. Monitoring was used in less than 30% of cases where succinylcholine was the sole drug used.

Supraglottic airway devices in difficult airway management: a retrospective cohort study of 658,104 general anaesthetics registered in the Danish Anaesthesia Database.

Indications for using supraglottic airway devices have widened over time and they now hold a prominent role in guidelines for difficult airway management. We aimed to describe the use of supraglottic airway devices in difficult airway management. We included adult patients undergoing general anaesthesia registered in the Danish Anaesthesia Database from 2008 to 2012 whose airway management had been recorded as difficult, defined as: ≥ 3 tracheal intubation attempts; failed tracheal intubation; or difficult facemask ventilation. In the Danish Anaesthesia Database, a separate difficult airway management module requires the technique used in each successive airway management attempt to be recorded. The primary aim of the study was to describe the use of supraglottic airway devices in cases of difficult airway management. Secondary aims were to examine success rates of supraglottic airway devices in difficult airway management cases, and specifically in the cases of 'cannot intubate, cannot facemask ventilate'. Difficult airway management occurred in 4898 (0.74% (95%CI 0.72-0.76%)) of 658,104 records of general anaesthesia. Supraglottic airway devices were used or use was attempted in 607 cases of difficult airway management (12.4% (95%CI 11.5-13.3%)), and were successful in 395 (65.1% (95%CI 61.2-68.8%)) cases. In 'cannot intubate, cannot facemask ventilate' situations, supraglottic airway devices were used in 86 (18.9% (95%CI 15.6-22.8%)) of 455 records and were successful in 54 (62.8% (95%CI 52.2-72.3%)) cases. We found that supraglottic airway devices are not widely used in the management of the difficult airway despite their prominent role in difficult airway management guidelines.

Validation of subjective rating scales for assessment of surgical workspace during laparoscopy.

BACKGROUND: Recently, studies have focused on how to optimize laparoscopic surgical workspace by changes in intra-abdominal pressure, level of muscle relaxation or body position, typically evaluated by surgeons using subjective rating scales. We aimed to validate two rating scales by having surgeons assess surgical workspace in video sequences recorded during laparoscopic surgery. METHOD: Video sequences were obtained from laparoscopic procedures. Eight experienced surgeons assessed the video sequences on a categorical 5-point scale and a numerical 10-point rating scale. Intraclass correlations coefficients (ICC) and 95% confidence intervals (CI) were calculated for intra- and inter-rater reliability. RESULTS: The 5-point rating scale had an intra-rater ICC of 0.76 (0.69; 0.83) and an inter-rater ICC of 0.57 (0.45; 0.68), corresponding to excellent and fair reliability, respectively. The 10-point scale had an intra-rater ICC of 0.86 (0.82; 0.89) and an inter-rater ICC of 0.54 (0.39; 0.68), corresponding to excellent and fair as well. All surgeons used the full range of the 5-point scale, but only one surgeon used the full range of the 10-point scale. CONCLUSION: In conclusion, both scales showed excellent intra-rater and fair inter-rater reliability for assessing surgical workspace in laparoscopy. The 5-point surgical rating scale had all categories employed by all surgeons.