CPET and cardioesophagectomy: A single centre 10-year experience.

INTRODUCTION: CPET is a routine investigation prior to cardioesophagectomy. Over a 10-year period 200 patients had CPET before elective cardioesophagectomy. We examine the relationship between CPET and outcomes in these patients. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Complication data were prospectively collected using the Clavien-Dindo system. Logistic regression analysis was used to determine whether 90-day mortality and morbidity were significantly different between fitter and less fit patients. RESULTS: 90-day mortality was 5.5%. In univariate analysis the following factors were associated with a significantly increased risk of death at 90 days: anaerobic threshold <11 ml kg-1 min-1 OR (95% CI) = 4.38 (1.23,15.6), p = 0.023; V̇O2 peak <15 ml kg-1 min-1 O2 OR (95% CI) = 5.0 (1.42,15.55), p = 0.012; V̇E/V̇CO2 > 34 OR (95% CI) = 4.07 (1.19,14.0), p = 0.026; diabetes mellitus OR (95% CI) = 5.76 (1.55,21.35) p = 0.009. In multivariate logistic regression analysis both diabetes (OR = 5.76 [1.55,21.4] p = 0.009) and presence of ≥ 1 subthreshold CPET value (OR = 6.72 [1.32,29.8] p = 0.021) were significantly associated with increased risk of death at 90 days. Median (95% CI) survival for patients who had a CPET with 'normal' parameters was 1176 (565, 1787) days, compared with 642 (336, 948) days for patients with ≥ one subthreshold parameter. 15.5% of patients had ECG ischaemia; there were no deaths in this group. CONCLUSION: Presence of at least one sub-threshold CPET value at pre-operative testing is associated with increased risk of 90-day mortality and shorter long term survival. These results allow us to better define risks during shared decision-making with patients.

Outpatient-based physical rehabilitation for survivors of prolonged critical illness: A randomized controlled trial.

INTRODUCTION: The physical and psychological impact of critical illness is well documented. Recovery may take many months and is often incomplete. The optimal way of addressing these important sequelae following hospital discharge remains unclear. METHODS: Single center, randomized controlled trial in patients invasively ventilated for ≥5 days. The treatment group (TG) underwent a 7-week, outpatient-based exercise and education program, with the control group (CG) receiving no intervention during the study period. Primary outcome measures were changes in functional capacity assessed using the cardiopulmonary exercise testing parameters, peak VO2, and anaerobic threshold (AT). Secondary outcome measures were changes in and health-related quality of life assessed using the Short Form 36 version 2 questionnaire. Assessors remained blinded to group allocation. RESULTS: Sixty-three patients completed the study (target n = 90). Improvements in both peak VO2 and AT were seen in both TG and CG but no significant difference between groups was evident. AT improved by 11.7% in CG (baseline 10.3 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1), follow-up 11.5 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1)), and by 14.6% in TG (baseline 10.3 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1), follow-up 11.8 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1); ANCOVA p = 0.74). Peak VO2 improved by 14.0% in CG (baseline 13.6 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1), follow-up 15.5 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1)), and by 18.8% in TG (baseline 13.8 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1), follow-up 16.4 ml O2 kg(-1) min(-1); ANCOVA p = 0.68). Significant improvements were seen in both groups for physical component summary scores (PCS) (TG 39.6 versus 31.0; CG 36.1 versus 32.6) and mental component summary scores (MCS) (TG 48.6 versus 38.4; CG 41.3 versus 37.0). The degree of improvement was significantly higher in the treatment group in comparison to control subjects (PCS p = 0.048; MCS p = 0.017). This improvement was most marked in the subgroup ventilated for >14 days. CONCLUSIONS: A 7-week, outpatient-based exercise and education program resulted in improved health-related quality of life scores but not improved exercise capacity.

Exercise testing in survivors of intensive care--is there a role for cardiopulmonary exercise testing?

PURPOSE: The aims of this study were to assess the feasibility of cardiopulmonary exercise testing (CPET) for the early assessment of cardiorespiratory fitness in general adult intensive care unit (ICU) survivors and to characterize the pathophysiology of exercise limitation in this population. METHODS: Fifty general ICU survivors (ventilated for ≥ 5 days) performed a maximal cycle ergometer CPET within 6 weeks of hospital discharge. Health-related quality of life was measured by the Medical Outcome Study Short Form 36 version 2.0 questionnaire. RESULTS: Fifty patients (median age, 57 years; median Acute Physiology And Chronic Health Evaluation II score, 16) completed a CPET 24 ± 14 days after hospital discharge with no adverse events. Significant exercise limitation was present with peak Vo(2) 56% ± 16% predicted and anaerobic threshold (AT) 41% ± 13% of peak predicted Vo(2). Prospectively stratified subgroup comparison showed that patients ventilated for 14 days or more had a significantly lower AT and peak Vo(2) than those ventilated for 5 to 14 days (AT: 9.6 vs 11.7 mL/kg per minute O(2), P = .009; peak Vo(2): 12.9 vs 15.3 mL/kg per minute O(2), P = .022). At peak exercise, heart rate reserve was 25% ± 14%, breathing reserve was 47% ± 19%, and the respiratory exchange ratio was 0.96 ± 0.11. Ventilatory equivalents for CO(2) (Eqco(2)) were 39 ± 9. CONCLUSIONS: Significant exercise limitation is evident in patients who have had critical illness. Etiology of exercise limitation appears multifactorial, with general deconditioning and muscle weakness as major contributory factors. Early CPET appears a practical method of assessing exercise capacity in ICU survivors. Cardiopulmonary exercise testing could be used to select patients who may benefit most from a targeted physical rehabilitation program, aid in exercise prescription, and help assess the response to intervention.

Emerging trends in minimally invasive haemodynamic monitoring and optimization of fluid therapy.

BACKGROUND: For decades the pulmonary artery catheter has been the mainstay of cardiac output monitoring in critically ill patients, and pressure-based indices of ventricular filling have been used to gauge fluid requirements with acknowledged limitations. In recent years, alternative technologies have become available which are minimally invasive, allow beat-to-beat cardiac output monitoring and permit assessment of fluid requirements by volumetric means and by allowing assessment of heart-lung interaction in mechanically ventilated patients. METHODS: A qualitative review of the basic science behind the transpulmonary dilution technique used in the measurement of cardiac output, global end-diastolic volume and extravascular lung water; the basic science and validation of pulse contour analysis methods of real-time cardiac output monitoring; the application and limitations of these technologies to guide rational fluid therapy in surgical and critically ill patients. RESULTS: Transpulmonary dilution techniques correlate well with pulmonary artery catheter-derived measurement of cardiac output. Volumetric measures of preload appear to be superior to central venous and pulmonary artery occlusion pressures. Dynamic indices of preload responsiveness such as stroke volume variation are more useful than static measures in mechanically ventilated patients. CONCLUSION: In fully mechanically ventilated patients, dynamic measurements of heart-lung interaction such as stroke volume variation are superior to static measures of preload in assessing whether a patient is volume-responsive (i.e. will increase stroke volume in response to a fluid challenge). For patients who are not fully mechanically ventilated, pulse contour analysis allows real-time assessment of increases in cardiac output in response to passive leg-raising.

Tips for the final FRCA examination.

The final Fellowship of the Royal College of Anaesthetists is a demanding written and oral examination requiring 6 months of dedicated preparation. The syllabus is large, and few candidates can hope to learn everything. The key to success is to practice as many written and viva questions as possible, focusing revision on areas of weakness identified in the process.