Logistic early warning scores to predict death, cardiac arrest or unplanned intensive care unit re-admission after cardiac surgery.

NHS England recently mandated that the National Early Warning Score of vital signs be used in all acute hospital trusts in the UK despite limited validation in the postoperative setting. We undertook a multicentre UK study of 13,631 patients discharged from intensive care after risk-stratified cardiac surgery in four centres, all of which used VitalPACTM to electronically collect postoperative National Early Warning Score vital signs. We analysed 540,127 sets of vital signs to generate a logistic score, the discrimination of which we compared with the national additive score for the composite outcome of: in-hospital death; cardiac arrest; or unplanned intensive care admission. There were 578 patients (4.2%) with an outcome that followed 4300 sets of observations (0.8%) in the preceding 24 h: 499 out of 578 (86%) patients had unplanned re-admissions to intensive care. Discrimination by the logistic score was significantly better than the additive score. Respective areas (95%CI) under the receiver-operating characteristic curve with 24-h and 6-h vital signs were: 0.779 (0.771-0.786) vs. 0.754 (0.746-0.761), p < 0.001; and 0.841 (0.829-0.853) vs. 0.813 (0.800-0.825), p < 0.001, respectively. Our proposed logistic Early Warning Score was better than the current National Early Warning Score at discriminating patients who had an event after cardiac surgery from those who did not.

The contribution of the anaesthetist to risk-adjusted mortality after cardiac surgery.

It is widely accepted that the performance of the operating surgeon affects outcomes, and this has led to the publication of surgical results in the public domain. However, the effect of other members of the multidisciplinary team is unknown. We studied the effect of the anaesthetist on mortality after cardiac surgery by analysing data collected prospectively over ten years of consecutive cardiac surgical cases from ten UK centres. Casemix-adjusted outcomes were analysed in models that included random-effects for centre, surgeon and anaesthetist. All cardiac surgical operations for which the EuroSCORE model is appropriate were included, and the primary outcome was in-hospital death up to three months postoperatively. A total of 110 769 cardiac surgical procedures conducted between April 2002 and March 2012 were studied, which included 127 consultant surgeons and 190 consultant anaesthetists. The overwhelming factor associated with outcome was patient risk, accounting for 95.75% of the variation for in-hospital mortality. The impact of the surgeon was moderate (intra-class correlation coefficient 4.00% for mortality), and the impact of the anaesthetist was negligible (0.25%). There was no significant effect of anaesthetist volume above ten cases per year. We conclude that mortality after cardiac surgery is primarily determined by the patient, with small but significant differences between surgeons. Anaesthetists did not appear to affect mortality. These findings do not support public disclosure of cardiac anaesthetists' results, but substantially validate current UK cardiac anaesthetic training and practice. Further research is required to establish the potential effects of very low anaesthetic caseloads and the effect of cardiac anaesthetists on patient morbidity.

The 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: protocol, methods and analysis of data.

Accidental awareness during general anaesthesia with recall is a potentially distressing complication of general anaesthesia that can lead to psychological harm. The 5th National Audit Project was designed to investigate the reported incidence, predisposing factors, causality and impact of accidental awareness. A nationwide network of local co-ordinators across all UK and Irish public hospitals reported all new patient reports of accidental awareness to a central database, using a system of monthly anonymised reporting over a calendar year. The database collected the details of the reported event, anaesthetic and surgical technique, and any sequelae. These reports were categorised into main types by a multidisciplinary panel, using a formalised process of analysis. The main categories of accidental awareness were: certain or probable; possible; during sedation; on or from the intensive care unit; could not be determined; unlikely; drug errors; and statement only. The degree of evidence to support the categorisation was also defined for each report. Patient experience and sequelae were categorised using current tools or modifications of such. The 5th National Audit Project methodology may be used to assess new reports of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia in a standardised manner, especially for the development of an ongoing database of case reporting. This paper is a shortened version describing the protocols, methods and data analysis from 5th National Audit Project - the full report can be found at http://www.nationalauditprojects.org.uk/NAP5_home#pt.

The 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: summary of main findings and risk factors.

We present the main findings of the 5th National Audit Project on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia. Incidences were estimated using reports of accidental awareness as the numerator, and a parallel national anaesthetic activity survey to provide denominator data. The incidence of certain/probable and possible accidental awareness cases was ~1:19 600 anaesthetics (95% CI 1:16 700-23 450). However, there was considerable variation across subtypes of techniques or subspecialties. The incidence with neuromuscular blockade was ~1:8200 (1:7030-9700), and without it was ~1:135 900 (1:78 600-299 000). The cases of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia reported to 5th National Audit Project were overwhelmingly cases of unintended awareness during neuromuscular blockade. The incidence of accidental awareness during caesarean section was ~1:670 (1:380-1300). Two thirds (82, 66%) of cases of accidental awareness experiences arose in the dynamic phases of anaesthesia, namely induction of and emergence from anaesthesia. During induction of anaesthesia, contributory factors included: use of thiopental; rapid sequence induction; obesity; difficult airway management; neuromuscular blockade; and interruptions of anaesthetic delivery during movement from anaesthetic room to theatre. During emergence from anaesthesia, residual paralysis was perceived by patients as accidental awareness, and commonly related to a failure to ensure full return of motor capacity. One third (43, 33%) of accidental awareness events arose during the maintenance phase of anaesthesia, most due to problems at induction or towards the end of anaesthesia. Factors increasing the risk of accidental awareness included: female sex; age (younger adults, but not children); obesity; anaesthetist seniority (junior trainees); previous awareness; out-of-hours operating; emergencies; type of surgery (obstetric, cardiac, thoracic); and use of neuromuscular blockade. The following factors were not risk factors for accidental awareness: ASA physical status; race; and use or omission of nitrous oxide. We recommend that an anaesthetic checklist, to be an integral part of the World Health Organization Safer Surgery checklist, is introduced as an aid to preventing accidental awareness. This paper is a shortened version describing the main findings from 5th National Audit Project - the full report can be found at http://www.nationalauditprojects.org.uk/NAP5_home#pt.

The 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: patient experiences, human factors, sedation, consent and medicolegal issues.

The 5th National Audit Project of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland into accidental awareness during general anaesthesia yielded data related to psychological aspects from the patient, and the anaesthetist, perspectives; patients' experiences ranged from isolated auditory or tactile sensations to complete awareness. A striking finding was that 75% of experiences were for < 5 min, yet 51% of patients (95% CI 43-60%) experienced distress and 41% (95% CI 33-50%) suffered longer-term adverse effect. Distress and longer-term harm occurred across the full range of experiences but were particularly likely when the patient experienced paralysis (with or without pain). The patient's interpretation of what is happening at the time of the awareness seemed central to later impact; explanation and reassurance during suspected accidental awareness during general anaesthesia or at the time of report seemed beneficial. Quality of care before the event was judged good in 26%, poor in 39% and mixed in 31%. Three quarters of cases of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia (75%) were judged preventable. In 12% of cases of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia, care was judged good and the episode not preventable. The contributory and human factors in the genesis of the majority of cases of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia included medication, patient and education/training. The findings have implications for national guidance, institutional organisation and individual practice. The incidence of 'accidental awareness' during sedation (~1:15 000) was similar to that during general anaesthesia (~1:19 000). The project raises significant issues about information giving and consent for both sedation and anaesthesia. We propose a novel approach to describing sedation from the patient's perspective which could be used in communication and consent. Eight (6%) of the patients had resorted to legal action (12, 11%, to formal complaint) at the time of reporting. The 5th National Audit Project methodology provides a standardised template that might usefully inform the investigation of claims or serious incidents related to accidental awareness during general anaesthesia.

5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: protocol, methods, and analysis of data.

BACKGROUND: Accidental awareness during general anaesthesia (AAGA) with recall is a potentially distressing complication of general anaesthesia that can lead to psychological harm. The 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) was designed to investigate the reported incidence, predisposing factors, causality, and impact of accidental awareness. METHODS: A nationwide network of local co-ordinators across all the UK and Irish public hospitals reported all new patient reports of accidental awareness to a central database, using a system of monthly anonymized reporting over a calendar year. The database collected the details of the reported event, anaesthetic and surgical technique, and any sequelae. These reports were categorized into main types by a multidisciplinary panel, using a formalized process of analysis. RESULTS: The main categories of accidental awareness were: certain or probable; possible; during sedation; on or from the intensive care unit; could not be determined; unlikely; drug errors; and statement only. The degree of evidence to support the categorization was also defined for each report. Patient experience and sequelae were categorized using current tools or modifications of such. CONCLUSIONS: The NAP5 methodology may be used to assess new reports of AAGA in a standardized manner, especially for the development of an ongoing database of case reporting. This paper is a shortened version describing the protocols, methods, and data analysis from NAP5--the full report can be found at http://www.nationalauditprojects.org.uk/NAP5_home.

5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: patient experiences, human factors, sedation, consent, and medicolegal issues.

The 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) of the Royal College of Anaesthetists and the Association of Anaesthetists of Great Britain and Ireland into accidental awareness during general anaesthesia (AAGA) yielded data related to psychological aspects from the patient, and the anaesthetist, perspectives; patients' experiences ranged from isolated auditory or tactile sensations to complete awareness. A striking finding was that 75% of experiences were for <5 min, yet 51% of patients [95% confidence interval (CI) 43-60%] experienced distress and 41% (95% CI 33-50%) suffered longer term adverse effect. Distress and longer term harm occurred across the full range of experiences but were particularly likely when the patient experienced paralysis (with or without pain). The patient's interpretation of what is happening at the time of the awareness seemed central to later impact; explanation and reassurance during suspected AAGA or at the time of report seemed beneficial. Quality of care before the event was judged good in 26%, poor in 39%, and mixed in 31%. Three-quarters of cases of AAGA (75%) were judged preventable. In 12%, AAGA care was judged good and the episode not preventable. The contributory and human factors in the genesis of the majority of cases of AAGA included medication, patient, and education/training. The findings have implications for national guidance, institutional organization, and individual practice. The incidence of 'accidental awareness' during sedation (~1:15,000) was similar to that during general anaesthesia (~1:19,000). The project raises significant issues about information giving and consent for both sedation and anaesthesia. We propose a novel approach to describing sedation from the patient's perspective which could be used in communication and consent. Eight (6%) of the patients had resorted to legal action (12, 11%, to formal complaint) at the time of reporting. NAP5 methodology provides a standardized template that might usefully inform the investigation of claims or serious incidents related to AAGA.

5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia: summary of main findings and risk factors.

We present the main findings of the 5th National Audit Project (NAP5) on accidental awareness during general anaesthesia (AAGA). Incidences were estimated using reports of accidental awareness as the numerator, and a parallel national anaesthetic activity survey to provide denominator data. The incidence of certain/probable and possible accidental awareness cases was ~1:19,600 anaesthetics (95% confidence interval 1:16,700-23,450). However, there was considerable variation across subtypes of techniques or subspecialities. The incidence with neuromuscular block (NMB) was ~1:8200 (1:7030-9700), and without, it was ~1:135,900 (1:78,600-299,000). The cases of AAGA reported to NAP5 were overwhelmingly cases of unintended awareness during NMB. The incidence of accidental awareness during Caesarean section was ~1:670 (1:380-1300). Two-thirds (82, 66%) of cases of accidental awareness experiences arose in the dynamic phases of anaesthesia, namely induction of and emergence from anaesthesia. During induction of anaesthesia, contributory factors included: use of thiopental, rapid sequence induction, obesity, difficult airway management, NMB, and interruptions of anaesthetic delivery during movement from anaesthetic room to theatre. During emergence from anaesthesia, residual paralysis was perceived by patients as accidental awareness, and commonly related to a failure to ensure full return of motor capacity. One-third (43, 33%) of accidental awareness events arose during the maintenance phase of anaesthesia, mostly due to problems at induction or towards the end of anaesthesia. Factors increasing the risk of accidental awareness included: female sex, age (younger adults, but not children), obesity, anaesthetist seniority (junior trainees), previous awareness, out-of-hours operating, emergencies, type of surgery (obstetric, cardiac, thoracic), and use of NMB. The following factors were not risk factors for accidental awareness: ASA physical status, race, and use or omission of nitrous oxide. We recommend that an anaesthetic checklist, to be an integral part of the World Health Organization Safer Surgery checklist, is introduced as an aid to preventing accidental awareness. This paper is a shortened version describing the main findings from NAP5--the full report can be found at http://www.nationalauditprojects.org.uk/NAP5_home.

Resuscitation after cardiac surgery: are we ageist?

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: To study the effect of age and other risk factors on: (a) the incidence and outcome of cardiopulmonary resuscitation and (b) any decision to institute a 'Do Not Attempt Resuscitation' order following cardiac surgery. METHODS: Prospective audit of cardiac arrest calls following 6550 consecutive open-heart surgery cases and retrospective audit of all cardiac surgical deaths not preceded by cardiac arrest calls. RESULTS: One-hundred-and-seventy-four patients (2.7%) had audited cardiac arrests of whom 70 (40%) survived to discharge. Elderly patients (> or = 70 yr old) had higher incidence of cardiac arrest (3.8% vs. 2%, P < 0.001). Survival to discharge following cardiopulmonary resuscitation was lower in the elderly patients, 33% vs. 48%, the difference approaching statistical significance (P = 0.06). Cardiopulmonary resuscitation was withheld in 46% of elderly vs. 40% of younger deaths (P = 0.40) which represented 3.1% of elderly vs. 1.2% younger patients (P < 0.001). Similar proportions of elderly (62%) and younger (67%) patients had failure of > or = 3 organ systems on institution of the 'Do Not Resuscitate' order (P = 0.70). CONCLUSION: 'Do Not Resuscitate' orders appeared twice as frequently in elderly patients (> or = 70 yr). However, the proportions of deaths without cardiopulmonary resuscitation and the organ failure scores between age groups were similar suggesting that severity of illness was more important than age in determining resuscitation status.

Six-year prospective audit of chest reopening after cardiac arrest.

OBJECTIVE: To identify which patients benefit from chest reopening after cardiac arrest. SETTING: Cardio-thoracic hospital undertaking full range of adult cardio-thoracic surgery. METHODS: In-hospital arrests were prospectively audited over a 6-year period. Information was collected for every patient whose chest was reopened following cardiac arrest: location of arrest, type of arrest, specialty, time since surgery, time to chest reopening, location of chest opening, surgical findings on reopening, time to cardiopulmonary bypass (if used) and patient outcomes. EXCLUSIONS: Arrests in theatre and chest openings for reasons other than cardiac arrest. RESULTS: There were 818 confirmed in-hospital arrests following 'cardiac arrest calls'. Chest reopening was undertaken in 79 surgical patients. Overall survival to discharge was 20/79 (25%). Favourable determinants of outcome were: arrest on intensive care unit (ICU), arrest within 24 h of surgery and reopening within 10 min of arrest. Nineteen of 58 (33%) chest openings following arrests on the ICU survived to discharge compared to one of 21 (5%) patients whose initial arrest was outside the ICU (P=0.017). One of nine ward arrests scooped to ICU for chest reopening survived whereas all 12 patients reopened on the ward died. Fifteen of 40 patients (38%) reopened within 24 h surgery survived compared to five of 39 patients where reopening was undertaken more than 24 h after surgery (P=0.02). Fourteen of 29 (48%) patients opened within 10 min of arrest survived to discharge compared to six of 50 (12%) patients where time to reopening was more than 10 min (P=<0.001). Seven of 22 patients (32%) patients where emergency bypass was utilised survived to discharge. CONCLUSION: This study strongly confirms the benefit of chest reopening after cardiac arrest in the cardiac surgical ICU. Patients who arrest within 24 h of surgery and in whom reopening is instituted within 10 min are particularly likely to benefit. The value of chest reopening in arrests outside the ICU remains unresolved. All patients reopened on the ward died, suggesting that this practice should be discontinued. Early 'scoop and run' resulted in one solitary survivor though it should probably be restricted to patients who arrest within 72 h of surgery as surgically remediable problems are unlikely after this time.

Losartan and low-dose hydrochlorothiazide in patients with essential hypertension. A double-blind, placebo-controlled trial of concomitant administration compared with individual components.

BACKGROUND: Angiotensin II acts at the cellular level through specific angiotensin II subtype I, AT-1 receptors. Losartan is the first of a new class of antihypertensive agents that specifically block angiotensin II at AT-1 receptors. By acting on complementary and different pharmacologic mechanisms, the concomitant use of low doses of hydrochlorothiazide with losartan may offer an additive antihypertensive activity with fewer adverse experiences. METHODS: This double-blind study evaluated losartan concomitantly administered with hydrochlorothiazide as initial therapy in 703 patients with essential hypertension. RESULTS: The greatest reduction in blood pressure was observed in the 50 mg of losartan potassium and 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide group (17.2 mm Hg in sitting systolic blood pressure and 13.2 mm Hg in sitting diastolic blood pressure [P < or = .001]), and the effects of the two components appeared to be additive. Seventy-eight percent of the patients treated with 50 mg of losartan potassium and 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide had an excellent or good antihypertensive response (sitting diastolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg or > or = 90 mm Hg with a reduction of 10 mm Hg or more). Peak (6 hours after dosing) and trough placebo-adjusted ratios for the losartan-hydrochlorothiazide groups ranged from 62% to 85%, indicating that there was a smooth reduction in sitting diastolic blood pressure that was sustained over 24 hours. The most common clinical adverse experiences (> or = 4%) that occurred with an incidence slightly greater than that reported by the placebo-treated patients were headache, asthenia or fatigue, dizziness, sinusitis, and upper respiratory infection. CONCLUSION: The concomitant administration of losartan potassium, 50 mg, with 12.5 mg of hydrochlorothiazide once daily produced an additive reduction in trough sitting systolic and diastolic blood pressure and was well tolerated.

Increasing organ blood flow during cardiopulmonary bypass in pigs: comparison of dopamine and perfusion pressure.

OBJECTIVE: To determine whether low-dose dopamine infusion (5 micrograms/kg/min) during cardiopulmonary bypass selectively increases perfusion to the kidney, splanchnic organs, and brain at low (45 mm Hg) as well as high (90 mm Hg) perfusion pressures. DESIGN: Randomized crossover trial. SETTING: Animal research laboratory in a university medical center. SUBJECTS: Ten female Yorkshire pigs (weight 29.9 +/- 1.2 kg). INTERVENTION: Anesthetized pigs were placed on normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass at a 100-mL/kg/min flow rate. After baseline measurements, the animal was subjected, in random sequence, to 15-min periods of low perfusion pressure (45 mm Hg), low perfusion pressure with dopamine (5 micrograms/kg/min), high perfusion pressure (90 mm Hg), and high perfusion pressure with dopamine. Regional perfusion (radioactive microspheres) was measured in tissue samples (2 to 10 g) from the renal cortex (outer two-third and inner one-third segments), stomach, duodenum, jejunum, ileum, colon, pancreas, and cerebral hemispheres. MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: Systemic perfusion pressure was altered by adjusting pump flow rate (r2 = .61; p < .05). In the kidney, cortical perfusion pressure increased from 178 +/- 16 mL/min/100 g at the low perfusion pressure to 399 +/- 23 mL/min/100 g at the high perfusion pressure (p < .05). Perfusion pressure augmentation increased the ratio of outer/inner renal cortical blood flow from 0.9 +/- 0.1 to 1.2 +/- 0.1 (p < .05). At each perfusion pressure, low-dose dopamine had no beneficial effect on renal perfusion or flow distribution. Similar results were found in the splanchnic organs, where regional perfusion was altered by perfusion pressure but not by dopamine. In contrast, neither changing perfusion pressure nor adding low-dose dopamine altered blood flow to the cerebral cortex. CONCLUSIONS: These data indicate that the lower autoregulatory limits of perfusion to the kidneys and splanchnic organs differ from those limits to the brain during normothermic bypass. Selective vasodilation from low-dose dopamine was not found in renal, splanchnic, or cerebral vascular beds. Increasing the perfusion pressure by pump flow, rather than by the addition of low-dose dopamine, enhanced renal and splanchnic but not cerebral blood flows during cardiopulmonary bypass.

Hyperglycemia during hypothermic canine cardiopulmonary bypass increases cerebral lactate.

BACKGROUND: Hyperglycemia frequently occurs during cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB), although its direct effects on cerebral perfusion and metabolism are not known. Using a canine model of hypothermic CPB, we tested whether hyperglycemia alters cerebral blood flow and metabolism and cerebral energy charge. METHODS: Twenty anesthetized dogs were randomized into hyperglycemic (n = 10) and normoglycemic (n = 10) groups. The hyperglycemic group received an infusion of D50W, and the normoglycemic animals received an equal volume of 0.9% NaCl. Both groups underwent 120 min of hypothermic (28 degrees C) CPB using membrane oxygenators, followed by rewarming and termination of CPB. Cerebral blood flow (radioactive microspheres) and the cerebral metabolic rate for oxygen were measured intermittently during the experiment and brain tissue metabolites were obtained after bypass. RESULTS: Before CPB, the glucose-treated animals had higher serum glucose levels (534 +/- 12 mg/dL; mean +/- SE) than controls (103 +/- 4 mg/dL; P < 0.05), and this difference was maintained throughout the study. Cerebral blood flow and metabolism did not differ between groups at any time during the experiment. Sagittal sinus pressure was comparable between groups throughout CPB. Tissue high-energy phosphates and water contents were similar after CPB, although cerebral lactate levels were greater in hyperglycemic (37.2 +/- 5.7 mumol/g) than normoglycemic animals (19.7 +/- 3.7 mumol/g; P < 0.05). After CPB, pH values of cerebrospinal fluid for normoglycemic (7.33 +/- 0.01) and hyperglycemic (7.34 +/- 0.01) groups were similar. CONCLUSIONS: Hyperglycemia during CPB significantly increases cerebral lactate levels without adversely affecting cerebral blood flow and metabolism, cerebrospinal fluid pH, or cerebral energy charge.

Clinical studies of a new, low-dose formulation of metolazone for the treatment of hypertension.

Two multicenter, double-blind, randomized studies were performed to determine the antihypertensive efficacy and effects on laboratory values of a new, shorter-acting formulation of metolazone in patients with mild to moderate hypertension. After baseline placebo-control periods, 105 patients were randomly assigned to receive single daily doses of either placebo or 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 mg of the new formulation of metolazone for six weeks in one study, and 164 patients were randomized to receive 0.5, 1.0, or 2.0 mg of the new formulation of metolazone or 2.5 mg of the older, long-acting metolazone in the other. Mean blood pressure reductions in all three metolazone groups were statistically and clinically significant. Blood pressures of 51% to 58% of patients in the 0.5-mg metolazone group were controlled (diastolic blood pressure less than 90 or a fall of greater than or equal to 10 mmHg from baseline). Reductions in mean serum potassium levels were dose-related. We conclude that 0.5 mg of metolazone is safe and effective therapy for hypertension; it will significantly reduce systolic and diastolic blood pressure and minimizes changes in laboratory test values.