Prophylactic Internal Iliac Artery Occlusion Balloon Placement to Reduce Operative Blood Loss in Patients with Invasive Placenta.

PURPOSE: To evaluate efficacy and safety of prophylactic internal iliac occlusion balloon placement before cesarean hysterectomy for invasive placenta. MATERIAL AND METHODS: A retrospective analysis was performed of patients with invasive placenta treated with and without occlusion balloon placement. Preoperative occlusion balloons were placed in 90 patients; 61 patients were treated without balloon placement (control group). Baseline demographics, including patient age, gestational age at delivery, gravidity, parity, and number of previous cesarean sections, were not significantly different (P > .05). Of the balloon placement group, 56% had placenta percreta compared with 25% in the control group (P < .001), and 83% had placenta previa compared with 66% in the control group (P = .012). RESULTS: Median blood loss was 2 L (range, 1.5-2.5 L) in the balloon placement group versus 2.5 L (range, 2-4 L) in the control group (P = .002). Patients with occlusion balloons were transfused a median of 2 U (range, 0-5 U) of packed red blood cells versus 5 U (range, 2-8 U) in patients in the control group (P = .002). In the balloon placement group, 34% had large volume blood loss > 2,500 mL versus 61% in the control group (P = .001), and 21% required blood transfusion > 6 U versus 44% in the control group (P = .002). Eight complications (9%) were attributed to occlusion balloon placement. CONCLUSIONS: Prophylactic internal iliac artery occlusion balloon placement reduces operative blood loss and transfusion requirements in patients undergoing hysterectomy for invasive placenta.

Telemedicine pre-anesthesia evaluation: a randomized pilot trial.

OBJECTIVE: Pre-anesthesia evaluation allows discovery of conditions affecting perioperative planning, but when inadequate it may be associated with delays, cancellations, and preventable adverse events. Not all patients who could benefit will keep appointments. Telemedicine pre-anesthesia evaluation may provide for safe patient care while reducing patient inconvenience and cost. Herein we investigate the impact of telemedicine pre-anesthesia evaluation on perioperative processes. SUBJECTS AND METHODS: This was a single-center prospective randomized trial in 200 adults scheduled for head and neck surgery at Loma Linda University Medical Center, Loma Linda, CA. Consenting patients not meeting criteria for telephone pre-anesthesia evaluation were randomly assigned to the in-person or telemedicine group. The primary outcome measure was inadequate evaluation caused surgical delay or cancellation. Secondary measures included prediction of difficult airway management and concordance of physical examination. RESULTS: After consent, 40 patients met criteria for telephone screening. Five patients canceled surgery, none for inadequate pre-anesthesia evaluation; thus 155 were randomized. Delay occurred in 1 telemedicine patient awaiting results performed outside our system. Missing documentation at the time of the visit was less common for telemedicine. Difficult airway management was predicted equally but had low positive predictive value. Heart and lung examinations were highly concordant with day of surgery documentation. Patients and providers were highly satisfied with both evaluation modalities. CONCLUSIONS: Telemedicine and in-person evaluations were equivalent, with high patient and provider satisfaction. Telemedicine provides potential patient time and cost saving benefits without more day of surgery delay in our system. A prospective trial of patients from multiple surgical specialty clinics is warranted.