Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.

The purpose of the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine Guideline on Intraoperative Management of Adult Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is to present recommendations based on current scientific evidence. This guideline seeks to address questions regarding the intraoperative care of patients with OSA, including airway management, anesthetic drug and agent effects, and choice of anesthesia type. Given the paucity of high-quality studies with regard to study design and execution in this perioperative field, recommendations were to a large part developed by subject-matter experts through consensus processes, taking into account the current scientific knowledge base and quality of evidence. This guideline may not be suitable for all clinical settings and patients and is not intended to define standards of care or absolute requirements for patient care; thus, assessment of appropriateness should be made on an individualized basis. Adherence to this guideline cannot guarantee successful outcomes, but recommendations should rather aid health care professionals and institutions to formulate plans and develop protocols for the improvement of the perioperative care of patients with OSA, considering patient-related factors, interventions, and resource availability. Given the groundwork of a comprehensive systematic literature review, these recommendations reflect the current state of knowledge and its interpretation by a group of experts at the time of publication. While periodic reevaluations of literature are needed, novel scientific evidence between updates should be taken into account. Deviations in practice from the guideline may be justifiable and should not be interpreted as a basis for claims of negligence.

Background: Evidence-based international expert consensus regarding anaesthetic practice in hip/knee arthroplasty surgery is needed for improved healthcare outcomes. Methods: The International Consensus on Anaesthesia-Related Outcomes after Surgery group (ICAROS) systematic review, including randomised controlled and observational studies comparing neuraxial to general anaesthesia regarding major complications, including mortality, cardiac, pulmonary, gastrointestinal, renal, genitourinary, thromboembolic, neurological, infectious, and bleeding complications. Medline, PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane Library including Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, NHS Economic Evaluation Database, from 1946 to May 17, 2018 were queried. Meta-analysis and Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation approach was utilised to assess evidence quality and to develop recommendations. Results: The analysis of 94 studies revealed that neuraxial anaesthesia was associated with lower odds or no difference in virtually all reported complications, except for urinary retention. Excerpt of complications for neuraxial vs general anaesthesia in hip/knee arthroplasty, respectively: mortality odds ratio (OR): 0.

Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a commonly encountered problem in the perioperative setting even though many patients remain undiagnosed at the time of surgery. The objective of this systematic review was to evaluate whether the diagnosis of OSA has an impact on postoperative outcomes. We performed a systematic review of studies published in PubMed-MEDLINE, MEDLINE In-Process, and other nonindexed citations, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and Health Technology Assessment up to November 2014. Studies of adult patients with a diagnosis of OSA or high risk thereof, published in the English language, undergoing surgery or procedures under anesthesia care, and reporting ≥1 postoperative outcome were included. Overall, the included studies reported on 413,304 OSA and 8,556,279 control patients. The majority reported worse outcomes for a number of events, including pulmonary and combined complications, among patients with OSA versus the reference group. The association between OSA and in-hospital mortality varied among studies; 9 studies showed no impact of OSA on mortality, 3 studies suggested a decrease in mortality, and 1 study reported increased mortality. In summary, the majority of studies suggest that the presence of OSA is associated with an increased risk of postoperative complications.

Given the basic need for opioids in the perioperative setting, we investigated associations between opioid prescription levels and postoperative outcomes using population-based data of orthopedic surgery patients. We hypothesized that increased opioid amounts would be associated with higher risk for postoperative complications. Data were extracted from the national Premier Perspective database (2006-2013); N = 1,035,578 lower joint arthroplasties and N = 220,953 spine fusions. Multilevel multivariable logistic regression models measured associations between opioid dose prescription and postoperative outcomes, studied by quartile of dispensed opioid dose. Compared to the lowest quartile of opioid dosing, high opioid prescription was associated with significantly increased odds for deep venous thrombosis and postoperative infections by approx. 50%, while odds were increased by 23% for urinary and more than 15% for gastrointestinal and respiratory complications (P < 0.001 respectively). Furthermore, higher opioid prescription was associated with a significant increase in length of stay (LOS) and cost by 12% and 6%, P < 0.001 respectively. Cerebrovascular complications risk was decreased by 25% with higher opioid dose (P = 0.004), while odds for myocardial infarction remained unaltered. In spine cases, opioid prescription was generally higher, with stronger effects observed for increase in LOS and cost as well as gastrointestinal and urinary complications. Other outcomes were less pronounced, possibly because of smaller sample size. Overall, higher opioid prescription was associated with an increase in most postoperative complications with the strongest effect observed in thromboembolic, infectious and gastrointestinal complications, cost, and LOS. Increase in complication risk occurred stepwise, suggesting a dose-response gradient.

Background Multimodal analgesia is increasingly considered routine practice in joint arthroplasties, but supportive large-scale data are scarce. The authors aimed to determine how the number and type of analgesic modes is associated with reduced opioid prescription, complications, and resource utilization. Methods Total hip/knee arthroplasties (N = 512,393 and N = 1,028,069, respectively) from the Premier Perspective database (2006 to 2016) were included. Analgesic modes considered were opioids, peripheral nerve blocks, acetaminophen, steroids, gabapentin/pregabalin, nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs, cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors, or ketamine. Groups were categorized into “opioids only” and 1, 2, or more than 2 additional modes. Multilevel models measured associations between multimodal analgesia and opioid prescription, cost/length of hospitalization, and opioid-related adverse effects. Odds ratios or percent change and 95% CIs are reported. Results Overall, 85.6% (N = 1,318,165) of patients received multimodal analgesia. In multivariable models, additions of analgesic modes were associated with stepwise positive effects: total hip arthroplasty patients receiving more than 2 modes (compared to “opioids only”) experienced 19% fewer respiratory (odds ratio, 0.81; 95% CI, 0.70 to 0.94; unadjusted 1.0% [N = 1,513] vs. 2.0% [N = 1,546]), 26% fewer gastrointestinal (odds ratio, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.65 to 0.84; unadjusted 1.5% [N = 2,234] vs. 2.5% [N = 1,984]) complications, up to a –18.5% decrease in opioid prescription (95% CI, –19.7% to –17.2%; 205 vs. 300 overall median oral morphine equivalents), and a –12.1% decrease (95% CI, –12.8% to –11.5%; 2 vs. 3 median days) in length of stay (all P &lt; 0.05). Total knee arthroplasty analyses showed similar patterns. Nonsteroidal antiinflammatory drugs and cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitors seemed to be the most effective modalities used. Conclusions While the optimal multimodal regimen is still not known, the authors’ findings encourage the combined use of multiple modalities in perioperative analgesic protocols.

In this cohort of hip and knee arthroplasty patients, anaesthesia type and perioperative medications were associated with increased odds for postoperative delirium. Our results support the notion that modifiable risk factors may exacerbate or attenuate risk for postoperative delirium.

Neuraxial anesthesia may improve perioperative outcomes when compared to general anesthesia; however, this is controversial. We performed a systematic review and meta-analysis using randomized controlled trials and population-based observational studies identified in MEDLINE, PubMed, and EMBASE from 2010 to May 31, 2016. Studies were included for adult patients undergoing major surgery of the trunk and lower extremity that reported: 30-day mortality (primary outcome), cardiopulmonary morbidity, surgical site infection, thromboembolic events, blood transfusion, and resource use. Perioperative outcomes were compared with general anesthesia for the following subgroups: combined neuraxial-general anesthesia and neuraxial anesthesia alone. Odds ratios (ORs) and 99% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated to identify the impact of anesthetic technique on outcomes. Twenty-seven observational studies and 11 randomized control trials were identified. This analysis comprises 1,082,965 records from observational studies or databases and 1134 patients from randomized controlled trials. There was no difference in 30-day mortality identified when combined neuraxial-general anesthesia was compared with general anesthesia (OR 0.88; 99% CI, 0.77-1.01), or when neuraxial anesthesia was compared with general anesthesia (OR 0.98; 99% CI, 0.92-1.04). When combined neuraxial-general anesthesia was compared with general anesthesia, combined neuraxial-general anesthesia was associated with a reduced odds of pulmonary complication (OR 0.84; 99% CI, 0.79-0.88), surgical site infection (OR 0.93; 99% CI, 0.88-0.98), blood transfusion (OR 0.90; 99% CI, 0.87-0.93), thromboembolic events (OR 0.84; 99% CI, 0.73-0.98), length of stay (mean difference -0.16 days; 99% CI, -0.17 to -0.15), and intensive care unit admission (OR 0.77; 99% CI, 0.73-0.81). For the combined neuraxial-general anesthesia subgroup, there were increased odds of myocardial infarction (OR 1.18; 99% CI, 1.01-1.37). There was no difference identified in the odds of pneumonia (OR 0.94; 99% CI, 0.87-1.02) or cardiac complications (OR 1.04; 99% CI, 1.00-1.09) for the combined neuraxial-general anesthesia subgroup. When neuraxial anesthesia was compared to general anesthesia, there was a decreased odds of any pulmonary complication (OR 0.38; 99% CI, 0.36-0.40), surgical site infection (OR 0.76; 99% CI, 0.71-0.82), blood transfusion (OR 0.85; 99% CI, 0.82-0.88), thromboembolic events (OR 0.79; 99% CI, 0.68-0.91), length of stay (mean difference -0.29 days; 99% CI, -0.29 to -0.28), and intensive care unit admission (OR 0.50; 99% CI, 0.48-0.53). There was no difference in the odds of cardiac complications (OR 0.99; 99% CI, 0.94-1.03), myocardial infarction (OR 0.91; 99% CI, 0.81-1.02), or pneumonia (OR 0.92; 99% CI, 0.84-1.01). Randomized control trials revealed no difference in requirement for blood transfusion (RR 1.05; 99% CI, 0.65-1.71) and a decreased length of stay (mean difference -0.15 days; 99% CI, -0.27 to -0.04). Neuraxial anesthesia when combined with general anesthesia...