No abstract

Cerebral oxygen saturation (rSO2) is a non-invasive monitor used to monitor cerebral oxygen balance and perfusion. Decreases in rSO2 >20 % from baseline have been associated with cerebral ischemia and increased perioperative morbidity. During transcatheter aortic valve replacement (TAVR), hemodynamic manipulation with ventricular pacing up to 180 beats per minute is necessary for valve deployment. The magnitude and duration of rSO2 change during this manipulation is unclear. In this small case series, changes in rSO2 in patients undergoing TAVR are investigated. Ten ASA IV patients undergoing TAVR with general anesthesia at a university hospital were prospectively observed. Cerebral oximetry values were analyzed at four points: pre-procedure (baseline), after tracheal intubation, during valve deployment, and at procedure end. Baseline rSO2 values were 54.5 ± 6.9 %. After induction of general anesthesia, rSO2 increased to a mean of 66.0 ± 6.7 %. During valve deployment, the mean rSO2 decreased <20 % below baseline to 48.5 ± 13.4 %. In two patients, rSO2 decreased >20 % of baseline. Cerebral oxygenation returned to post-induction values in all patients 13 ± 10 min after valve deployment. At procedure end, the mean rSO2 was 67.6 ± 8.1 %. As expected, rapid ventricular pacing resulting in the desired decrease in cardiac output during valve deployment was associated with a significant decrease in rSO2 compared to post-induction values. However, despite increased post-induction values in all patients, whether related to increased inspired oxygen fraction or reduced cerebral oxygen consumption under anesthesia, two patients experienced a significant decrease in rSO2 compared to baseline. Recovery to baseline was not immediate, and took up to 20 min in three patients. Furthermore, baseline rSO2 in this population was at the lower limit of the published normal range. Significant cerebral desaturation during valve deployment may potentially be limited by maximizing rSO2 after anesthetic induction. Future studies should attempt to correlate recovery in rSO2 with recovery of hemodynamics and cardiac function, provide detailed neurological assessments pre and post procedure, determine the most effective method of maximizing rSO2 prior to hemodynamic manipulation, and provide the most rapid method of recovery of rSO2 following valve deployment.

No abstract

Aim:The aim of this study was to describe our institutional experience, primarily with general anesthesiologists consulting with cardiac anesthesiologists, caring for left ventricular assist device (LVAD) patients undergoing noncardiac surgery.Materials and Methods:This is a retrospective review of the population of patients with LVADs at a single institution undergoing noncardiac procedures between 2009 and 2014. Demographic, perioperative, and procedural data collected included the type of procedure performed, anesthetic technique, vasopressor requirements, invasive monitors used, anesthesia provider type, blood product management, need for postoperative intubation, postoperative disposition and length of stay, and perioperative complications including mortality.Statistical Analysis:Descriptive statistics for categorical variables are presented as frequency distributions and percentages. Continuous variables are expressed as mean ± standard deviation and range when applicable.Results:During the study, 31 patients with LVADs underwent a total of 74 procedures. Each patient underwent an average of 2.4 procedures. Of the total number of procedures, 48 (65%) were upper or lower endoscopies. Considering all procedures, 81% were performed under monitored anesthesia care (MAC). Perioperative care was provided by faculty outside of the division of cardiac anesthesia in 62% of procedures. Invasive blood pressure monitoring was used in 27 (36%) procedures, and a central line, peripherally inserted central catheter or midline was in place preoperatively and used intraoperatively for 38 (51%) procedures. Vasopressors were not required in the majority (65; 88%) of procedures. There was one inhospital mortality secondary to multiorgan failure; 97% of patients survived to discharge after their procedure.Conclusion:At our institution, LVAD patients undergoing noncardiac procedures most frequently require endoscopy. These procedures can frequently be done safely under MAC, with or without consultation by a cardiac anesthesiologist.

A 32-year-old man with severe pulmonary arterial hypertension and Eisenmenger syndrome secondary to congenital ventricular septal defects presented for ventriculoperitoneal shunt insertion. Consultation between surgical and anesthesia teams acknowledged the extreme risk of performing this case, but given ongoing symptoms related to increased intracranial pressure from a large third ventricle colloid cyst, the case was deemed urgent. After a full discussion with the patient, including an explanation of anesthetic expectations and perioperative risks, the case was performed under monitored anesthesia care. Anesthetic management included high-flow nasal cannula oxygen with capnography and arterial blood pressure monitoring, dexmedetomidine infusion, boluses of midazolam and ketamine, and local anesthetic infiltration of the cranial and abdominal incisions as well as the catheter track. Hemodynamic support was provided with an epinephrine infusion, small vasopressin boluses, and inhaled nitric oxide. The patient recovered without any significant problems and was discharged home on postoperative day 3.

Patients after cardiac surgery experience moderate to severe pain in the immediate postoperative period as a result of surgical interventions, such as incision, sternotomy, sternal retraction, pericardiotomy, tissue dissection, and the presence of chest tubes. 1 Poorly controlled acute pain increases suffering, cardiovascular stress, and respiratory complications and may develop into persistent postoperative pain, which adversely affects patients' daily activities, psychological well-being, and quality of life. 2

No abstract

This is a PDF file of an article that has undergone enhancements after acceptance, such as the addition of a cover page and metadata, and formatting for readability, but it is not yet the definitive version of record. This version will undergo additional copyediting, typesetting and review before it is published in its final form, but we are providing this version to give early visibility of the article. Please note that, during the production process, errors may be discovered which could affect the content, and all legal disclaimers that apply to the journal pertain.