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.

No abstract

No abstract

BackgroundDifficult airway management and obstructive sleep apnea may contribute to increased risk of perioperative morbidity and mortality. The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis (SRMA) is to evaluate the evidence of a difficult airway being associated with obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) patients undergoing surgery.MethodsThe standard databases were searched from 1946 to April 2017 to identify the eligible articles. The studies which included adult surgical patients with either suspected or diagnosed obstructive sleep apnea must report at least one difficult airway event [either difficult intubation (DI), difficult mask ventilation (DMV), failed supraglottic airway insertion or difficult surgical airway] in sleep apnea and non-sleep apnea patients were included.ResultsOverall, DI was 3.46-fold higher in the sleep apnea vs non-sleep apnea patients (OSA vs. non-OSA: 13.5% vs 2.5%; OR 3.46; 95% CI: 2.32–5.16, p <0.00001). DMV was 3.39-fold higher in the sleep apnea vs non-sleep apnea patients (OSA vs. non-OSA: 4.4% vs 1.1%; OR 3.39; 95% CI: 2.74–4.18, p <0.00001). Combined DI and DMV was 4.12-fold higher in the OSA vs. non-OSA patients (OSA vs. non-OSA: 1.1% vs 0.3%; OR 4.12; 95% CI: 2.93–5.79, p <0.00001). There was no significant difference in the supraglottic airway failure rates in the sleep apnea vs non-sleep apnea patients (OR: 1.34; 95% CI: 0.70–2.59; p = 0.38). Meta-regression to adjust for various subgroups and baseline confounding factors did not impact the final inference of our results.ConclusionThis SRMA found that patients with obstructive sleep apnea had a three to four-fold higher risk of difficult intubation or mask ventilation or both, when compared to non-sleep apnea patients.

Background: High ventilatory frequencies increase static lung strain and possibly lung stress by shortening expiratory time, increasing intrathoracic pressure, and causing dynamic hyperinflation. We hypothesised that high intraoperative ventilatory frequencies were associated with postoperative respiratory complications. Methods: In this retrospective hospital registry study, we analysed data from adult non-cardiothoracic surgical cases performed under general anaesthesia with mechanical ventilation at a single centre between 2005 and 2017. We assessed the association between intraoperative ventilatory frequency (categorised into four groups) and postoperative respiratory complications, defined as composite of invasive mechanical ventilation within 7 days after surgery or peripheral oxygen desaturation after extubation, using multivariable logistic regression. In a subgroup, we adjusted analyses for arterial blood gas parameters. Results: A total of 102 632 cases were analysed. Intraoperative ventilatory frequencies ranged from a median (interquartile range [IQR]) of 8 (8e9) breaths min À1 (Group 1) to 15 (14e18) breaths min À1 (Group 4). High ventilatory frequencies were associated with higher odds of postoperative respiratory complications (adjusted odds ratio¼1.26; 95% confidence interval, 1.14e1.38; P<0.001), which was confirmed in a subgroup after adjusting for arterial partial pressure of carbon dioxide and the ratio of arterial oxygen partial pressure to fractional inspired oxygen. We identified considerable variability in the use of high ventilatory frequencies attributable to individual provider preference (ranging from 22% to 88%) and temporal change; however, the association with postoperative respiratory complications remained unaffected. Conclusions: High intraoperative ventilatory frequency was associated with increased risk of postoperative respiratory complications, and increased postoperative healthcare utilisation.

Importance The optimal approach to airway management during in-hospital cardiac arrest is unknown. Objective To describe hospital-level variation in endotracheal intubation during cardiopulmonary resuscitation (CPR) for in-hospital cardiac arrest and the association between hospital use of endotracheal intubation and arrest survival. Design, setting, participants Retrospective cohort study of adult patients suffering in-hospital cardiac arrest at Get With The Guidelines-Resuscitation participating hospitals between January, 2000, and December, 2016. Hospitals were categorized into quartiles based on the proportion of in-hospital cardiac arrest patients managed with endotracheal intubation during CPR. Risk-adjusted mixed models with random intercepts were created to assess the association between hospital quartile of in-hospital arrests managed with endotracheal intubation during CPR and survival to hospital discharge. Exposure Hospital rate of endotracheal intubation during CPR for in-hospital arrest Main outcomes and measures Survival to hospital discharge Results Among 155,252 patients suffering in-hospital cardiac arrest at 656 hospitals, 69.7% of patients received endotracheal intubation during CPR and overall survival to discharge was 24.8%. At the hospital level, the median rate of endotracheal intubation use was 71.2% (interquartile range, 63.6 to 78.1%; range, 26.6 to 100%). We found a strong inverse association between hospital rate of endotracheal intubation and survival to discharge (risk-adjusted odds ratio comparing highest intubation quartile vs. lowest intubation quartile, 0.81; 95% confidence interval (CI), 0.74 to 0.90; p value < .001). This association was modified by the presence of respiratory failure prior to arrest ( p for interaction < .001), and stratified analyses demonstrated lower patient survival at hospitals with higher rates of endotracheal intubation was limited to patients without respiratory failure prior to cardiac arrest. Conclusion In a national sample of patients suffering IHCA, the use of endotracheal intubation during CPR varied across hospitals. We found a strong inverse association between hospital use of endotracheal intubation during CPR and survival to discharge, but this association was confined to patients without respiratory failure prior to arrest. Identifying the optimal approach to airway management for in-hospital cardiac arrest may have a significant impact on patient survival.

Preparedness measures for the anticipated surge of coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) cases within eastern Massachusetts included the establishment of alternate care sites (field hospitals). Boston Hope hospital was set up within the Boston Convention and Exhibition Center to provide low-acuity care for COVID-19 patients and to support local healthcare systems. However, early recognition of the need to provide higher levels of care, or critical care for the potential deterioration of patients recovering from COVID-19, prompted the development of a hybrid acute care–intensive care unit. We describe our experience of implementing rapid response capabilities of this innovative ad hoc unit. Combining quality improvement tools for hazards detection and testing through in situ simulation successfully identified several operational hurdles. Through rapid continuous analysis and iterative change, we implemented appropriate mitigation strategies and established rapid response and rescue capabilities. This study provides a framework for future planning of high-acuity services within a unique field hospital setting.

Supplemental Digital Content is available in the text.