Canadian journal of anaesthesia = Journal canadien d'anesthésie
-
Editorial Comment
Depth of anesthesia causality dilemmas: the next generation.
-
The purpose of this paper is to review the current evidence relating anesthetic depth to long-term survival after surgery. ⋯ The available evidence on anesthetic depth and long-term survival is inconclusive. Randomized controlled trials with carefully controlled arterial blood pressure are required.
-
Perioperative myocardial infarction represents the most common cardiovascular complication following non-cardiac surgery, but frequently presents without the usual clinical signs and symptoms consistent with acute coronary syndrome. Given the silent nature of this event, a clinician's reliance on risk stratification tools and cardiac specific biomarkers to assist in the identification of at-risk individuals is heightened in the perioperative setting. ⋯ This decision is further complicated by the increasing sensitivity of the newest generation of cardiac biomarker immunoassays. In this narrative review, the growing body of evidence surrounding cardiac troponin elevations in the perioperative setting, how the evidence has been integrated into recent clinical practice guidelines, and its implications for the detection of perioperative myocardial infarction are discussed.
-
This review discusses the utility of risk scores, specifically, the role of preoperative risk scores in guiding the management of surgical patients, approaches to evaluate the quality of risk scores, and limitations to consider when applying risk scores in clinical practice. ⋯ Preoperative risk scores help inform perioperative clinical decision-making. Future research must determine how estimates of preoperative risk can be updated with information from the intraoperative period, how risk information should be communicated to patients, and which interventions can improve outcomes among patients within newly identified risk strata.
-
Quality of recovery is a complex construct whose definition is influenced heavily by the opinions and biases of the individual patient, clinician, or institution. Asa result, recovery assessment tools differ in their fundamental definitions of recovery, breadth, and assessment time frame. Accurate assessment of recovery is essential as suboptimal recovery has both economic and prognostic implications. ⋯ Ideally, recovery measures should assess outcomes in a simple dichotomous fashion and maintain relevancy by assessing in multiple domains at various time points. Assessment of recovery in a dichotomous fashion also has both clinical and research applications. It allows identification of suboptimal recovery at both individual and group levels,respectively, and when performed in real time, it allows the opportunity for timely targeted intervention specific to individual patients as well as for resource rationalization.