Anaesthesia
-
Multicenter Study
The contribution of the anaesthetist to risk-adjusted mortality after cardiac surgery.
It is widely accepted that the performance of the operating surgeon affects outcomes, and this has led to the publication of surgical results in the public domain. However, the effect of other members of the multidisciplinary team is unknown. We studied the effect of the anaesthetist on mortality after cardiac surgery by analysing data collected prospectively over ten years of consecutive cardiac surgical cases from ten UK centres. ⋯ Anaesthetists did not appear to affect mortality. These findings do not support public disclosure of cardiac anaesthetists' results, but substantially validate current UK cardiac anaesthetic training and practice. Further research is required to establish the potential effects of very low anaesthetic caseloads and the effect of cardiac anaesthetists on patient morbidity.
-
There is little doubt that these guidelines incorporate advances made in airway management since 2004. They will change day-to-day practice of anaesthesia, as outlined above, from pre-operative airway assessment, to integrating the WHO team briefing, to the use and provision of equipment and drugs, and the recording of information on the anaesthesia chart. They will inform the later analysis of any critical airway incidents, especially as documentation and postoperative management are addressed, and they will encourage training in a range of techniques. ⋯ Formal testing may reveal which aspects of their design, complex as it is, may distract from, rather than enhance, airway management during crises. All guidelines represent a standard of care or a normative approach to a clinical problem. As such, they not only help guide clinicians, but they also provide the broader community with the opportunity to improve standards, to ensure equipment is available, and that training for the skills and processes required are in place to ensure successful adoption.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
A randomised controlled trial of peri-operative pregabalin vs. placebo for video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery.
We allocated 52 participants to oral pregabalin 300 mg and 48 participants to placebo tablets before thoracoscopic surgery and for five postoperative days. The median (IQR [range]) cumulative pain scores at rest for nine postoperative months were 184 (94-274 [51-1454]) after pregabalin and 166 (66-266 [48-1628]) after placebo, p = 0.39. ⋯ After three postoperative months, 29/100 participants had persistent surgical site pain, 19/52 after pregabalin and 10/48 after placebo, p = 0.12, of whom four and five, respectively, attended a pain management clinic, p = 0.24. The median (IQR [range]) morphine equivalent consumption six days after surgery was 273 (128-619 [39-2243]) mg after pregabalin and 319 (190-663 [47-2258]) mg after placebo, p = 0.35.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
A randomised comparison between ultrasound and nerve stimulation for infraclavicular catheter placement.
We conducted this study to determine if placement of infraclavicular catheters guided by ultrasound is quicker than placement guided by nerve stimulation. Infraclavicular brachial plexus catheters were inserted in 210 randomly allocated patients who were scheduled for elective hand or elbow surgery. Needle and catheter placement was guided by ultrasound (n = 105) or by nerve stimulation (n = 105). ⋯ Success rate was similar between the two techniques (83.2% vs 81.4%, p = 0.738). However, placement of ultrasound-guided catheters took less time (7.2 [2.5] vs 9.6 [3.6] min, p < 0 .001). Pain and satisfaction scores, and incidence of nerve deficit, were also similar with both techniques.