25 research outputs found
Peri-operative red blood cell transfusion in neonates and infants: NEonate and Children audiT of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe: A prospective European multicentre observational study
BACKGROUND: Little is known about current clinical practice concerning peri-operative red blood cell transfusion in neonates and small infants. Guidelines suggest transfusions based on haemoglobin thresholds ranging from 8.5 to 12 g dl-1, distinguishing between children from birth to day 7 (week 1), from day 8 to day 14 (week 2) or from day 15 (≥week 3) onwards. OBJECTIVE: To observe peri-operative red blood cell transfusion practice according to guidelines in relation to patient outcome. DESIGN: A multicentre observational study. SETTING: The NEonate-Children sTudy of Anaesthesia pRactice IN Europe (NECTARINE) trial recruited patients up to 60 weeks' postmenstrual age undergoing anaesthesia for surgical or diagnostic procedures from 165 centres in 31 European countries between March 2016 and January 2017. PATIENTS: The data included 5609 patients undergoing 6542 procedures. Inclusion criteria was a peri-operative red blood cell transfusion. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary endpoint was the haemoglobin level triggering a transfusion for neonates in week 1, week 2 and week 3. Secondary endpoints were transfusion volumes, 'delta haemoglobin' (preprocedure - transfusion-triggering) and 30-day and 90-day morbidity and mortality. RESULTS: Peri-operative red blood cell transfusions were recorded during 447 procedures (6.9%). The median haemoglobin levels triggering a transfusion were 9.6 [IQR 8.7 to 10.9] g dl-1 for neonates in week 1, 9.6 [7.7 to 10.4] g dl-1 in week 2 and 8.0 [7.3 to 9.0] g dl-1 in week 3. The median transfusion volume was 17.1 [11.1 to 26.4] ml kg-1 with a median delta haemoglobin of 1.8 [0.0 to 3.6] g dl-1. Thirty-day morbidity was 47.8% with an overall mortality of 11.3%. CONCLUSIONS: Results indicate lower transfusion-triggering haemoglobin thresholds in clinical practice than suggested by current guidelines. The high morbidity and mortality of this NECTARINE sub-cohort calls for investigative action and evidence-based guidelines addressing peri-operative red blood cell transfusions strategies. TRIAL REGISTRATION: ClinicalTrials.gov, identifier: NCT02350348
Recommended from our members
Protective intraoperative ventilation with higher versus lower levels of positive end-expiratory pressure in obese patients (PROBESE): study protocol for a randomized controlled trial
Background: Postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) increase the morbidity and mortality of surgery in obese patients. High levels of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) with lung recruitment maneuvers may improve intraoperative respiratory function, but they can also compromise hemodynamics, and the effects on PPCs are uncertain. We hypothesized that intraoperative mechanical ventilation using high PEEP with periodic recruitment maneuvers, as compared with low PEEP without recruitment maneuvers, prevents PPCs in obese patients. Methods/design The PRotective Ventilation with Higher versus Lower PEEP during General Anesthesia for Surgery in OBESE Patients (PROBESE) study is a multicenter, two-arm, international randomized controlled trial. In total, 2013 obese patients with body mass index ≥35 kg/m2 scheduled for at least 2 h of surgery under general anesthesia and at intermediate to high risk for PPCs will be included. Patients are ventilated intraoperatively with a low tidal volume of 7 ml/kg (predicted body weight) and randomly assigned to PEEP of 12 cmH2O with lung recruitment maneuvers (high PEEP) or PEEP of 4 cmH2O without recruitment maneuvers (low PEEP). The occurrence of PPCs will be recorded as collapsed composite of single adverse pulmonary events and represents the primary endpoint. Discussion To our knowledge, the PROBESE trial is the first multicenter, international randomized controlled trial to compare the effects of two different levels of intraoperative PEEP during protective low tidal volume ventilation on PPCs in obese patients. The results of the PROBESE trial will support anesthesiologists in their decision to choose a certain PEEP level during general anesthesia for surgery in obese patients in an attempt to prevent PPCs. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov identifier: NCT02148692. Registered on 23 May 2014; last updated 7 June 2016. Electronic supplementary material The online version of this article (doi:10.1186/s13063-017-1929-0) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users
Relationship Between Glycosylated Hemoglobin Level and Sciatic Nerve Block Performance in Diabetic Patients
WOS: 000314274600012PubMed ID: 23386766Background: The objective of the present study was to explore the effects of deficiencies in glucose regulation on the onset, regression, and block performance times in a group of patients with diabetes-related foot problems. Methods: Forty-eight patients with American Society of Anesthetists physical status 2-4 undergoing foot and ankle surgery with a popliteal fossa block were prospectively studied. Patients were stratified into cohorts based on 3 groups according to their HbA1c levels: group 1 (n = 15), HbA1c 5%-6%; group 2 (n = 16), HbA1c 7%-8%; group 3 (n = 17), HbA1c 9%-10%. A standardized local anesthetic mixture containing 10 mL of 2% prilocaine and 10 mL of 0.5% levobupivacaine was used in all study groups. The primary outcome of the study was the time for regression of the sensory block. Results: The onset times of sensory and motor blocks in group 3 were significantly longer than those in groups 2 and 1. Motor block regression time differed significantly between groups (P = .04), being longer in group 3 compared with group 1. In group 3, the sensory block regression time and the time of first analgesic use were significantly longer than the times in groups 1 and 2. Conclusions: We found that sensory block regression time was longer in diabetic patients with poor glycemic control than in the patients with better glycemic control. Longer block performance time, probably due to reduction in sensory and motor conduction velocity in diabetic patients with poor glycemic control, should be taken into consideration when peripheral nerve blocks are used. Level of Evidence: Level II, prospective comparative study