Editorial: The times, they are a-changin’; a fundamental change to perioperative cardiac risk stratification for noncardiac surgery

No Abstrac

Editorial: Surgery and sedation is not safe in Africa

No Abstrac

Editorial: Challenging barriers to surgical access in lower and middle-income countries

No Abstrac

Incidence and hospital mortality of vascular surgery patients with perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI) or myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS)

Background: Perioperative myocardial infarction (PMI) and prognostically relevant myocardial injury following non-cardiac surgery (MINS) increases perioperative mortality. Studies in vascular patients show an increased incidence and mortality from PMI. However, there remains limited data on the relative prognostic importance of PMI and MINS in South African vascular surgical patients. The primary objective was to evaluate the incidence and prognosis of PMI and MINS in vascular surgical patients admitted to intensive care. The secondary objective was to identify predictors of PMI and hospital mortality.Methods: A retrospective electronic patient record review of all patients aged at least 45 years admitted to Inkosi Albert Luthuli Central Hospital (IALCH) intensive care unit (ICU) following vascular surgery between 1 January 2011 and 31 December 2013 was carried out.Results: A total of 140 vascular patients were reviewed; 24.3% of the patients had a PMI and a further 25% had MINS. PMI was associated with significantly increased hospital mortality of 58.8% (p < 0.01) and MINS was not (20%, p = 1.00). Increasing age, the highest postoperative B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP) and a blood transfusion within the first three days postoperatively were independent predictors of PMI. PMI and a history of congestive cardiac failure were independent predictors of hospital mortality.Conclusion: PMI and MINS are present in nearly 50% of vascular patients admitted to intensive care postoperatively. PMI but not MINS in these patients was significantly associated with hospital mortality. MINS requires strict diagnostic criteria in the intensive care where other non-ischaemic pathologies may be associated with myocardial injury.Keywords: brain natriuretic peptide, critical illness, myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery, perioperative myocardial infarction, vascular surger

Management of failed spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section

Background. Failed spinal anaesthesia for caesarean section (CS) may be partial or complete and the subsequent discomfort is the most commonly cited cause of litigation in obstetric anaesthesia.Objectives. To determine if there is a standardised approach to: (i) testing the level of block of spinal anaesthesia; and (ii) the management of failed spinal anaesthesia for CS.Methods. A structured questionnaire to ascertain the current practice of testing the level of block and management of three different scenarios of failed spinal anaesthesia was distributed to 51 government hospitals in KwaZulu-Natal, South Africa (SA). All obstetric anaesthetic service providers, ranging from interns to specialist anaesthetists, were invited to complete the questionnaire.Results. A total of 375 responses were received from 42 of the 51 hospitals surveyed. Specialist anaesthetists managed failure of spinal anaesthesia significantly differently than other anaesthetic service providers. Specialists were more likely to convert to a general anaesthetic (GA), while others were more likely to repeat spinal anaesthesia or administer intravenous ketamine, midazolam and opioids. Only 212 respondents (56%) tested the level of block and there was no difference between the groups with regard to the method of assessment of height (p=0.15). Nonspecialists, however, accepted a significantly lower level of block, using pinprick, than specialists (p=0.027), which could lead to a higher failure rate. More than one-third of non-specialists did not consider themselves competent to perform a GA and >90% of respondents agreed that a ‘failed’ spinal algorithm would be useful.Conclusion. There is a need for standardised assessment of the adequacy of spinal anaesthesia for CS in SA, as well as a failed spinal algorithm

Editorial: It is time for Africa to lead the way in pragmatic clinical trials

No Abstrac

Editorial: Is the HPCSA requirement for a research dissertation for specialist registration the best option?

No Abstrac

The African Surgical OutcomeS-2 (ASOS-2) Pilot Trial, a mixed-methods implementation study

Background: The African Surgical Outcomes Study (ASOS) showed that surgical patients in Africa have a mortality twice the global average. The working hypothesis is that patients die as a result of failure to rescue following complications in the postoperative period. The African Surgical OutcomeS-2 (ASOS-2) Trial plans to test the efficacy of increased postoperative surveillance in high risk patients for decreasing perioperative morbidity and mortality. This pilot trial aimed i) to evaluate the adequacy of data produced by the data collection strategies of the ASOS-2 Trial, ii) to evaluate the fidelity of implementation of the increased postoperative surveillance intervention, and iii) to understand the acceptability, appropriateness and feasibility of the intervention and the trial processes.Methods: The ASOS-2 Pilot Trial was a mixed-methods (quantitative-qualitative) implementation study focusing on the intervention arm of the proposed ASOS-2 Trial. The intervention is increased postoperative surveillance for high-risk surgical patients. The intervention protocol was implemented at all sites for a seven-day period. A post pilot trial survey was used to collect data on the implementation outcomes.Results: 803 patients were recruited from 16 hospitals in eight African countries. The sampling and data collection strategies provided 98% complete data collection. Seventy-three percent of respondents believed that they truly provided increased postoperative surveillance to high risk patients. In reality 83/125 (66%) of high-risk patients received some form of increased postoperative surveillance. However, the individual components of the increased postoperative surveillance intervention were implemented in less than 50% of high-risk patients (excepting increasing nursing observations). The components most frequently unavailable were the ability to provide care in a higher care ward (32.1%) and assigning the patient to a bed in view of the nurses’ station (28.4%). Failure to comply with available components of the intervention ranged from 27.5% to 54.3%. The post pilot survey had a response rate of 30/40 (75%). In Likert scale questions about acceptability, appropriateness, and feasibility of the ASOS-2 intervention, 63% to 87% of respondents indicated agreement. Respondents reported barriers related to resources, trial processes, teamwork and communication as reasons for disagreement.Conclusions: The proposed ASOS-2 Trial appears to be appropriate, acceptable and feasible in Africa. This pilot trial provides support for the proposed ASOS-2 Trial. It emphasises the need for establishing trial site teams which address the needs of all stakeholders during the trial. A concerted effort must be made to help participating hospitals to increase compliance with all the components of the proposed intervention of ‘increased postoperative surveillance’ during the ASOS-2 Trial.Keywords: Trial, cluster randomised, Trial, pilot, Implementation science, Mixed methods, Mortality, Surger

South African cardiovascular risk stratification guideline for non-cardiac surgery

The South African (SA) guidelines for cardiac patients for non-cardiac surgery were developed to address the need for cardiac risk assessment and risk stratification for elective non-cardiac surgical patients in SA, and more broadly in Africa. The guidelines were developed by updating the Canadian Cardiovascular Society Guidelines on Perioperative Cardiac Risk Assessment and Management for Patients Who Undergo Non-cardiac Surgery, with a search of literature from African countries and recent publications. The updated proposed guidelines were then evaluated in a Delphi consensus process by SA anaesthesia and vascular surgical experts. The recommendations in these guidelines are: 1. We suggest that elective non-cardiac surgical patients who are 45 years and older with either a history of coronary artery disease, congestive cardiac failure, stroke or transient ischaemic attack, or vascular surgical patients 18 years or older with peripheral vascular disease require further preoperative risk stratification as their predicted 30-day major adverse cardiac event (MACE) risk exceeds 5% (conditional recommendation: moderate-quality evidence). 2. We do not recommend routine non-invasive testing for cardiovascular risk stratification prior to elective non-cardiac surgery in adults (strong recommendation: low-to-moderate-quality evidence). 3. We recommend that elective non-cardiac surgical patients who are 45 years and older with a history of coronary artery disease, or stroke or transient ischaemic attack, or congestive cardiac failure or vascular surgical patients 18 years or older with peripheral vascular disease should have preoperative natriuretic peptide (NP) screening (strong recommendation: high-quality evidence). 4. We recommend daily postoperative troponin measurements for 48 - 72 hours for non-cardiac surgical patients who are 45 years and older with a history of coronary artery disease, or stroke or transient ischaemic attack, or congestive cardiac failure or vascular surgical patients 18 years or older with peripheral vascular disease, i.e. (i) a baseline risk >5% for MACE 30 days after elective surgery (if no preoperative NP screening), or (ii) an elevated B-type natriuretic peptide (BNP)/N-terminal-prohormone B-type natriuretic peptide (NT-proBNP) measurement before elective surgery (defined as BNP >99 pg/mL or a NT-proBNP >300 pg/mL) (conditional recommendation: moderate-quality evidence). Additional recommendations are given for the management of myocardial injury after non-cardiac surgery (MINS) and medications for comorbidities.The Global Surgery Fellowship grant.http://www.samj.org.zadm2022Anaesthesiolog

Effects of accelerated versus standard care surgery on the risk of acute kidney injury in patients with a hip fracture : A substudy protocol of the hip fracture Accelerated surgical TreaTment and Care tracK (HIP ATTACK) international randomised controlled trial

Introduction Inflammation, dehydration, hypotension and bleeding may all contribute to the development of acute kidney injury (AKI). Accelerated surgery after a hip fracture can decrease the exposure time to such contributors and may reduce the risk of AKI. Methods and analysis Hip fracture Accelerated surgical TreaTment And Care tracK (HIP ATTACK) is a multicentre, international, parallel-group randomised controlled trial (RCT). Patients who suffer a hip fracture are randomly allocated to either accelerated medical assessment and surgical repair with a goal of surgery within 6 hours of diagnosis or standard care where a repair typically occurs 24 to 48 hours after diagnosis. The primary outcome of this substudy is the development of AKI within 7 days of randomisation. We anticipate at least 1998 patients will participate in this substudy. Ethics and dissemination We obtained ethics approval for additional serum creatinine recordings in consecutive patients enrolled at 70 participating centres. All patients provide consent before randomisation. We anticipate reporting substudy results by 2021. Trial registration number NCT02027896; Pre-results