Diagnosis of Inadvertent Cannulation of the Azygos Vein During Cardiopulmonary Bypass

Cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass demands diligence and attention to detail to prevent neurologic injury. Arterial and venous cannulae are used to facilitate cardiopulmonary bypass. The assessment of adequate decompression of the venous circulation is an essential duty of the cardiac surgical team. Modalities for the assessment of adequate regional venous drainage are limited, however communication between the team and increased awareness of certain pathologic states can be useful. These modalities include cerebral oximetry and superior vena caval pressure monitoring, which were employed during a case with bicaval venous cannulation. Malposition of the superior vena cava cannula was detected after a series of events alerted the team that superior vena cava drainage may be compromised

Report from AmSECT’s International Consortium for Evidence-Based Perfusion: American Society of ExtraCorporeal Technology Standards and Guidelines for Perfusion Practice: 2013

One of the roles of a professional society is to develop standards and guidelines of practice as an instrument to guide safe and effective patient care. The American Society of Extracorporeal Technology (AmSECT) first published its Essentials for Perfusion Practice, Clinical Function: Conduct of Extracorporeal Circulation in 1993. The International Consortium for Evidence-Based Perfusion (ICEBP), a committee within AmSECT, was tasked with updating this document in 2010. The aim of this report is to describe the method of development and content of AmSECT’s new professional standards and guidelines. The ICEBP committee independently evaluated and provided input regarding the current “Essentials and Guidelines.” Structural changes were made to the entire document, and a draft document was developed, presented, and circulated to the AmSECT Board of Directors and broader membership for comment. Informed by these reviews, a revised document was then presented to the Society for a membership vote. The final document consists of 15 areas of practice covered by 50 Standards and 38 Guidelines (see Appendix 1) with the first standard focusing on the development of institutional protocols to support their implementation and use. A majority of the membership voted to accept the document (81.2% of the voting membership accepting, 18.8% rejecting). After an audit of the balloting process by AmSECT’s Ethics Committee, the results were reported to the membership and the document was officially adopted on July 24, 2013. The Standards and Guidelines will serve as a useful guide for cardiac surgical teams that wish to develop institution-specific standards and guidelines to improve the reliability, safety, and effectiveness of adult cardiopulmonary bypass. The ICEBP recognizes that the development of a Standards and Guidelines statement alone will not change care. Safe, reliable, and effective care will be best served through the development and implementation of institutional protocols based on these standards. AmSECT’s Standards and Guidelines for Perfusion Practice reflect the changing landscape of our profession as we work toward a safer and optimal provision of cardiopulmonary bypass for all our patients as well as a work environment that is supportive of delivering this care

Validation of a Perfusion Registry: Methodological Approach and Initial Findings

Although regional and national registries exist to measure and report performance of cardiac surgical programs, few registries exist dedicated to the practice of cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). We developed and implemented a cardiovascular perfusion registry (Perfusion Measures and outcomes [PERForm] Registry) within the structure of the Michigan Society of Thoracic and Cardiovascular Surgeons (MSTCVS) to improve our understanding of the practice of CPB. The PERForm Registry comprises data elements describing the practice of CPB. Fourteen medical centers within MSTCVS have voluntarily reported these data on procedures in which CPB is used. We validated the case count among procedures performed between January 1, 2011 to December 31, 2011, and validated the values among 20 fields at three medical centers. We queried database managers at all 14 medical centers to identify the infrastructure that contributed to best overall data collection performance. We found that 98% of all records submitted to the PERForm and 95% of those submitted to the Society of Thoracic Surgeons (STS) matched. We found quite favorable agreement in our audit of select fields (95.8%). Those centers with the most favorable performance in this validation study were more likely to use electronic data capture, have a perfusionist as the STS database manager, and have involvement of the STS database manager in the PERForm or STS databases. We successfully and accurately collected data concerning cardiovascular perfusion among 14 institutions in conjunction with the MSTCVS. Future efforts will focus on expanding data collection to all MSTCVS participating institutions as well as more broadly outside of Michigan

Is Conventional Bypass for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery a Misnomer?

Although recent trials comparing on vs. off-pump revascularization techniques describe cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) as “conventional,” inadequate description and evaluation of how CPB is managed often exist in the peer-reviewed literature. We identify and subsequently describe regional and center-level differences in the techniques and equipment used for conducting CPB in the setting of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. We accessed prospectively collected data among isolated CABG procedures submitted to either the Australian and New Zealand Collaborative Perfusion Registry (ANZCPR) or Perfusion Measures and outcomes (PERForm) Registry between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015. Variation in equipment and management practices reflecting key areas of CPB is described across 47 centers (ANZCPR: 9; PERForm: 38). We report average usage (categorical data) or median values (continuous data) at the center-level, along with the minimum and maximum across centers. Three thousand five hundred sixty-two patients were identified in the ANZCPR and 8,450 in PERForm. Substantial variation in equipment usage and CPB management practices existed (within and across registries). Open venous reservoirs were commonly used across both registries (nearly 100%), as were “all-but-cannula” biopassive surface coatings (>90%), whereas roller pumps were more commonly used in ANZCPR (ANZCPR: 85% vs. PERForm: 64%). ANZCPR participants had 640 mL absolute higher net prime volumes, attributed in part to higher total prime volume (1,462 mL vs. 1,217 mL) and lower adoption of retrograde autologous priming (20% vs. 81%). ANZCPR participants had higher nadir hematocrit on CPB (27 vs. 25). Minimal absolute differences existed in exposure to high arterial outflow temperatures (36.6°C vs. 37.0°C). We report substantial center and registry differences in both the type of equipment used and CPB management strategies. These findings suggest that the term “conventional bypass” may not adequately reflect real-world experiences. Instead of using this term, authors should provide key details of the CPB practices used in their patients

Is Conventional Bypass for Coronary Artery Bypass Graft Surgery a Misnomer?

Although recent trials comparing on vs. off-pump revascularization techniques describe cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) as conventional, inadequate description and evaluation of how CPB is managed often exist in the peer-reviewed literature. We identify and subsequently describe regional and center-level differences in the techniques and equipment used for conducting CPB in the setting of coronary artery bypass grafting (CABG) surgery. We accessed prospectively collected data among isolated CABG procedures submitted to either the Australian and New Zealand Collaborative Perfusion Registry (ANZCPR) or Perfusion Measures and outcomes (PERForm) Registry between January 1, 2014, and December 31, 2015. Variation in equipment and management practices reflecting key areas of CPB is described across 47 centers (ANZCPR: 9; PERForm: 38). We report average usage (categorical data) or median values (continuous data) at the center-level, along with the minimum and maximum across centers. Three thousand five hundred sixty-two patients were identified in the ANZCPR and 8,450 in PERForm. Substantial variation in equipment usage and CPB management practices existed (within and across registries). Open venous reservoirs were commonly used across both registries (nearly 100%), as were all-but-cannula biopassive surface coatings (\u3e90%), whereas roller pumps were more commonly used in ANZCPR (ANZCPR: 85% vs. PERForm: 64%). ANZCPR participants had 640 mL absolute higher net prime volumes, attributed in part to higher total prime volume (1,462 mL vs. 1,217 mL) and lower adoption of retrograde autologous priming (20% vs. 81%). ANZCPR participants had higher nadir hematocrit on CPB (27 vs. 25). Minimal absolute differences existed in exposure to high arterial outflow temperatures (36.6°C vs. 37.0°C). We report substantial center and registry differences in both the type of equipment used and CPB management strategies. These findings suggest that the term conventional bypass may not adequately reflect real-world experiences. Instead of using this term, authors should provide key details of the CPB practices used in their patients