Isolated forearm technique: a meta-analysis of connected consciousness during different general anaesthesia regimens

BACKGROUND: General anaesthesia should prevent patients from experiencing surgery, defined as connected consciousness. The isolated forearm technique (IFT) is the current gold standard for connected consciousness monitoring. We evaluated the efficacy of different anaesthesia regimens in preventing IFT responses. METHODS: We conducted a systematic review with meta-analysis of studies evaluating IFT in adults. Proportions of IFT-positive patients were compared for inhalational versus intravenous anaesthesia and anaesthesia brain monitor (ABM)-guided versus non-ABM-guided. RESULTS: Of 1131 patients in 22 studies, 393 (34.8%) had an IFT response during induction or maintenance. IFT-positive patients were less frequent during induction (19.7% [95% CI, 17.5-22.1]) than during maintenance (31.2% [95% CI, 27.8-34.8]). Proportions of IFT-positive patients during induction and maintenance were similar for inhalational (0.51 [95% CI, 0.38-0.65]) and intravenous (0.52 [95% CI, 0.26-0.77]) anaesthesia, but during maintenance were lower with inhalational (0.18 [95% CI, 0.08-0.38]) than with intravenous (0.48 [95% CI, 0.24-0.73]) anaesthesia. Proportions of IFT-positive patients during induction and maintenance were not significantly different for ABM-guided (0.64 [95% CI, 0.39-0.83]) and non-ABM-guided (0.48 [95% CI, 0.34-0.62]) anaesthesia but during maintenance were lower with non-ABM-guided (0.19 [95% CI, 0.09-0.37]) than with ABM-guided (0.57 [95% CI, 0.34-0.77]). Proportions of IFT-positive patients decreased significantly with increasing age and premedication use. Of the 34 anaesthesia regimens, 16 were inadequate. Studies had low methodological quality (only seven randomised controlled trials) and significant heterogeneity. CONCLUSIONS: Standard general anaesthesia regimens might not prevent connected consciousness. More accurate anaesthesia brain monitor methodology to reduce the likelihood of connected consciousness is desirable

Implicit memory and anesthesia: A systematic review and meta‐analysis

General anesthesia should induce unconsciousness and provide amnesia. Amnesia refers to the absence of explicit and implicit memories. Unlike explicit memory, implicit memory is not consciously recalled, and it can affect behavior/performance at a later time. The impact of general anesthesia in preventing implicit memory formation is not well‐established. We performed a systematic review with meta‐analysis of studies reporting implicit memory occurrence in adult patients after deep sedation (Observer’s Assessment of Alertness/Sedation of 0–1 with spontaneous breathing) or general anesthesia. We also evaluated the impact of different anesthetic/analgesic regimens and the time point of auditory task delivery on implicit memory formation. The metaanalysis included the estimation of odds ratios (ORs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs). We included a total of 61 studies with 3906 patients and 119 different cohorts. For 43 cohorts (36.1%), implicit memory events were reported. The American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status III–IV was associated with a higher likelihood of implicit memory formation (OR:3.48; 95%CI:1.18–10.25, p < 0.05) than ASA physical status I–II. Further, there was a lower likelihood of implicit memory formation for deep sedation cases, compared to general anesthesia (OR:0.10; 95%CI:0.01–0.76, p < 0.05) and for patients receiving premedication with benzodiazepines compared to not premedicated patients before general anesthesia (OR:0.35; 95%CI:0.13–0.93, p = 0.05)

Targeted temperature management in cardiac surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis on postoperative cognitive outcomes

Background: Postoperative cognitive decline occurs commonly after cardiac surgery. The available literature is inconclusive on the role of intraoperative causal or protective factors. Methods: We systematically reviewed studies evaluating delayed neurocognitive recovery (DNR), postoperative neurocognitive disorder (NCD), stroke, and the mortality rates among patients undergoing hypothermic or normothermic cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB). We further performed a subgroup analysis for age, surgery type (coronary artery bypass grafting [CABG], valve surgery, or combined), and the mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) during CPB, and conducted a proportion meta-analysis after calculation of single proportions and confidence intervals (CIs). Results: We included a total of 58 studies with 9609 patients in our analysis. Among these, 1906 of 4010 patients (47.5%) had DNR, and 2071 of 7160 (28.9%) had postoperative NCD. Ninety of 4625 patients (2.0%) had a stroke, and 174 of 7589 (2.3%) died. There was no statistically significant relationship between the considered variables and DNR, NCD, stroke, and mortality. In the subgroup analysis comparing hypothermic with normothermic CPB, we found higher NCD rates after combined surgery; for normothermic CPB cases only, the rates of DNR and NCD were lower after combined surgery compared with CABG surgery. A MAP >70 mm Hg compared with MAP=50–70 mm Hg during CPB was associated with a lower rate of DNR. Conclusions: Temperature, MAP during CPB, age, and surgery type were not associated with neurocognitive disorders, stroke, and mortality in cardiac surgery. A normothermic CPB, particularly when performed with MAP >70 mm Hg, may reduce the risk of postoperative neurocognitive decline after cardiac surgery. PROSPERO registration number: CRD42019140844

Early and Midterm Outcome of Propensity-Matched Intermediate-Risk Patients Aged 6580 Years with Aortic Stenosis Undergoing Surgical or Transcatheter Aortic Valve Replacement (from the Italian Multicenter OBSERVANT Study)

The aim of this study was to analyze procedural and postprocedural outcomes of patients aged 6580 years treated by transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) or surgical aortic valve replacement (SAVR) as enrolled in the OBservational Study of Effectiveness of SAVR-TAVR procedures for severe Aortic steNosis Treatment (OBSERVANT) Study. TAVI is offered to patients with aortic stenosis judged inoperable or at high surgical risk. Nevertheless, it is common clinical practice to treat elderly ( 6580 years) patients by TAVI regardless of surgical risk for traditional SAVR. OBSERVANT is a multicenter, observational, prospective cohort study that enrolled patients with symptomatic severe aortic stenosis who underwent SAVR or TAVI from December 2010 to June 2012 in 93 Italian participating hospitals. Information on demographic characteristics, health status before intervention, therapeutic approach, and intraprocedural and 30-day outcomes was collected. An administrative follow-up was set up to collect data on midterm to long-term outcomes. We reviewed baseline and procedural data of patients aged 6580 years, looking for different early and late outcome after TAVI or SAVR. Patients treated by TAVI were sicker than SAVR because of higher rate of co-morbidities, advanced illness, frailty, and Logistic EuroSCORE. After propensity matching, early and midterm mortality were comparable between the 2 groups. However, patients treated by TAVI had higher rate of vascular complications (6.0% vs 0.5%; p <0.0001), permanent pacemaker implantation (13.4% vs 3.7%; p <0.0001), and paravalvular leak (8.9% vs 2.4%; p <0.0001). Patients who underwent SAVR had more frequent bleedings needing transfusion (63.2% vs 34.5%; p <0.0001) and acute kidney injury (9.6% vs 3.9%; p = 0.0010). In conclusion, patients aged 6580 years treated by TAVI or SAVR had similar early and midterm mortality

“Full-plastic jacket” with everolimus-eluting Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffolds: Clinical outcomes in the multicenter prospective RAI registry (ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02298413)

Objectives: The objective of this study was to investigate mid-term clinical outcomes of patients treated with ‘full-plastic jacket’ (FPJ) everolimus-eluting Absorb bioresorbable vascular scaffold (BRS) implantation. Background: FPJ with BRS may represent an interesting option for patient with diffuse coronary artery disease (CAD), but data on the clinical impact of FPJ using the Absorb BRS are scant. Methods: FPJ was defined as the implantation of >56 mm of overlapping BRS in at least one vessel. We compared outcomes of patients receiving Absorb FPJ vs. non-FPJ within the multicenter prospective RAI Registry. Results: Out of 1505 consecutive patients enrolled in the RAI registry, 1384 were eligible for this analysis. Of these, 143 (10.3%) were treated with BRS FPJ. At a median follow-up of 649 days, no differences were observed between FPJ and non-FPJ groups in terms of the device-oriented composite endpoint (DoCE) (5.6% vs. 4.4%, p = 0.675) or the patient-related composite endpoint (PoCE) (20.9% vs. 15.9%, p = 0.149). Patients receiving FPJ had higher rates of target vessel repeat revascularization (TVR) (11.2% vs. 6.3%, p = 0.042). In the FPJ group, there was no cardiac death and only one (very late) stent thrombosis (ST) (0.7%). Conclusions: Mid-term outcomes of a FPJ PCI strategy in the setting of diffuse CAD did not show a significant increase in composite device- and patient-related events, with rates of cardiac death and ST comparable to non-FPJ Absorb BRS implantation. However, these findings are hypothesis generating and requiring further validation