Anaesthesia
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
Supraclavicular versus infraclavicular approach for ultrasound-guided right subclavian venous catheterisation: a randomised controlled non-inferiority trial.
Infraclavicular and supraclavicular approaches are used for subclavian venous catheterisation. We hypothesised that the supraclavicular approach is non-inferior to the infraclavicular approach in terms of safety during ultrasound-guided right subclavian venous catheterisation. We randomly allocated 401 neurosurgical patients undergoing ultrasound-guided right subclavian venous catheterisation into supraclavicular (n = 200) and infraclavicular (n = 201) groups. ⋯ The number (proportion) of patients with catheterisation-related complications was six (3.0%) in the supraclavicular group and 27 (13.4%) in the infraclavicular group, mean difference (95%CI) -10.4% (-15.7 to -5.1%), p < 0.001, with a significant difference also seen for catheter misplacement. Except for a shorter time (median (IQR [range]) required for venous puncture in the supraclavicular group, being 9 (6-20 [2-138]) vs. 13 (8-20 [3-99]) s, the incidence of mechanical complications and other catheterisation characteristics were similar between the two groups. We recommend the supraclavicular approach for ultrasound-guided right subclavian venous catheterisation.
-
Stroke is a leading cause of death and disability, and is associated with a huge societal and economic burden. Interventions for the immediate treatment of ischaemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion are dependent on recanalisation of the occluded vessel. Trials have provided evidence supporting the efficacy of mechanical thrombectomy in ischaemic stroke due to large vessel occlusion. ⋯ These and other studies have highlighted the importance of optimal blood pressure management as a major determinant of patient outcome. Anaesthetic management should be tailored to the individual patient and circumstances. Acute ischaemic stroke is a neurological emergency; clinicians should focus on minimising door-to-groin puncture time and the provision of high-quality periprocedural care with a particular emphasis on the maintenance of an adequate blood pressure.
-
Review
Evidence-based strategies to reduce the incidence of postoperative delirium: a narrative review.
Delirium is one of the most commonly occurring postoperative complications in older adults. It occurs due to the vulnerability of cerebral functioning to pathophysiological stressors. Identification of those at increased risk of developing delirium early in the surgical pathway provides an opportunity for modification of predisposing and precipitating risk factors and effective shared decision-making. ⋯ Current evidence suggests that avoidance of peri-operative benzodiazepines, careful titration of anaesthetic depth guided by processed electroencephalogram monitoring and treatment of pain are the most effective strategies to minimise the risk of delirium. Addressing postoperative delirium requires a collaborative, whole pathway approach, beginning with the early identification of those patients who are at risk. The research agenda should continue to examine the potential for pharmacological prophylaxis to prevent delirium while also addressing how successful models of delirium prevention can be translated from one setting to another, underpinned by implementation science methodology.
-
Nocebo refers to non-pharmacological adverse effects of an intervention. Well-intended procedural warnings frequently function as a nocebo. Both nocebo and placebo are integral to the generation of 'real' treatment effects and their associated 'real' side-effects. ⋯ Anaesthesia as a profession has always prided itself on practicing evidence-based medicine, yet for decades anaesthetists and other healthcare staff have communicated in ways counter to the evidence. The premise of every interaction should be 'primum non nocere' (first, do no harm). Whether the context is research or clinical anaesthesia practice, the nocebo can be ignored no longer.
-
Randomized Controlled Trial
A randomised controlled trial of 7.5-mm and 7.0-mm tracheal tubes vs. 6.5-mm and 6.0-mm tracheal tubes for men and women during laparoscopic surgery.
Sore throat after tracheal intubation impairs postoperative recovery. We randomly allocated 172 ASA physical status 1-2 participants, scheduled for laparoscopic lower abdominal surgery, to tracheal intubation with larger tubes (n = 88) or smaller tubes (n = 84), with internal diameters 7.5-mm vs. 6.5-mm for men and 7.0-mm vs. 6.0-mm for women. ⋯ Intra-operative ventilatory variables were unaffected by tube diameter, including peak inspiratory pressure, plateau pressure and end-tidal carbon dioxide partial pressure. In summary, smaller tracheal tubes benefitted patients having laparoscopic operations.