British journal of anaesthesia
-
Both anaemia and blood transfusion are associated with poor outcomes in the neurosurgical population. Based on the available literature, the optimal haemoglobin concentration for neurologically injured patients appears to be in the range of 9.0-10.0 g dl-1, although the individual risks and benefits should be weighed. Several perioperative blood conservation strategies have been used successfully in neurosurgery, including correction of anaemia and coagulopathy, use of antifibrinolytics, and intraoperative cell salvage. Avoidance of non-steroidal anti-inflammatory drugs and starch-containing solutions is recommended given the potential for platelet dysfunction.
-
Cerebrospinal-fluid (CSF) drainage is recommended by current guidelines for spinal protection during open and endovascular repairs of thoracic and thoraco-abdominal aortic aneurysms. In the published literature, great variability exists in the rate of CSF-related complications and morbidity. Herein, we perform a systematic review and meta-analysis on the incidence of CSF drainage-related complications, and compare the complication rates between open and endovascular repairs. ⋯ The complication rate for CSF drainage is not negligible. Our results help define a more accurate risk-benefit ratio for CSF drain placement at the time of repair of thoracic and thoraco-abdominal aneurysms.
-
The fragility index (FI), the number of events the statistical significance a result depends on, and the number of patients lost to follow-up are important parameters for interpreting randomised clinical trial results. We evaluated these two parameters in randomised controlled trials in anaesthesiology. For this, we performed a systematic search of the medical literature, seeking articles reporting on anaesthesiology trials with a statistically significant difference in the primary outcome and published in the top five general medicine journals, or the top 15 anaesthesiology journals. ⋯ The number of patients lost to follow-up exceeded the FI in 41 and 27% in trials in general medicine journals and anaesthesiology journals, respectively. The FI positively correlated with sample size and number of primary outcome events, and negatively correlated with the reported P-values. The results of this systematic review suggest that statistically significant differences in randomised controlled anaesthesiology trials are regularly fragile, implying that the primary outcome status of patients lost to follow-up could possibly have changed the reported effect.