Anaesthesia and Intensive Care

In preparation for a case, an anaesthetist opened a 20 ml glass vial of propofol and aspirated the propofol into a syringe via a blunt drawing-up needle. Increased resistance was felt with aspiration. On inspection, a shard of glass was found at the tip of the drawing-up needle. The shard was presumed to be from the propofol ampoule, and to have fallen into the solution upon snapping open its glass tip. This illustrative case raises the issue of contamination of drugs by particles introduced during the drawing-up process. It also highlights the possibility that during the drawing-up process, intravenous drugs may become contaminated not just with particles, but with microorganisms on the surface of the particles. In this article, we discuss relevant recent research of the implications of this type of drug contamination. We draw attention to the need for meticulous care in drawing up and administering intravenous drugs during anaesthesia, particularly propofol.

These guidelines are a consensus document developed by a working party of the Australian and New Zealand Anaesthetic Allergy Group (ANZAAG) to provide an approach to the investigation of perioperative anaphylaxis. They focus primarily on the use of skin testing as it is the investigation with the greatest clinical utility for the identification of the likely causative agent and potentially safer alternatives. The practicalities and process of skin testing, its limitations, and the place of other tests are discussed. These guidelines also address the roles of graded challenge and in vitro testing. The implications of anaphylaxis associated with neuromuscular blocking agents, beta-lactam antibiotics, local anaesthetic agents and chlorhexidine are discussed. Evidence for the recommendations is derived from literature searches using the words skin test, allergy, anaphylaxis, anaesthesia, and each of the individual agents listed in these guidelines. The individual articles were then reviewed for suitability for inclusion in these guidelines. Where evidence was not strong, as is the situation for many perioperative agents, expert consensus from the ANZAAG working party was used. These guidelines are intended for use by specialists involved in the investigation of perioperative allergy. They have been approved following peer review by members of ANZAAG and are available on the ANZAAG website: http://www.anzaag.com/anaphylaxis-management/testing-guidelines.pdf.

Nicotine replacement therapy is widely used in critically ill smokers and its effect on delirium, mortality and duration of intensive care unit (ICU) admission is unknown. The aims of this review were to determine whether the management of nicotine withdrawal with nicotine replacement therapy reduces delirium, mortality or length of stay in critically ill smokers in ICU. The primary outcome was incidence of author-defined ICU delirium. Secondary outcomes were ICU or hospital mortality, ICU-free days at day 28, and ICU or hospital length of stay. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of the data sources MEDLINE, EMBASE, CINAHL, and the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews for randomised controlled trials and observational studies. Clinical trials, observational studies and systematic reviews comparing nicotine replacement therapy with placebo or no treatment were included. Case reports, case series, non-systematic reviews and studies that involved children were excluded. Eight studies were eligible (n=2,636) for inclusion in the data synthesis. In a meta-analysis of observational studies, nicotine replacement therapy was associated with increased delirium (three studies; n=908; I2=0%; finite element method: odds ratio 4.03 [95% confidence interval 2.64, 6.15]; P <0.001). There was no difference in ICU mortality (three studies; n=1,309; P=0.10, I2=44%; finite element method: odds ratio 0.58; 95% confidence intervals 0.31– 1.10) and hospital mortality or 28-day ICU-free days. In the absence of high-quality data, nicotine replacement therapy cannot currently be recommended for routine use to prevent delirium or to reduce hospital or ICU mortality in critically ill smokers.

We evaluated the effects of haemodilution with either dextran 40 or 0.9% normal saline on coagulation in vitro using rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM^®, Pentapharm Co., Munich, Germany) and multiple electrode aggregometry (Multiplate^® Platelet Function Analyser, Dynabyte, Munich, Germany). Venous blood samples obtained from 20 healthy volunteers were diluted in vitro with dextran 40 or normal saline by 5%, 10% and 15%. Fibrinogen concentration, ROTEM-EXTEM^® (screening test for the extrinsic coagulation pathway), FIBTEM^® (an EXTEM-based assay of the fibrin component of clot) parameters including coagulation time, clot formation time, alpha angle, maximum clot firmness and lysis index were measured in the undiluted sample and at each level of haemodilution. Dextran 40 at 15% haemodilution significantly prolonged coagulation time, clot formation time and significantly decreased the alpha angle and maximal clot firmness (EXTEM amplitude at five minutes [A5] and ten minutes [A10]) compared with normal saline. The FIBTEM assay (maximal clot firmness and FIBTEM A5 and A10) showed a marked decrease in maximal clot firmness at all dilutions suggesting impaired fibrinogen activity and a risk of bleeding. Multiple electrode aggregometry did not demonstrate any platelet dysfunction. Haemodilution with dextran 40 causes significant impairment in clot formation and strength compared to saline haemodilution and undiluted blood. At the levels of in vitro haemodilution designed to reflect the clinical use of dextran infusions, no significant fibrinolysis or platelet inhibition was observed.

In this retrospective observational study performed in a high-volume hepatobiliary–pancreatic unit, we evaluated the effect of a surgery-specific goal-directed therapy (GDT) physiologic algorithm on complications and length of hospital stay. We compared patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy with either a standardised Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program (usual care group), or a standardised Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program in combination with a surgery-specific cardiac output–guided algorithm (GDT group). We included 145 consecutive patients: 47 in the GDT group and 98 in the usual care group. Multivariable associations between GDT and lengths of stay and complications were investigated using negative binomial regression. Postoperative complications were common and occurred at similar frequencies amongst the GDT and usual care groups: 64% versus 68% respectively, P=0.71; odds ratio 0.82; (95% confidence interval 0.39–1.70). There were fewer cardiorespiratory complications in the GDT group. Median (interquartile range) length of hospital stay was ten days (8.0–14.0) in the GDT group compared to 13 days (8.8–21.3) in the usual care group, P=0.01. Median (interquartile range) total intraoperative fluid was 3,000 ml (2,050–4,175) in the GDT group compared to 4,500 ml (3,275–5,325) in the usual care group, P <0.0001; but by day one, the median (interquartile range) fluid balance was similar (1,198 ml [700–1,729] in the GDT group versus 977 ml [419–2,044] in the usual care group, P=0.96). Use of vasoactive medications was higher in the GDT group. In our patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy, GDT was associated with restrictive intraoperative fluid intervention, fewer cardiorespiratory complications and a shorter hospital length of stay compared to usual care. However, we could not exclude an influence of surgical caseload, which we have previously found to be an important variable. We also could not relate the increased hospital length of stay to cardiorespiratory complications in individual patients. Therefore, these observational retrospective findings would require confirmation in a prospective randomised study.

This study aimed to assess the effects of sugammadex and neostigmine/atropine on postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD) in adult patients after elective surgery. A randomised, double-blind controlled trial was carried out on 160 American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status I to III patients who were >40 years of age. The Mini–Mental State Evaluation, clock-drawing test and the Isaacs Set test were used to assess cognitive function at three timepoints: 1) preoperatively, 2) one hour postoperatively, and 3) at discharge. The anaesthetic protocol was the same for all patients, except for the neuromuscular block reversal, which was administered by random allocation using either sugammadex or neostigmine/ atropine after the reappearance of T2 in the train-of-four sequence. POCD was defined as a decline ≥1 standard deviation in ≥2 cognitive tests. The incidence of POCD was similar in both groups at one hour postoperatively and at discharge (28% and 10%, in the neostigmine group, 23% and 5.4% in the sugammadex group, P=0.55 and 0.27 respectively). In relation to individual tests, a significant decline of clock-drawing test in the neostigmine group was observed at one hour postoperatively and at discharge. For the Isaacs Set test, a greater decline was found in the sugammadex group. These findings suggest that there are no clinically important differences in the incidence of POCD after neostigmine or sugammadex administration.

We assessed the clinical impact of thrombelastography (TEG^®) results (TEG^® 5000, Haemonetics Corporation, Braintree, MA, USA) by measuring their ability to cause changes in a theoretical treatment plan and contribute to the understanding of haemostasis. We prospectively included paediatric intensive care unit (PICU) patients who had standard tests of haemostasis and TEG ordered and had an arterial catheter or extracorporeal access port in situ. Blood for standard tests and TEG was taken simultaneously. Independent of patient care, general patient information and results of standard laboratory tests were presented to five clinicians who were asked to document their theoretical treatment plan. Clinicians were then shown TEG results and asked if they caused a change in their plan, if they confirmed initial standard laboratory test results, if they enabled a better understanding of haemostasis and if they provided additional information. Inter-rater agreement between the clinicians was determined. Forty-two TEG results were obtained from 34 patients. Overall, the inclusion of TEG results led to a change in treatment plan in 97 of 207 occasions (47%), confirmed standard laboratory test results in 177 of 204 occasions (87%), enabled a better understanding of haemostasis in 140 of 204 occasions (69%) and provided additional information in 131 of 204 occasions (64%). Variation existed between clinicians, seemingly due to individual differences, with poor inter-rater agreement. We conclude that TEG results led to changes in treatment plans almost half the time, confirmed findings of standard tests and provided a better understanding of haemostasis, but randomised controlled trials are required to determine the role and influence of TEG results on patient outcome.

Procalcitonin (PCT) and presepsin (PSEP) are useful biomarkers for diagnosing sepsis; however, elevated PCT and PSEP levels may be observed in conditions other than sepsis. We hypothesised that PCT and PSEP levels could increase after severe traumatic injuries. Trauma patients with an Injury Severity Score of ≥16 from October 2013 to September 2015 were enrolled in our study. We examined PCT and PSEP levels and their positive rates on days 0 and 1. PCT and PSEP levels on days 0 and 1 were compared. Risk factors for increasing sepsis biomarker levels were identified by multivariate logistic regression analyses. In this study, 75 patients were included. PCT levels on days 0 and 1 were 0.1±0.4 and 1.8±6.3 ng/ml, respectively (P=0.02). PSEP levels on days 0 and 1 were 221±261 and 222±207 pg/ml, respectively (P=0.98). As per multivariate logistic regression analyses, packed red blood cell (PRBC) transfusion was the only independent risk factor for higher PCT levels on day 1 (P=0.04). Using PCT to diagnose sepsis in trauma patients on day 1 requires caution. PRBC transfusion was found to be a risk factor for increasing PCT levels. On the other hand, PSEP levels were not affected by trauma during the early phases.

Telemedicine consultations in remote intensive care units (ICUs) overseas were found to be effective in reducing mortality and hospital length of stay (LOS). In Australia, there were anecdotal reports of these clinical outcomes. This retrospective before and after study assessed the improvement in patient outcomes with the implementation of a telemedicine program in a regional high dependency unit. Daily virtual consultations were conducted between the rural facility and the intensivists at the regional centre. A total of 525 patients received intensive care support between 2010 and 2015. Hospital and High Dependency Unit mortality showed no evidence of significant differences between the telemedicine group and the baseline (relative risk 1.02, 95% confidence interval [CI] 0.99–1.06, P=0.25 and relative risk 1.00, 95% CI 0.98–1.03, P=0.67 respectively). The hospital LOS was lower in the baseline group by 1.5 days. There was no significant difference in High Dependency Unit LOS. To adjust for the covariates in LOS, log linear regression analysis was performed. The telemedicine intervention, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II scores and inter-hospital transfers were found to contribute significantly to hospital LOS. The most important result of the study was that the proportion of inter-hospital transfers was lower in the telemedicine group (relative risk 0.88, 95% CI 0.80–0.98, P=0.03) compared to baseline. This means that critically ill patients in our regional centre can continue to receive specialist care remotely through tele-ICU consultations thus avoiding the need for patient transport. However, further study is needed to establish the benefits and risks of telemedicine intervention in ICUs in Australia.

Testing for malignant hyperthermia in New Zealand involves two tests—in vitro contracture testing of excised lateral quadriceps muscle and DNA analysis. In vitro contracture testing is regarded as the gold standard in malignant hyperthermia diagnosis but several publications have questioned the reliability of a normal result. Analysis of 479 anaesthetic records in 280 patients or their descendants throughout New Zealand who had tested negative for malignant hyperthermia, demonstrated there was no evidence of malignant hyperthermia episodes in this group who had been administered anaesthetic triggering agents. A wide range of anaesthetics were used over the study period. Analysis of each anaesthetic record was undertaken using the malignant hyperthermia grading scale which determines the likelihood that an anaesthetic event represents a malignant hyperthermia episode. Confirmation of the negative results was further supported by normal DNA analysis of patients in 48% of anaesthetics. There are advantages to using inhalational agents in certain situations and although demonstrating a zero risk of a malignant hyperthermia episode is not statistically possible, evidence in this large series suggests that the risk of an episode in these patients is extremely low and may be negligible. We suggest that anaesthetic triggering agents can be used safely in patients with normal in vitro contracture tests, and in their descendants.

The perioperative risks and factors associated with adverse cardiac outcomes in patients with dilated cardiomyopathy undergoing non-cardiac surgery are unknown. Interrogation of the Nelson Hospital transthoracic echocardiogram database identified 127 patients with dilated cardiomyopathy who satisfied the study criteria and underwent non-cardiac surgery between June 1999 and July 2013. Demographic and clinical data along with postoperative death within 30 days or a major adverse cardiac event were retrieved and analysed. The mean age was 75.9 years. Seventy-one percent of the patients had severe impairment of left ventricular function and 35% had a severely dilated left ventricle. A major adverse cardiac event occurred in 18.1% of patients and 5.5% of patients died within 30 days of surgery. Increased surgical risk and absence of cerebrovascular disease were associated with adverse outcome (P <0.001, P <0.05, respectively). Forty-three and a half percent (43.5%) of patients undergoing high-risk surgery had an adverse outcome compared to 36.1% and 5.9% for moderate and low-risk surgery, respectively. A major adverse cardiac event was observed in 26.7% of patients with cardiovascular disease compared to 9.8% of patients without cardiovascular disease. We were unable to exclude an influence of other potential risk factors due to the retrospective observational nature of the study. These findings highlight a potential increase in complications with moderate or high surgical risk, whilst are reassuring in demonstrating the relative safety of low-risk surgery in this group of high-risk patients.

Drug errors amongst anaesthetists are common. Although there has been previous work on the system factors involved with drug error, there has been little research on the sequelae of a drug error from the anaesthetist's perspective. To clarify this issue, we surveyed anaesthetists regarding their most memorable drug error to identify associated factors and personal sequelae regarding their professional practice after the event. An online survey was sent anonymously to 989 Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) Fellows in March 2016 and the results were collected over the following two months. There were 295 completed surveys (29.8% response). The majority of respondents were male consultants, aged over 45 years. Reported drug errors occurred most frequently during normal working hours, and the most common drugs involved were non-depolarising muscle relaxants. In 34% of the errors, another anaesthetist was present, and their presence was felt to have contributed in 40.7% of these cases. About 20% of respondents reported that they did not receive adequate support after the event. Sleep patterns were affected in 14.4% of respondents, although very few found that the error had affected their capacity to function at work. These findings suggest that memorable drug errors can be significant enough to have adverse sequelae to anaesthetists, even if no patient harm occurs.