Hofer, Ryan E

Surgical innovation and multidisciplinary management have allowed children born with univentricular physiology congenital heart disease to survive into adulthood. An estimated global population of 70 000 patients have undergone the Fontan procedure and are alive today, most of whom are <25 years of age. Several unexpected consequences of the Fontan circulation include Fontan-associated liver disease. Surveillance biopsies have demonstrated that virtually 100% of these patients develop clinically silent fibrosis by adolescence. As they mature, there are increasing reports of combined heart-liver transplantation resulting from advanced liver disease, including bridging fibrosis, cirrhosis, and hepatocellular carcinoma, in this population. In the absence of a transplantation option, these young patients face a poor quality of life and overall survival. Acknowledging that there are no consensus guidelines for diagnosing and monitoring Fontan-associated liver disease or when to consider heart transplantation versus combined heart-liver transplantation in these patients, a multidisciplinary working group reviewed the literature surrounding Fontan-associated liver disease, with a specific focus on considerations for transplantation.

Background. Anesthetic management of orthotopic liver transplantation (OLT) can be challenging. Management involves responding to sudden hemodynamic shifts, addressing instability, and performing ongoing volume assessment. To best prepare for these perturbations, various monitors are used intraoperatively. We sought to explore the impact of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE) and pulmonary artery catheter (PAC) use on outcomes of patients undergoing OLT. Methods. We retrospectively reviewed records of patients who underwent OLT at a single institution and included all who were monitored intraoperatively with TEE alone, PAC alone, or both methods concurrently (TEE + PAC). We determined whether these groups had differences in length of hospitalization (primary outcome), 30-day mortality rate, and other outcomes. Results. Three hundred eighteen liver transplant operations were included in the study. Patients in the TEE + PAC group had the shortest median length of hospitalization (TEE + PAC, 8.6 days; TEE, 10.3; PAC, 9.1; P = 0.04). The TEE + PAC group also had the lowest 30-day mortality rate (TEE + PAC, n = 1 [1.3%]; TEE, n = 5 [12.8%]; PAC, n = 7 [3.5%]; P = 0.009). However, the TEE + PAC group also had the highest rate of a new postoperative need for dialysis (TEE + PAC, n = 8 [10.3%]; TEE, n = 2 [5.1%]; PAC, n = 1 [0.5%]; P < 0.001). Conclusions. Compared with either TEE alone or PAC alone, intraoperative monitoring with TEE + PAC during OLT was associated with the shortest length of hospitalization and lowest 30-day mortality rate. Transplant anesthesiologists should be aware of the potential benefit on patient mortality and hospital length of stay with concurrent intraoperative TEE + PAC monitoring and the increased need for new postoperative dialysis.

BACKGROUND: The use of cognitive aids, such as emergency manuals (EMs), improves team performance on critical steps during crisis events. In our large academic anesthesia practice, we sought to broadly implement an EM and subsequently evaluate team member performance on critical steps. METHODS: We observed the phases of implementing an EM at a large academic anesthesia practice from 2013 to 2016, including the formation of the EM implementation team, identification of preferred EM characteristics, consideration of institution-specific factors, selection of the preferred EM, recognition of logistical barriers, and staff education. Utilization of the EM was tested in a regular clinical environment with all available resources using a standardized verbal simulation of 3 crisis events both preimplementation and 6 months postimplementation. Individual members of the anesthesia team were asked to verbalize interventions for specific crisis events over 60 seconds. RESULTS: We introduced a customized version of the Stanford Emergency Manual on January 26, 2015. Fifty-nine total participants (equal proportion of anesthesiology attending physicians, resident physicians, certified registered nurse anesthetists, and student registered nurse anesthetist staff) were surveyed in the preimplementation phase and 60 in the 6-month postimplementation phase. In the postimplementation phase, a minority (41.7%) utilized the EM for the verbal-simulated crisis events. Those who used the EM performed better than those who did not (median 21.0 critical steps out of a possible 30 total steps [70.0%], interquartile range 19–25 vs 18.0 critical steps verbalized [60.0%], interquartile range 16–20; P < .001). Among all subjects, the median number of critical steps verbalized was 16 (53.3%) preimplementation and 19.5 critical steps (65.0%) postimplementation. CONCLUSIONS: Implementation of an EM in a large academic anesthesia practice is not without challenges. While full integration of the EM was not achieved 6 months after implementation, verbalization of critical steps on 3 simulated crisis events improved when the EM was utilized.