Sharpe, Emily E.

Transvaginal oocyte retrieval (TVOR) is typically performed under ambulatory intravenous (IV) sedation with preservation of spontaneous ventilation. We retrospectively identified five medically complex patients who received remimazolam as part of individualized anesthetic management for TVOR at a tertiary academic center. Comorbidities included cardiomyopathy, Fontan physiology, pheochromocytoma, difficult airway, and renal transplantation. Spontaneous ventilation was preserved in all cases without airway intervention. Two patients required intermittent phenylephrine, and one required flumazenil for delayed emergence. Median time from operating room exit to discharge readiness was 128 minutes (range 39–149). These cases illustrate clinical scenarios in which remimazolam may support individualized anesthetic strategies for medically complex patients undergoing TVOR.

BACKGROUND: Compared to standard labor epidurals, placement of a dural puncture epidural (DPE) has been shown to improve labor analgesia efficacy, speed onset of analgesia, and decrease failure rates. However, there is a concern of increased post-dural puncture headache (PDPH) risk. A 25-gauge or larger spinal needle is typically needed for a DPE to have improved efficacy over a standard epidural. A prior meta-analysis comparing combined spinal-epidurals (CSEs) with epidurals did not identify a difference in PDPH rates, but many of the included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) used smaller diameter (27–29 gauge) spinal needles. This systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs evaluates headache frequency following CSE or DPE labor analgesia techniques with 24- or 25-gauge spinal needles. METHODS: Medline, EMBASE, Scopus, Database of Abstracts of Reviews of Effects, Web of Science Core Collection, and Cochrane databases were searched on May 7, 2024, for RCTs comparing either DPE or CSE techniques using 24- or 25-gauge spinal needles with epidural labor analgesia. The primary outcome was headache. The risk-of-bias 2 tool was used to assess bias. The odds ratio (OR) was the chosen effect size using binomial family Bayesian estimation. The reference category for estimation was the conventional epidural technique group. RESULTS: Encompassing 3278 patients, 1765 (53.8%) received labor epidurals, 971 (29.6%) received DPEs, and 542 (16.5%) received CSEs. The rate of headaches in both groups was low, with headache rates of CSE/DPE and epidural groups (0.59% vs 0.34%), respectively. Headache was a secondary outcome in all the RCTs. In 10 of the 16 RCTs (62.5%), no patients of 1428 (0%; 95% credible interval [CI], 0.00–0.25) reported a headache. A total of nine (0.6%) headaches were reported in the DPE/CSE patients (denominator 1513) and six (0.3%) headaches were reported in the traditional epidural patients (denominator 1765). The posterior distribution of the treatment effect ( θ ) showed that the log OR of 0.35 favored the control group as having fewer events, but the number of events was rare, and the 95% CI was wide (−0.49 to 1.22). CONCLUSIONS: Headache was a rare event in both groups. Although these results are reassuring that either technique is clinically safe, they should be interpreted cautiously. A large RCT examining PDPH as the primary outcome with long-term follow-up is needed to more precisely determine if placement of a DPE or CSE with a 24- or 25-gauge spinal needle increases the risk of PDPH.

BACKGROUND: The use of glucagon-like peptide-1 receptor agonists (GLP-1 RAs) has significantly increased in recent years. GLP-1 RAs delay gastric emptying, resulting in early satiety and weight loss. This may increase the risk of pulmonary aspiration of residual gastric contents (RGC) during anesthesia delivery. Evidence is urgently needed to guide perioperative anesthesia management for patients taking GLP-1 RAs. This study evaluated preoperative factors that may be associated with high RGC. METHODS: Adult patients who were taking GLP-1 RAs and scheduled to receive anesthesia at 3 hospitals between June 30, 2023, and August 15, 2024, were evaluated via preoperative point-of-care gastric ultrasonography (GUS). The primary outcome was high RGC, defined by the presence of solids food or >1.5 mL/kg of clear liquids on GUS, and its association with preoperative factors (eg, existing medical conditions, indication and route of taking GLP-1 RAs, length of taking GLP-1 RAs, days of withholding GLP-1 RAs before surgery, and preoperative fasting periods). Data are presented as median (interquartile range [IQR]). RESULTS: Among the 316 patients (60.9 years [52.1–68.9] of age; 167 [52.8%] females) included in the study, 113 (35.8%) had high RGC. A higher percentage (5.3%; 6/113) of patients in the high RGC group had an opioid prescription for pain management within 3 months of the GUS assessment compared to the low RGC group (1.0%; 2/203; P = .027). No statistical difference was found between the groups in other existing medical conditions, indication and route of taking GLP-1 RAs, and length of taking GLP-1 RAs. Of the 294 patients taking weekly injections, there were 187 (63.6%) with low RGC and 107 (36.4%) with high RGC. Patients with low RGC withheld their GLP-1 RAs for 8 days [5–10], while patients with high RGC withheld for 6 days [3–9] ( P = .003). Receiver operating characteristic (ROC) analysis found ≤7.5 days of withholding the medication as cutoff for increased prevalence of high RGC in patients taking GLP-1 RA injections. Patients with low RGC fasted from solid food for 20.0 hours [14.8–40.8], and patients with high RGC fasted from solid food for 15.0 hours [12.8–19.0] ( P < .001). ROC found ≤21.3 hours of fasting from solid food as the cutoff for increased prevalence of high RGC. CONCLUSIONS: GLP-1 RA usage may delay gastric emptying. In preoperatively fasting adults, ≤7.5 days of withholding injections and ≤21.3 hours of fasting from solid food are associated with high RGC.

BACKGROUND: Childbirth can have a substantial impact on maternal health-related quality of life. Cesarean delivery is the most performed inpatient operation, yet little is known about normal postpartum recovery profiles. The primary aim of our study was to longitudinally evaluate global health visual analog scale (GHVAS; 0–100) scores up to 12 weeks after scheduled cesarean delivery and identify the time to plateau of scores. The secondary aims were to evaluate different domains of postpartum recovery using validated patient-reported outcome measures (Obstetric Quality of Recovery score [ObsQoR-10] and 5-level 5-dimensional EuroQol questionnaire [EQ-5D]). METHODS: After institutional review board approval, this single-center, prospective longitudinal study enrolled healthy women scheduled for cesarean delivery. Women were excluded for gestational age <32 weeks, neonatal demise, neonatal intensive care unit admission, inability to read or understand English, and if general anesthesia was used. Women completed baseline surveys before delivery and then at 24 and 48 hours after delivery. After hospital discharge, women completed surveys (including GHVAS, OBsQoR-10, EQ-5D, Edinburgh Postnatal Depression Scale, and activities of daily living) at 1 week, 3 weeks, 6 weeks, and 12 weeks postpartum. One-way repeated measures analysis of variance (ANOVA) was used to detect the difference in GHVAS and postpartum recovery outcomes with different follow-up time points. RESULTS: We enrolled 66 parturients and 3 were withdrawn. Response rates were 95%, 84%, 83%, and 76% at 1, 3, 6, and 12 weeks, respectively. Mean ± standard deviation [SD] GHVAS scores were 78 ± 16 at baseline, 64 ± 17 at 24 hours, 69 ± 15 at 48 hours, 75 ± 19 at 1 week, 88 ± 11 at 3 weeks, 88 ± 15 at 6 weeks, and 90 ± 12 at 12 weeks postpartum ( P < .001). The global health VAS improved up until week 3 and then plateaued close to the maximum score between 3 weeks and 12 weeks postpartum. Mean ± SD ObsQoR-10 scores were 75 ± 15 at 24 hours, 85 ± 10 at 48 hours, and 81 ± 28 at 1 week postpartum ( P = .003). The mean ± SD EQ-5D composite scores improved at 6 weeks (4.9 ± 2.9) and 3 months (4.2 ± 2.6) compared to baseline (6.5 ± 1.8) with usual activities ( P = .001) and pain/discomfort ( P < .001) showing significant improvement over time. ObsQoR-10 score at 24 hours correlated with ObsQoR-10 scores at 48 hours (r = 0.629, P < .001) and 1 week (r = 0.429, P < .001) but did not correlate with EQ-5D scores at 6 weeks and 12 weeks. CONCLUSIONS: Our study demonstrates that GHVAS after scheduled CD plateaus at week 3. This data can be used to inform patients about the anticipated trajectory of key postpartum recovery domains up to 12 weeks postpartum.

Purpose of review Pain during cesarean delivery (PDCD) has been overlooked and underreported and is associated with a traumatic birth experience and long-term morbidity. We review the studies reporting on PDCD and summarize available guidance providing roadmaps for anesthesiologists caring for patients during cesarean delivery. Recent findings PDCD is a patient-reported outcome and should not be defined by interventions mitigating insufficient neuraxial anesthesia, such as supplemental analgesic medication or general anesthesia. Depending on the cohorts studied and definitions used, current reported rates of PDCD range between 2 and 36%. Preoperative patient counseling, risk stratification, and testing of neuraxial block are mitigating strategies; ultimately, if pain occurs, it should be managed skillfully applying shared decision-making with a supportive follow-up to reduce psychological trauma. Statements from three international organizations offer guidance to prevent and treat PDCD. Summary This review provides strategies to mitigate the occurrence of PDCD, with targeted approaches to better prevent and manage PDCD.

Achondroplasia accounts for approximately 70% of all forms of dwarfism. Cesarean delivery is often required in parturients with achondroplasia due to cephalopelvic disproportion. There is no consensus on the optimal management for cesarean delivery considering the difficulties in both general and regional anesthesia in patients with achondroplasia. The aim of this study was to explore the literature for prior case reports and series to determine the optimum anesthetic management for cesarean delivery in achondroplastic patients. We conducted a review of the literature using Embase, Medline, Scopus, and Web of Science database searches for case series and case reports on achondroplasia and pregnancy through January 2024. Conference abstracts >3 years old were excluded, as well as data on forms of dwarfism other than achondroplasia, patients taller than 147 cm, and non-English language papers. Extracted data included demographic information, anesthetic management, and reported complications. The literature review resulted in 57 manuscripts with a total of 80 anesthetics. Anesthetic management consisted of planned general anesthesia (n = 16), single injection spinal (n = 28), epidural (n = 17), combined spinal-epidural (n = 12), and intrathecal catheter (n = 1). Six patients required conversion from neuraxial anesthesia to general anesthesia due to failed neuraxial placement (n = 3), inadequate blockade (n = 2), and high neuraxial block (n = 1). Reduced dose of intrathecal bupivacaine was common in this population. Complications such as hypotension (4 in 64), inadvertent dural puncture (1 in 64), and transient paresthesia (3 in 64) during neuraxial technique were reported but were infrequent. Neuraxial anesthesia is more common and a viable option in carefully selected parturients with achondroplasia. We recommend reduction of intrathecal local anesthetic as part of a titratable neuraxial technique (ie, combined spinal-epidural) that minimizes the risk of hypotension, high spinal, and emergent intubation.

BACKGROUND: Sugammadex, aprepitant, and fosaprepitant are increasingly used perioperatively. These medications may interfere with the effectiveness of hormonal contraception. This study assessed anesthesia providers’ use of sugammadex and aprepitant, their knowledge of interactions with hormonal birth control, and patient counseling practices to identify possible knowledge gaps or opportunities for practice improvement. METHODS: In January 2023, an electronic survey was distributed to all anesthesia providers at Mayo Clinic sites (Mayo Clinic Rochester, Mayo Clinic Arizona, Mayo Clinic Florida, and Mayo Clinic Health System hospitals). The survey included 32 questions assessing providers’ use of sugammadex and aprepitant, their knowledge of the medications’ interactions with hormonal contraceptives (HC), their perceptions regarding education of these interactions during training, and their perioperative patient counseling practices. The collected data were analyzed using descriptive statistics. RESULTS: A total of 337 of 1092 (31%) providers completed the survey. While almost all respondents (324; 96%) knew that sugammadex may interfere with oral contraceptive effectiveness, only 158 (47%) knew about aprepitant’s potential contraceptive interference. Only 176 providers (52%) knew the recommended duration for alternative contraceptive methods after use after sugammadex, and 119 providers (35%) knew the recommended duration after aprepitant exposure. Most respondents considered the interference of these perioperative drugs with HCs to be clinically relevant (sugammadex, 217, 64%; aprepitant, 191, 58%). Despite the common belief that the decision between these medications and alternatives should be shared between provider and patient, most providers reported rarely engaging in such shared decision-making (SDM) in practice. Most providers recognized the need for preoperative discussions on sugammadex (280, 83%) and aprepitant (257, 76%), yet 184 providers (73%) never or rarely discussed contraception use before surgery for aprepitant, and 135 (36%) never or rarely did so for sugammadex. Lastly, many providers believed that the interference between sugammadex, aprepitant, and HC was poorly taught during training. CONCLUSIONS: The results of this study highlight the need for increased education and awareness among anesthesia providers regarding drug interactions with HCs during the perioperative period. To facilitate SDM, it is imperative that providers discuss alternative medications and the potential need for additional contraception methods after drug administration and communicate the risks with patients preoperatively to enable informed and SDM. The patient’s preferences should be accounted for, especially if they are unwilling or unable to use an alternative contraceptive for 7 to 30 days, thereby avoiding the complexities and burdens of altering birth control methods.

Purpose of review Medication administration errors represent a significant yet preventable cause of patient harm in the peripartum period. Implementation of best practices contained in this manuscript can significantly reduce medication errors and associated patient harm. Recent findings Cases of medication errors involving unintended intrathecal administration of tranexamic acid highlight the need to improve medication safety in peripartum patients and obstetric anesthesia. Summary In obstetric anesthesia, medication errors can include wrong medication, dose, route, time, patient, or infusion setting. These errors are often underreported, have the potential to be catastrophic, and most can be prevented. Implementation of various types of best practice cost effective mitigation strategies include recommendations to improve drug labeling, optimize storage, determine correct medication prior to administration, use non-Luer epidural and intravenous connection ports, follow patient monitoring guidelines, use smart pumps and protocols for all infusions, disseminate medication safety educational material, and optimize staffing models. Vigilance in patient care and implementation of improved patient safety measures are urgently needed to decrease harm to mothers and newborns worldwide.