Citations

Abstract Background Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) is frequent after bariatric surgery. We hypothesized that when compared with a volatile-based technique incorporating propofol infusions, the need for rescue antiemetics would be reduced by the use of two strategies: 1) the addition of dexmedetomidine infusions, and 2) the avoidance of opioid and volatile anesthetics, and that this reduction would be observed in the PACU following PACU discharge. Methods In this retrospective observational study we included patients undergoing bariatric surgery from 2018–2022 who received one of three anesthetic strategies: 1) volatile anesthetic and propofol infusion (VOL + PROP), 2) VOL + PROP with the addition of dexmedetomidine (DEX), or 3) opioid-sparing total intravenous anesthesia (PROP + DEX). Inverse probability of treatment weighting analysis determined the association between the need for rescue-antiemetics in the PACU following PACU discharge. Results 332 patients received VOL + PROP, 354 VOL + PROP + DEX, and 166 PROP + DEX. PROP + DEX received fewer rescue antiemetics in PACU compared to VOL + PROP (11% vs 24%, P = 0.002), and VOL + PROP + DEX fewer compared to VOL + PROP (16% vs 24%, P = 0.023). This differential effect was limited to PACU stay; antiemetic use increased across all groups following PACU discharge until midnight (ranging from 38–46% across groups, P = 0.71) and through the first postoperative day (ranging from 47–57%, P = 0.20). Conclusions The benefit associated with two PONV prevention strategies, the addition of dexmedetomidine infusion or avoidance of opioid and volatile anesthetics, did not persist after PACU discharge. These findings highlight the challenge of PONV on postoperative wards, and the need for a novel multimodal team approach to mitigate this complication.

ObjectivesRacial disparities are pervasive in access to pediatric surgery. The goal of this study was to test the hypotheses that, compared with White children, non‐White and Hispanic children: (1) were less likely to attend evaluations by otolaryngologists after a diagnosis of otitis media (OM) eligible for surgical referral, and (2) these children were less likely to receive tympanostomy tube (TT) after surgical consultation.MethodsThe OptumLabs Data Warehouse is a de‐identified claims database of privately insured enrollees. Guidelines on the management of OMs suggest that children should be evaluated for surgery if they have recurrent acute OM or chronic OM with effusion. A cohort of children who were diagnosed with OM were constructed. For Hypothesis 1, the primary outcome was otolaryngology office visit within 6 months of a diagnosis of recurrent or chronic OM. For Hypothesis 2, the outcome was TT placement within 6 months following the otolaryngology office visit. Cox regression models were used to determine the relationship between race/ethnicity and the primary outcomes.ResultsAmong 187,776 children with OMs, 72,774 (38.8%) had otolaryngology visits. In a multivariate Cox model, the hazard ratios of attending otolaryngology visit for Black, Hispanic, and Asian children were 0.93 (95% CI,0.90, 0.96), 0.86 (0.83, 0.88), and 0.74 (0.71, 0.77), compared with White children. Among the children evaluated by otolaryngologists, 46,554 (63.97%) received TT. Black, Hispanic, and Asian children with recurrent acute OM had lower likelihood of receiving TT.ConclusionsRacial disparities in attending otolaryngology office visit contributed to the disparities in receiving TT.Quality of EvidenceLevel 3 Laryngoscope, 134:3846–3852, 2024

Purpose: The Zoster Eye Disease Study (ZEDS) is the first randomized clinical trial to study the efficacy of long-term (1 year) suppressive valacyclovir treatment on herpes zoster ophthalmicus (HZO) outcomes. This article details the baseline characteristics of participants. Methods: Setting: The study was set at 95 participating clinical centers in 33 states, Canada, and New Zealand. Study Population: Immunocompetent adults with a history of a characteristic HZO unilateral rash and documentation of an episode of active dendriform epithelial keratitis, stromal keratitis, endothelial keratitis, or iritis within the preceding year, enrolled in ZEDS from November 2017 to January 2023. Intervention: Participants were randomized to double-masked oral valacyclovir 1 gm daily versus placebo for 1 year of treatment and followed for 18 months. Results: Five hundred twenty-seven participants were enrolled across 4 strata according to age at HZO onset (younger or older than 60 years) and duration of HZO at enrollment (less or greater than 6 months), with an even distribution of men and women and a median age of 60 years. More participants with recent (57%, 300/527) than chronic HZO and younger than 60 years at HZO onset (54%, 286/527) were enrolled. Most participants were treated acutely with a recommended antiviral regimen (91%, 480/527) and had not been vaccinated against zoster (79%, 418/527). Conclusions: The broad ZEDS study population enhances the likelihood that ZEDS will provide generalizable high-quality evidence regarding the efficacy and safety of suppressive valacyclovir for HZO immunocompetent adults and whether it should become standard of care. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03134196.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are frequent after volatile anesthesia. We hypothesized that coadministration of propofol with volatile anesthetic compared to pure volatile anesthetics would decrease the need for postoperative antiemetic treatments and shorten recovery time in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU). METHODS: We retrospectively identified adult patients who underwent procedures using general anesthesia with volatile agents, with or without propofol infusion, from May 2018 through December 2020, and who were admitted to the PACU. Inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) analysis was performed using generalized estimating equations with robust variance estimates to assess whether propofol was associated with decreased need for rescue antiemetics. RESULTS: Among 47,847 patients, overall IPTW rescue antiemetic use was 4.7% for 17,573 patients who received propofol and 8.2% for 30,274 who did not (odds ratio [OR], 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.49–0.61; P <.001). This effect associated with propofol was present regardless of the intensity of antiemetic prophylaxis (OR, 0.59, 0.51, and 0.58 for 0–1, 2, and ≥3 antiemetics used, respectively), procedural duration (OR, 0.54, 0.62, and 0.47 for ≤2.50, 2.51–4.00, ≥4.01 hours), and type of volatile agent (OR, 0.51, 0.52, and 0.57 for desflurane, isoflurane, and sevoflurane) (all P <.001). This effect was dose dependent, with little additional benefit for the reduction in the use of PACU antiemetics when propofol rate exceeded 100 μg/kg/min. Patients who received rescue antiemetics required longer PACU recovery time than those who did not receive antiemetics (ratio of the geometric mean, 1.31; 95% CI, 1.28–1.33; P <.001), but use of propofol did not affect PACU recovery time (ratio of the geometric mean, 1.00; 95% CI, 0.98–1.01; P =.56). CONCLUSIONS: The addition of propofol infusions to volatile-based anesthesia is associated with a dose-dependent reduction in the need for rescue antiemetics in the PACU regardless of the number of prophylactic antiemetics, duration of procedure, and type of volatile agent used, without affecting PACU recovery time.

Objective The Pulmonary Embolism Severity Index (PESI) and simplified PESI (sPESI) predict mortality for patients with PE. We compared PESI/sPESI to the Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation IV (APACHE-IV) in predicting mortality in patients with PE admitted to the intensive care unit (ICU). Additionally, we assessed the performance of a novel ICU-sPESI score created by adding three clinical variables associated with acuity of PE presentation (intubation, confusion [altered mental status], use of vasoactive infusions) to sPESI. Materials and Methods Using the eICU Collaborative Research Database from 2014 to 2015, we conducted a large retrospective cohort study of adult patients admitted to the ICU with a primary diagnosis of PE. We calculated APACHE-IV, PESI, sPESI, and ICU-sPESI scores and compared their performance for predicting in-hospital mortality using area under the receiver operating characteristic (AUROC) curve. Score thresholds for >99% negative predictive values (NPV) were calculated for each score. Survival was estimated using the Kaplan–Meier method. Results We included 1424 PE cases. In-hospital mortality was 6.3% [95% CI: 5.1%-7.6%]. AUROC for APACHE-IV, PESI, and sPESI were 0.870, 0.848, and 0.777, respectively. APACHE-IV and PESI outperformed sPESI (P < 0.01 for both comparisons), while APACHE-IV and PESI demonstrated similar performance (P = 0.322). The ICU-sPESI performance was similar to APACHE-IV and PESI (AUROC = 0.847; AUROC comparison: APACHE-IV vs ICU-sPESI: P = 0.396; PESI vs ICU-sPESI: P = 0.945). Hospital mortality for ICU-sPESI scores 0-2 was 1.1%, and for scores 3, 4, 5, 6, and ≥7 was 8.6%, 11.7%, 29.2%, 37.5%, and 76.9%, respectively. Score thresholds for >99% NPV were ≤48 for APACHE-IV, ≤115 for PESI, and 0 points for sPESI and ICU-sPESI. Conclusions By accounting for severity of PE presentation, our newly proposed ICU-sPESI score provided improved PE mortality prediction compared to the original sPESI score and offered excellent discrimination of mortality risk.

435 Background: Assessing tobacco use and providing cessation support is recommended by the American Society for Clinical Oncology (ASCO). As part of the National Cancer Institute Cancer Center Cessation Initiative, we established an electronic health record based "opt-out" approach to refer patients to tobacco treatment specialists. However, the role of oncologists in contributing to the “opt-out” approach to patients has not been explored. We tested the hypothesis that a multi-component educational program for oncologists would increase the proportion of patients who completed tobacco treatment appointments. Methods: As a quality improvement initiative, oncology providers at the Rochester Mayo Clinic Cancer Center were educated using a multimodal academic detailing approach with group and individual educational sessions. Its effectiveness was tested using a modified step-wedge implementation design. The primary outcomes were patient behaviors that could plausibly be changed by conversations with their provider: the rate at which cancer patients identified as current tobacco users scheduled an appointment in the Nicotine Dependence Center, and the rate at which patients scheduled for a NDC appointment completed their appointment. Comparisons were made before, during, and after the education period (from July through Dec 2019) and with a separate group of providers who did not complete education (results examined over a similar time period). Results: Education intervention did not improve outcomes among providers who received education; indeed, the rate of appointment scheduling decreased, although this may reflect other concurrent changes in the tobacco treatment referral process (Table 1). Outcomes were similar between oncology providers who did and did not receive multicomponent education intervention. Conclusions: Smoking cessation efforts can be successfully integrated into routine cancer care. The implementation of the “opt-out” referral system resulted in approximately 1 in 5 patients being seen for tobacco use, but a multicomponent education intervention designed to equip oncologists to encourage patients to complete appointments was not effective. Novel approaches are needed to increase the uptake of tobacco treatment among patients.[Table: see text]

BACKGROUND: Whether volatile anesthetic solubility affects postanesthesia recovery time in clinical practice is unclear. We investigated the association among 3 volatile agents and 2 clinically relevant outcomes—postanesthesia care unit (PACU) recovery time (time from PACU admission to fulfillment of discharge criteria) and oversedation (Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale score ≤−3)—as a potential contributor to delaying PACU discharge. The volatile agents studied were isoflurane, desflurane, and sevoflurane. We hypothesized that increased solubility of the volatile agent (isoflurane versus desflurane or sevoflurane) would be associated with longer PACU recovery time and higher rates of oversedation. METHODS: This retrospective observational study included adults (≥18 years) who underwent surgical procedures under general anesthesia with a volatile agent and were admitted to the PACU from May 5, 2018, to December 31, 2020. The primary outcome was PACU recovery time, and the secondary outcome was oversedation. PACU recovery time was log-transformed and analyzed with linear regression. Oversedation was analyzed by using logistic regression. To account for potential confounding, inverse probability of treatment weighting (IPTW) was used. Pairwise comparisons of the 3 agents were performed, with P < .017 (Bonferroni-adjusted) considered significant. RESULTS: Of 47,847 patients included, 11,817 (24.7%) received isoflurane, 11,286 (23.6%) received desflurane, and 24,744 (51.7%) received sevoflurane. Sevoflurane had an estimated 4% shorter PACU recovery time (IPTW-adjusted median [interquartile range {IQR}], 61 [42–89] minutes) than isoflurane (64 [44–92] minutes) (ratio of geometric means [98.3% confidence interval {CI}], 0.96 [0.95–0.98]; P < .001). Differences in PACU recovery time between desflurane and the other agents were not significant. The IPTW-adjusted frequency of oversedation was 8.8% for desflurane, 12.2% for sevoflurane, and 16.7% for isoflurane; all pairwise comparisons were observed to be significant (odds ratio [98.3% CI], 0.70 [0.62–0.79] for desflurane versus sevoflurane, 0.48 [0.42–0.55] for desflurane vs isoflurane, and 0.69 [0.63–0.76] for sevoflurane versus isoflurane; all P < .001). Although oversedated patients had longer PACU recovery time, differences in the oversedation rate across agents did not result in meaningful differences in time to PACU recovery. CONCLUSIONS: In clinical practice, only small, clinically unimportant differences in PACU recovery time were observed between the volatile anesthetics. Although oversedation was associated with increased PACU recovery time, differences in the rate of oversedation among agents were insufficient to produce meaningful differences in overall PACU recovery time across the 3 volatile agents. Practical attempts to decrease PACU recovery time should address factors other than volatile agent selection.