Nika Samadzadeh Tabrizi, Alexander D Shapeton, Jamel Ortoleva, Sridhar R Musuku, Roman Schumann
{"title":"Post-esophagectomy patients presenting for general anesthesia induction: a survey of practice among US anesthesiologists (PESO-GAIN-S).","authors":"Nika Samadzadeh Tabrizi, Alexander D Shapeton, Jamel Ortoleva, Sridhar R Musuku, Roman Schumann","doi":"10.1007/s00540-024-03432-3","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p><strong>Purpose: </strong>Following esophagectomy, annually several thousand patients in the United States (US) reach a stable post-esophagectomy status. Such patients may require general anesthesia (GA) for elective procedures, but no generally accepted guidelines exist for the induction of GA in post-esophagectomy patients.</p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>A national survey describing a post-esophagectomy patient was emailed to 23,524 attending anesthesiologists who were members of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. The survey included 3 demographic and 12 anesthetic management questions. Responses were further stratified by gender, years in practice and frequency of exposure to the patient population of interest.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 744 (3.2%) respondents completed the survey. The respondent demographic characteristics closely reflected recent US anesthesiology workforce analyses. Endotracheal tube was the preferred method of airway management for 648 (87.1%), 419 (64.7%) used a rapid sequence induction, and 504 (67.7%) elected a reverse Trendelenburg position, with the latter two choices being favored among anesthesiologists with routine (vs. rarely/never) exposure to post-esophagectomy patients (76.6% vs. 58.4%; p < 0.001; and 73.6% vs. 63.9%; p = 0.021, respectively). Across survey participants, induction of GA was highly variable with differential effects of gender, years in practice and exposure frequency to post-esophagectomy patients.</p><p><strong>Conclusions: </strong>US attending anesthesiologists' approach to induction of GA in a patient with a history of successful esophagectomy was not uniform. The majority of responses reflected a concern for aspiration in such a patient. Considering surgical and non-surgical upper gastrointestinal changes, establishment of practice guidance to optimize perioperative care is an unmet need.</p>","PeriodicalId":14997,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Anesthesia","volume":" ","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":2.8000,"publicationDate":"2024-11-18","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Anesthesia","FirstCategoryId":"3","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.1007/s00540-024-03432-3","RegionNum":3,"RegionCategory":"医学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q2","JCRName":"ANESTHESIOLOGY","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Purpose: Following esophagectomy, annually several thousand patients in the United States (US) reach a stable post-esophagectomy status. Such patients may require general anesthesia (GA) for elective procedures, but no generally accepted guidelines exist for the induction of GA in post-esophagectomy patients.
Methods: A national survey describing a post-esophagectomy patient was emailed to 23,524 attending anesthesiologists who were members of the American Society of Anesthesiologists. The survey included 3 demographic and 12 anesthetic management questions. Responses were further stratified by gender, years in practice and frequency of exposure to the patient population of interest.
Results: A total of 744 (3.2%) respondents completed the survey. The respondent demographic characteristics closely reflected recent US anesthesiology workforce analyses. Endotracheal tube was the preferred method of airway management for 648 (87.1%), 419 (64.7%) used a rapid sequence induction, and 504 (67.7%) elected a reverse Trendelenburg position, with the latter two choices being favored among anesthesiologists with routine (vs. rarely/never) exposure to post-esophagectomy patients (76.6% vs. 58.4%; p < 0.001; and 73.6% vs. 63.9%; p = 0.021, respectively). Across survey participants, induction of GA was highly variable with differential effects of gender, years in practice and exposure frequency to post-esophagectomy patients.
Conclusions: US attending anesthesiologists' approach to induction of GA in a patient with a history of successful esophagectomy was not uniform. The majority of responses reflected a concern for aspiration in such a patient. Considering surgical and non-surgical upper gastrointestinal changes, establishment of practice guidance to optimize perioperative care is an unmet need.
期刊介绍:
The Journal of Anesthesia is the official journal of the Japanese Society of Anesthesiologists. This journal publishes original articles, review articles, special articles, clinical reports, short communications, letters to the editor, and book and multimedia reviews. The editors welcome the submission of manuscripts devoted to anesthesia and related topics from any country of the world. Membership in the Society is not a prerequisite.
The Journal of Anesthesia (JA) welcomes case reports that show unique cases in perioperative medicine, intensive care, emergency medicine, and pain management.