Acta Anaesthesiologica Scandinavica最新文献

Background: Peripheral nerve blocks may provide better conditions for closed reduction of distal radius fractures as compared to other more frequently used modalities. In this systematic review, we evaluate existing evidence on the effect and harm of peripheral nerve blocks for closed reduction of distal radius fractures in adults.

Methods: We performed a systematic review with meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis including trials investigating the use of peripheral nerve blocks for closed reduction of distal radius fractures. Co-primary outcomes were (1) the quality of the closed reduction measured as the proportion of participants needing surgery afterwards and (2) pain during closed reduction.

Results: Six trials (n = 312) met the inclusion criteria. One trial reported on the need for surgery with 4 of 25 participants receiving nerve block compared to 7 of 25 receiving haematoma block needing surgery (RR 0.57, 96.7% CI [0.19; 1.71], p = .50). Four trials reported pain during closed reduction. In a meta-analysis, pain was not statistically significantly reduced with a nerve block (-2.1 Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) points (0-10), 96.7% CI [-4.4; 0.2], p = .07, tau² = 5.4, I² = 97%, TSA-adj. 95% CI [-11.5; 7.3]). No trial sequential boundaries were crossed, and the required information size was not met. Pre-planned subgroup analysis on trials evaluating ultrasound guided peripheral nerve blocks (patients = 110) showed a significant decrease in 'pain during reduction' (-4.1 NRS, 96.7% CI [-5.5; -2.6], p < .01, tau² = 0.9, I² = 80%). All trial results were at high risk of bias and the certainty of the evidence was very low.

Conclusion: The certainty of evidence on the effect of peripheral nerve blocks for closed reduction of distal radius fractures is currently very low. Peripheral nerve blocks performed with ultrasound guidance may potentially reduce pain during closed reduction. High-quality clinical trials are warranted.

Background: Prone position ventilation (PPV) is recommended for patients with COVID-19 induced severe Adult Respiratory Distress Syndrome (ARDS) and is used for patients supported with V-V ECMO as well. The purpose of this study was to describe the use of PPV in these patients focusing on physiological effects with the hypothesis that PPV could reduce oxygen need and improve dynamic compliance.

Methods: This study was a nationwide retrospective analysis of all COVID-19 patients in Denmark from March 2020 - December 2021 with severe ARDS and need of V-V ECMO support. Data on the number of patients treated with PPV, number of PPV sessions, timing, the time spent in prone position, pulmonary physiological response types with analysis of variables affecting the response are reported.

Results: Out of 68 patients 44 were treated with 220 PPV sessions and a positive clinical response was observed in 80% of patients but only in 45% of sessions. On a single session level, increased compliance was observed in 38% and increased oxygenation in only 15% of 220 sessions, with within-patient heterogeneity. Higher dynamic compliance at the beginning of a PPV session was associated with a lower delta change in dynamic compliance during PPV. The response to a PPV session could not be predicted by the response in the prior session. Dynamic compliance did not change during the ECMO course.

Conclusion: Eighty percent of patients responded positively during a PPV session, but this was not associated with overall pulmonary improvement. On a single patient level, responses were heterogenous and only 45% of sessions resulted in clinical improvement. Response in dynamic compliance was associated with starting values of compliance.

Background: The Clinical Practice Committee of the Scandinavian Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine endorses the clinical practice guideline "ESAIC focused guideline for the use of cardiac biomarkers in perioperative risk evaluation." The guideline can provide guidance to Nordic anaesthesiologists on the perioperative use of cardiac biomarkers in patients undergoing non-cardiac surgery.

Background: Enteral nutrition may affect risks of gastrointestinal bleeding, pneumonia and mortality in critically ill patients and may also modify the effects of pharmacological stress ulcer prophylaxis. We undertook post hoc analyses of the stress ulcer prophylaxis in the intensive care unit trial to assess for any associations and interactions between enteral nutrition and pantoprazole.

Methods: Extended Cox models with time-varying co-variates and competing events were used to assess potential associations, adjusted for baseline severity of illness. Potential interactions between daily enteral nutrition and allocation to pantoprazole on outcomes were similarly assessed.

Results: Enteral nutrition was associated with lower risk of clinically important gastrointestinal bleeding (cause-specific hazard ratio [HR]: 0.29, 95% confidence interval: [CI] 0.19-0.44, p < .001), higher risk of pneumonia (HR: 1.44, 95% CI: 1.14-1.82, p = .003), and lower risk of all-cause mortality (HR: 0.22, 95% CI: 0.18-0.27, p < .001). Enteral nutrition with allocation to pantoprazole was associated with a lower risk of mortality (HR: 0.27, 95% CI: 0.21-0.35, p < .001), similar to enteral nutrition with allocation to placebo (HR: 0.17, 95% CI: 0.13-0.23, p < .001). Allocation to pantoprazole with no enteral nutrition had little effect on mortality (HR: 0.83, 95% CI: 0.63-1.09, p = .179), whilst allocation to pantoprazole and receipt of enteral nutrition was mostly compatible with increased all-cause mortality (HR: 1.27, 95% CI: 0.99-1.64, p = .061). The test of interaction between enteral nutrition and pantoprazole treatment allocation for all-cause mortality was statistically significant (p = .024).

Conclusions: Enteral nutrition was associated with an increased risk of pneumonia and a reduced risk of gastrointestinal bleeding. The interaction between pantoprazole and enteral nutrition suggesting an increased risk of mortality requires further study.

Background: Over the past decade, ultrasound utilization has increased within anesthesia and intensive care medicine, enhancing patient safety and diagnostic accuracy. However, the frequency of ultrasound usage and operator training in the Nordic countries remain unclear. This project aims to perform a survey on ultrasound availability, daily clinical use, and how ultrasound skills are trained and assessed, among anesthesiologists.

Methods: This online cross-sectional survey will include anesthesiologists from the Nordic countries. The survey will adhere to the CROSS checklist. Survey items will be developed based on a formative model with a conceptual model, consisting of three main parts, including demographics, ultrasound machines and use, and skills development and assessment. The clinical relevance of items will be secured by including anesthesiologists of various levels of experience in the development of the survey. Furthermore, experienced researchers in medical education will participate in the development, contributing with relevant medical educational perspectives. Data will be summarized using a non-parametric descriptive approach. A chi-squared test will examine relevant relationships between certain answers.

Results: Results will be published in a peer-reviewed journal and presented at relevant scientific conferences and meetings.

Conclusion: This study may find a high availability of ultrasound machines and frequent use in the clinical departments. Despite this expected daily use of ultrasound, missing standardized structured skills acquisition and assessment could be uncovered. The results of this study may contribute to mapping various aspects of clinical ultrasound and skills development for further use in research.

Background: Cocaine may be applied to decongest the nasal mucosa before nasotracheal intubation, but patients risk a criminal offence if cocaine is detected when patients drive a car shortly after surgery. We aimed to evaluate whether benzoylecgonine levels in saliva exceeded the cut-off point 24 h after administration in patients undergoing nasotracheal intubation and whether cocaine would be detectable above the Danish legal fixed limit in blood samples 1 and 24 h after surgery.

Methods: We conducted a prospective study following approval from the local research ethics committee and the national medicine agency. Written informed consent was obtained from all patients. We included patients scheduled for surgery under general anaesthesia with nasotracheal intubation. They received 80 mg cocaine as a nasal spray 5 min before induction and nasotracheal intubation. The primary outcome was a dichotomous assessment of benzoylecgonine levels in saliva samples measured 24 h after administration of nasal cocaine with a cut-off limit of 200 ng/mL. Secondary outcomes were dichotomous assessments of cocaine in whole blood samples measured 1 and 24 h after administration of nasal cocaine with a cut-off limit of 0.01 mg/kg.

Results: Overall, 70 patients had valid saliva samples and 75 had valid blood samples 24 h after cocaine administration. Benzoylecgonine in saliva was traceable above the cut-off in 9/70 patients (13%; CI_95%: 6% to 23%), and cocaine in blood was detected above the cut-off in 2/75 patients (3%; CI_95%: 0.3% to 9%).

Conclusion: We found benzoylecgonine traceable in saliva in 13% of patients and cocaine traceable in blood in 3% of patients 24 h after administration of 80 mg nasal cocaine. Patients should be informed when receiving cocaine and advised not to drive for at least 24 h.