-
Age and Ageing Jun 2023Postoperative delirium (POD) is a frequent complication in older adults, characterised by disturbances in attention, awareness and cognition, and associated with...
BACKGROUND
Postoperative delirium (POD) is a frequent complication in older adults, characterised by disturbances in attention, awareness and cognition, and associated with prolonged hospitalisation, poor functional recovery, cognitive decline, long-term dementia and increased mortality. Early identification of patients at risk of POD can considerably aid prevention.
METHODS
We have developed a preoperative POD risk prediction algorithm using data from eight studies identified during a systematic review and providing individual-level data. Ten-fold cross-validation was used for predictor selection and internal validation of the final penalised logistic regression model. The external validation used data from university hospitals in Switzerland and Germany.
RESULTS
Development included 2,250 surgical (excluding cardiac and intracranial) patients 60 years of age or older, 444 of whom developed POD. The final model included age, body mass index, American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score, history of delirium, cognitive impairment, medications, optional C-reactive protein (CRP), surgical risk and whether the operation is a laparotomy/thoracotomy. At internal validation, the algorithm had an AUC of 0.80 (95% CI: 0.77-0.82) with CRP and 0.79 (95% CI: 0.77-0.82) without CRP. The external validation consisted of 359 patients, 87 of whom developed POD. The external validation yielded an AUC of 0.74 (95% CI: 0.68-0.80).
CONCLUSIONS
The algorithm is named PIPRA (Pre-Interventional Preventive Risk Assessment), has European conformity (ce) certification, is available at http://pipra.ch/ and is accepted for clinical use. It can be used to optimise patient care and prioritise interventions for vulnerable patients and presents an effective way to implement POD prevention strategies in clinical practice.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Emergence Delirium; Delirium; Risk Factors; Postoperative Complications; Risk Assessment; C-Reactive Protein
PubMed: 37290122
DOI: 10.1093/ageing/afad086 -
Frontiers in Oncology 2023Transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) is now commonly administered for postoperative pain control and reduced opioid consumption in patients undergoing major...
Laparoscopic versus ultrasound-guided transversus abdominis plane block for postoperative pain management in minimally invasive colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis protocol.
INTRODUCTION
Transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) is now commonly administered for postoperative pain control and reduced opioid consumption in patients undergoing major colorectal surgeries, such as colorectal cancer, diverticular disease, and inflammatory bowel disease resection. However, there remain several controversies about the effectiveness and safety of laparoscopic TAPB compared to ultrasound-guided TAPB. Therefore, the aim of this study is to integrate both direct and indirect comparisons to identify a more effective and safer TAPB approach.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
Systematic electronic literature surveillance will be performed in the PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL), and ClinicalTrials.gov databases for eligible studies through July 31, 2023. The Cochrane Risk of Bias version 2 (RoB 2) and Risk of Bias in Non-randomized Studies of Interventions (ROBINS-I) tools will be applied to scrutinize the methodological quality of the selected studies. The primary outcomes will include (1) opioid consumption at 24 hours postoperatively and (2) pain scores at 24 hours postoperatively both at rest and at coughing and movement according to the numerical rating scale (NRS). Additionally, the probability of TAPB-related adverse events, overall postoperative 30-day complications, postoperative 30-day ileus, postoperative 30-day surgical site infection, postoperative 7-day nausea and vomiting, and length of stay will be analyzed as secondary outcome measures. The findings will be assessed for robustness through subgroup analyses and sensitivity analyses. Data analyses will be performed using RevMan 5.4.1 and Stata 17.0. P value of less than 0.05 will be defined as statistically significant. The certainty of evidence will be examined the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) working group approach.
ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION
Owing to the nature of the secondary analysis of existing data, no ethical approval will be required. Our meta-analysis will summarize all the available evidence for the effectiveness and safety of TAPB approaches for minimally invasive colorectal surgery. High-quality peer-reviewed publications and presentations at international conferences will facilitate disseminating the results of this study, which are expected to inform future clinical trials and help anesthesiologists and surgeons determine the optimal tailored clinical practice for perioperative pain management.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/PROSPERO/display_record.php?RecordID=281720, identifier (CRD42021281720).
PubMed: 37284204
DOI: 10.3389/fonc.2023.1080327 -
The Cochrane Database of Systematic... Jun 2023Epidural analgesia is often used for pain relief during labour and childbirth, and involves administration of local anaesthetics (LA) into the epidural space resulting... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Epidural analgesia is often used for pain relief during labour and childbirth, and involves administration of local anaesthetics (LA) into the epidural space resulting in sensory blockade of the abdomen, pelvis, and perineum. Epidural opioids are often co-administered to improve analgesia. Administration of epidural medications can be accomplished by basal infusion (BI) or automated mandatory bolus (AMB). With BI, medications are administered continuously, while AMB involves injecting medications at set time intervals. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) on top of AMB or BI enables patients to initiate additional boluses of epidural medications. The superior method of delivering epidural medications would result in lower incidence of pain requiring anaesthesiologist intervention (breakthrough pain). Also, it should be associated with lower incidence of epidural-related adverse effects including caesarean delivery, instrumental delivery (use of forceps or vacuum devices), prolonged duration of labour analgesia, and LA consumption. However, clear evidence of the superiority of one technique over the other is lacking. Also, differences in the initiation of epidural analgesia such as combined spinal-epidural (CSE) (medications given into the intrathecal space in addition to the epidural space) compared to epidural only, and medications used (types and doses of LA or opioids) may not have been accounted for in previous reviews. Our prior systematic review suggested that AMB reduces the incidence of breakthrough pain compared to BI with no significant difference in the incidence of caesarean delivery or instrumental delivery, duration of labour analgesia, and LA consumption. However, several studies comparing AMB and BI have been performed since then, and inclusion of their data may improve the precision of our effect estimates.
OBJECTIVES
To assess the benefits and harms of AMB versus BI for maintaining labour epidural analgesia in women at term.
SEARCH METHODS
We searched CENTRAL, Wiley Cochrane Library), MEDLINE, (National Library of Medicine), Embase(Elseiver), Web of Science (Clarivate), the WHO-ICTRP (World Health Organization) and ClinicalTrials.gov (National Library of Medicine) on 31 December 2022. Additionally, we screened the reference lists of relevant trials and reviews for eligible citations, and we contacted authors of included studies to identify unpublished research and ongoing trials.
SELECTION CRITERIA
We included all randomised controlled studies that compared bolus dosing AMB with continuous BI during epidural analgesia. We excluded studies of women in preterm labour, with multiple pregnancies, with fetal malposition, intrathecal catheters, those that did not use automated delivery of medications, and those where AMB and BI were combined.
DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS
We used standard methodology for systematic review and meta-analysis described by Cochrane. Primary outcomes included: incidence of breakthrough pain requiring anaesthesiologist intervention; incidence of caesarean delivery; and incidence of instrumental delivery. Secondly, we assessed the duration of labour; hourly LA consumption in bupivacaine equivalents, maternal satisfaction after fetal delivery, and neonatal Apgar scores. The following subgroup analyses were chosen a priori: epidural alone versus CSE technique; regimens that used PCEA versus those that did not; and nulliparous versus combination of nulli- and multi-parous women. We used the GRADE system to assess the certainty of evidence associated with our outcome measures.
MAIN RESULTS
We included 18 studies of 4590 women, of which 13 enrolled healthy nulliparous women and five included healthy nulli- and multiparous women. All studies excluded women with preterm or complicated pregnancies. Techniques used to initiate epidural analgesia differed between the studies: seven used combined spinal epidural, 10 used epidural, and one used dural puncture epidural (DPE). There was also variation in analgesics used. Eight studies utilised ropivacaine with fentanyl, three used ropivacaine with sufentanil, two utilised levobupivacaine with sufentanil, one used levobupivacaine with fentanyl, and four utilised bupivacaine with fentanyl. Most of the studies were assessed to have low risk of randomisation, blinding, attrition, and reporting biases, except for allocation concealment where eight studies were assessed to have uncertain risk and three with high risk. Our results showed that AMB was associated with lower incidence of breakthrough pain compared to BI (risk ratio (RR) 0.71; 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.55 to 0.91; I = 57%) (16 studies, 1528 participants), and lower hourly LA consumption in bupivacaine equivalents (mean difference (MD) -0.84 mg/h; 95% CI -1.29 to -0.38, I = 87%) (16 studies, 1642 participants), both with moderate certainty. AMB was associated with an estimated reduction in breakthrough pain incidence of 29.1% (incidence 202 per 1000, 95% CI 157 to 259), and was therefore considered clinically significant. The incidence of caesarean delivery (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.69 to 1.06; I = 0%) (16 studies, 1735 participants) and instrumental delivery (RR 0.85; 95% CI 0.71 to 1.01; I = 0%) (17 studies, 4550 participants) were not significantly, both with moderate certainty. There was no significant difference in duration of labour analgesia (MD -8.81 min; 95% CI -19.38 to 1.77; I = 50%) (17 studies, 4544 participants) with moderate certainty. Due to differences in the methods and timing of outcome measurements, we did not pool data for maternal satisfaction and Apgar scores. Results reported narratively suggest AMB may be associated with increased maternal satisfaction (eight studies reported increased satisfaction and six reported no difference), and all studies showed no difference in Apgar scores. WIth the exception of epidural alone versus CSE which found significant subgroup differences in LA consumption between AMB and BI, no significant differences were detected in the remaining subgroup analyses.
AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS
Overall, AMB is associated with lower incidence of breakthrough pain, reduced LA consumption, and may improve maternal satisfaction. There were no significant differences between AMB and BI in the incidence of caesarean delivery, instrumental delivery, duration of labour analgesia, and Apgar scores. Larger studies assessing the incidence of caesarean and instrumental delivery are required.
Topics: Female; Humans; Infant, Newborn; Pregnancy; Analgesia, Epidural; Analgesics; Analgesics, Opioid; Breakthrough Pain; Levobupivacaine; Ropivacaine; Sufentanil; United States
PubMed: 37276327
DOI: 10.1002/14651858.CD011344.pub3 -
PloS One 2023Previously, we reviewed 1052 randomized-controlled trial abstracts presented at the American Society of Anesthesiologists annual meetings from 2001-2004. We found...
The relationship between study findings and publication outcome in anesthesia research following implementation of mandatory trial registration: A systematic review of publication bias.
Previously, we reviewed 1052 randomized-controlled trial abstracts presented at the American Society of Anesthesiologists annual meetings from 2001-2004. We found significant positive publication bias in the period examined, with the odds ratio for abstracts with positive results proceeding to journal publication over those with null results being 2.01 [95% confidence interval: 1.52, 2.66; P < 0.001]. Mandatory trial registration was introduced in 2005 as a required standard for publication. We sought to examine whether mandatory trial registration has decreased publication bias in the anesthesia and perioperative medicine literature. We reviewed all abstracts from the 2010-2016 American Society of Anesthesiologists meetings that reported on randomized-controlled trials in humans. We scored the result of each abstract as positive or null according to a priori definitions. We systematically searched for any subsequent publication of the studies and calculated the odds ratio for journal publication, comparing positive vs null studies. We compared the odds ratio from the 2010-2016 abstracts (post-mandatory trial registration) with the odds ratio from the 2001-2004 abstracts (pre-mandatory trial registration) as a ratio of odds ratios. We defined a 33% decrease in the odds ratio as significant, corresponding to a new odds ratio of 1.33. We reviewed 9789 abstracts; 1049 met inclusion criteria as randomized-controlled trials, with 542 (51.7%) of the abstracts going on to publication. The odds ratio for abstracts with positive results proceeding to journal publication was 1.28 [95% CI: 0.97, 1.67; P = 0.076]. With adjustment for sample size and abstract quality, the difference in publication rate between positive and null abstracts was statistically significant (odds ratio 1.34; 95% CI: 1.02, 1.76; P = 0.037). The ratio of odds ratios, comparing the odds ratio from the 2010-2016 abstracts (post-mandatory trial registration) to the odds ratio from the 2001-2004 abstracts (pre-mandatory trial registration), was 0.63 (95% CI: 0.43, 0.93); P = 0.021). We present the first study in the anesthesia and perioperative medicine literature that examines and compares publication bias over two discrete periods of time, prior to and after the implementation of mandatory trial registration. Our results suggest that the amount of publication bias has decreased markedly following implementation of mandatory trial registration. However, some positive publication bias in the anesthesia and perioperative medicine literature remains.
Topics: Humans; Publication Bias; Anesthesiology; Anesthesia; Sample Size; Odds Ratio
PubMed: 37235595
DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0282839 -
Frontiers in Public Health 2023The World Health Organization defines burnout as a problem associated with employment, a category distinct from psychological disorders such as depression, anxiety,...
INTRODUCTION
The World Health Organization defines burnout as a problem associated with employment, a category distinct from psychological disorders such as depression, anxiety, suicidality and disorders of substance abuse. Evaluating the association between burnout as an occupational exposure and psychological morbidity may indicate that burnout can act as an occupational risk factor for mental ill-health. The systematic review explores this relationship in physicians due to the increased risk in this population and the implications for healthcare delivery.
METHODS
A mixed methods systematic review of the literature was conducted across Medline, Cinahl Plus, PsycInfo, Web of Science and The Cochrane Library. Databases were systematically searched using keywords relating to physician burnout and depression, anxiety, suicidality and substance abuse. Identified articles were screened for eligibility by two independent researchers. Data extraction was performed and studies assessed for risk of bias. Quantitative and qualitative results were integrated using a convergent segregated approach and results portrayed as a narrative synthesis.
RESULTS
Sixty-one articles were included in the review. There was notable heterogeneity in the measurement and criteria used to define burnout limiting the assimilation of results. Despite this, all studies that measured the association between depression and burnout reported a significant association. Studies that reported association between burnout and anxiety were similarly uniformly consistent. Most studies that reported the association between burnout and suicidality indicated that a significant association exists however difficulty in measurement of suicidality may have influenced variability of results. The reported association between substance abuse and burnout was more variable, suggesting that any association is likely to be weak or influenced by other variables. Qualitative studies described the manifestations of chronic workplace stress as well as perceived links with psychological morbidity. These included lack of time for work-life balance, the contribution of professional relationships and a culture of invulnerability that exists among physicians.
CONCLUSION
The systematic review cannot conclude causality but suggests that physician burnout is associated with depression, anxiety and suicidality. Qualitative data provides insight into the nature of this association. The review indicates the need for longitudinal research and provides considerations for intervention strategies to prevent the development and progression of burnout.
SYSTEMATIC REVIEW REGISTRATION
https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/display_record.php?ID=CRD42020172938, identifier: CRD42020172938.
Topics: Humans; Depression; Suicide; Anxiety; Physicians; Burnout, Professional; Substance-Related Disorders
PubMed: 37064688
DOI: 10.3389/fpubh.2023.1133484 -
Vascular Health and Risk Management 2023In the United States, echocardiography is an essential component of the care of many cardiac patients. Recently, increased attention has been given to the accuracy of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In the United States, echocardiography is an essential component of the care of many cardiac patients. Recently, increased attention has been given to the accuracy of interpretation of cardiac-based procedures in different specialties, amongst them the field of cardiac anesthesiology and primary echocardiographers for transesophageal echocardiogram (TEE). The purpose of this study was to assess the TEE skills of cardiac anesthesiologists in comparison to primary echocardiographers, either radiologists or cardiologists. In this systematic review, we evaluated available current literature to identify if cardiac anesthesiologists interpret TEE procedures at an identical level to that of primary echocardiographers.
METHODS
A PRISMA systematic review was utilized from PubMed from the years 1952-2022. A broad keyword search of "Cardiology Anesthesiology Echocardiogram" and "Echocardiography Anesthesiology" to identify the literature was used. From reviewing 1798 articles, there were a total of 9 studies included in our systematic review, 3 of which yielded quantitative data and 6 of which yielded qualitative data. The mean accuracy from each of these three qualitative studies was calculated and used to represent the overall accuracy of cardiac anesthesiologists.
RESULTS
Through identified studies, a total of 8197 TEEs were interpreted by cardiac anesthesiologists with a concordance rate of 84% to the interpretations of primary echocardiographers. Cardiac anesthesiologists had a concordance rate of 83% when compared to radiologists. On the other hand, cardiac anesthesiologists and cardiologists had a concordance rate of 87% in one study and 79% in another study.
CONCLUSION
Based on these studies, cardiac anesthesiologists are shown to interpret TEEs similarly to that of primary echocardiographers. At this time, there is no gold standard to evaluate the accuracy of TEE readings. One way to address this is to individually assess the TEE interpretation of anesthesiologists and primary echocardiographers with a double-blind study.
Topics: Humans; Anesthesia, Cardiac Procedures; Anesthesiology; Cardiology; Echocardiography; Echocardiography, Transesophageal; Randomized Controlled Trials as Topic
PubMed: 37056574
DOI: 10.2147/VHRM.S400117 -
World Journal of Gastrointestinal... Mar 2023Oesophageal cancer is a frequently observed and lethal malignancy worldwide. Surgical resection remains a realistic option for curative intent in the early stages of the...
BACKGROUND
Oesophageal cancer is a frequently observed and lethal malignancy worldwide. Surgical resection remains a realistic option for curative intent in the early stages of the disease. However, the decision to undertake oesophagectomy is significant as it exposes the patient to a substantial risk of morbidity and mortality. Therefore, appropriate patient selection, counselling and resource allocation is important. Many tools have been developed to aid surgeons in appropriate decision-making.
AIM
To examine all multivariate risk models that use preoperative and intraoperative information and establish which have the most clinical utility.
METHODS
A systematic review of the MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases was conducted from 2000-2020. The search terms applied were ((Oesophagectomy) AND (Risk OR predict OR model OR score) AND (Outcomes OR complications OR morbidity OR mortality OR length of stay OR anastomotic leak)). The applied inclusion criteria were articles assessing multivariate based tools using exclusively preoperatively available data to predict perioperative patient outcomes following oesophagectomy. The exclusion criteria were publications that described models requiring intra-operative or post-operative data and articles appraising only univariate predictors such as American Society of Anesthesiologists score, cardiopulmonary fitness or pre-operative sarcopenia. Articles that exclusively assessed distant outcomes such as long-term survival were excluded as were publications using cohorts mixed with other surgical procedures. The articles generated from each search were collated, processed and then reported in accordance with PRISMA guidelines. All risk models were appraised for clinical credibility, methodological quality, performance, validation, and clinical effectiveness.
RESULTS
The initial search of composite databases yielded 8715 articles which reduced to 5827 following the deduplication process. After title and abstract screening, 197 potentially relevant texts were retrieved for detailed review. Twenty-seven published studies were ultimately included which examined twenty-one multivariate risk models utilising exclusively preoperative data. Most models examined were clinically credible and were constructed with sound methodological quality, but model performance was often insufficient to prognosticate patient outcomes. Three risk models were identified as being promising in predicting perioperative mortality, including the National Quality Improvement Project surgical risk calculator, revised STS score and the Takeuchi model. Two studies predicted perioperative major morbidity, including the predicting postoperative complications score and prognostic nutritional index-multivariate models. Many of these models require external validation and demonstration of clinical effectiveness.
CONCLUSION
Whilst there are several promising models in predicting perioperative oesophagectomy outcomes, more research is needed to confirm their validity and demonstrate improved clinical outcomes with the adoption of these models.
PubMed: 37032794
DOI: 10.4240/wjgs.v15.i3.450 -
Medicina (Kaunas, Lithuania) Feb 2023: Supracondylar fractures of the humerus (SCHF) make up about one-third of pediatric fractures and are the most common elbow fractures in children. Reduction and... (Review)
Review
: Supracondylar fractures of the humerus (SCHF) make up about one-third of pediatric fractures and are the most common elbow fractures in children. Reduction and fixation of SC fractures can be performed with the patient in the prone or supine position. However, the role of the patient's position during surgery is still unclear. The purpose of this systematic review is to evaluate, based on data from the literature, the role of patient position during closed reduction and fixation of pediatric SCHFs. : A systematic review of the current literature from 1951 to 2021 was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. Articles were identified from 6 public databases. Articles were screened and abstracted by two investigators and the quality of included publications ( = 14) was assessed (MINORS criteria). Statistical analyses were performed using R studio 4.1.2. : The systematic literature review identified 114 articles, from which, according to inclusion and exclusion criteria, 14 studies were identified. A total of 741 children were treated in the prone position and 538 in the supine position. The results of the systematic review showed that there were no statistical differences between the two positions with regard to clinical, radiographic, and complication outcomes. : The functional and radiographic outcome of displaced SCHFs is generally excellent regardless of the position, prone or supine, in which the patient is positioned for surgery. The choice of how to position the patient depends on the habit and experience of the surgeon and anesthesiologist performing the surgery.
Topics: Child; Humans; Supine Position; Prone Position; Humerus; Humeral Fractures; Fracture Fixation, Internal; Treatment Outcome; Retrospective Studies
PubMed: 36837576
DOI: 10.3390/medicina59020374 -
Medicine Feb 2023Propofol is increasingly being used for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy; however, owing to its side effects, an alternative drug is needed. We aimed to compare... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
Propofol is increasingly being used for sedation in gastrointestinal endoscopy; however, owing to its side effects, an alternative drug is needed. We aimed to compare the safety, satisfaction, and efficacy outcomes of etomidate versus propofol in patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy, including advanced endoscopic procedures.
METHODS
We systematically searched Embase, PubMed, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, CINAHL (via EBSCO), China National Knowledge Infrastructure, and Web of Science (1946-April 2020) databases for randomized controlled trials of gastrointestinal endoscopy (upper gastrointestinal endoscopy, colonoscopy, and advanced endoscopy) using etomidate or propofol as sedatives. We pooled odds ratios (ORs) for the safety profile and patient and anesthesiologist satisfaction using mixed-effects conditional logistic models and standardized mean differences for efficiency outcomes using random-effects models.
RESULTS
Twenty-four studies involving 3875 patients were included. Compared with propofol, etomidate resulted in significantly reduced apnea (OR: 0.22; 95% confidence interval [CI]: 0.13-0.37; P < .001), hypoxemia (OR: 0.43; 95% CI: 0.35-0.54; P < .001), hypotension (OR: 0.20; 95% CI: 0.11-0.36; P < .001), and bradycardia (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.30-0.91; P = .02) but led to increased myoclonus (OR: 8.54; 95% CI: 5.20-14.01; P < .001) and lowered anesthesiologist satisfaction (OR: 0.60; 95% CI: 0.39-0.91; P = .02).
CONCLUSION
Etomidate may be a good alternative to propofol for gastrointestinal endoscopy, especially advanced endoscopy. Etomidate appears to be safe as an inducer for hemodynamically unstable patients or older adult patients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy.
Topics: Humans; Aged; Propofol; Etomidate; Endoscopy, Gastrointestinal; Hypnotics and Sedatives; Colonoscopy
PubMed: 36820568
DOI: 10.1097/MD.0000000000032876 -
Journal of Clinical Medicine Feb 2023(1) Background: Systemic mastocytosis is a rare, non-curable disease with potential life-threatening complications in patients receiving cardiac surgery. (2) Methods:... (Review)
Review
(1) Background: Systemic mastocytosis is a rare, non-curable disease with potential life-threatening complications in patients receiving cardiac surgery. (2) Methods: This systematic review of the literature was prompted by the case of a life-threatening anaphylactic reaction during cardiac surgery related to systemic mastocytosis. The search of all types of studies, using several databases (Pubmed, Scopus and Web of Science), was conducted through September 2022 to identify the relevant studies. (3) Results: Twelve studies were included describing cases of patients undergoing cardiac surgery who were diagnosed with systemic mastocytosis. An adverse effect, namely anaphylaxis, has happened in three cases. Different strategies of premedication, intraoperative and postoperative management were used. In our case, the patient was admitted for elective biological aortic valve replacement due to severe aortic stenosis. Intraoperatively, the patient developed an anaphylactic shock during the administration of protamine after separation from the cardiopulmonary bypass. This anaphylaxis reaction was a complication of the pre-existing systemic mastocytosis and could be successfully managed by the administration of epinephrine, antihistamines and corticosteroids. (4) Conclusions: This systematic literature search and case report highlight the importance of careful preoperative planning, as well as coordination between cardiac surgeons, anesthesiologists and hemato-oncological specialists, in patients with rare but complication-prone diseases such as systemic mastocytosis.
PubMed: 36769805
DOI: 10.3390/jcm12031156