Hopkins PM, Girard T, Dalay S, Jenkins B, Thacker A, Patteril M, McGrady E. Malignant hyperthermia 2020: Guideline from the Association of Anaesthetists. Anaesthesia. 2021 May;76(5):655-664. Free full-text.
Kim KSM, Kriss RS, Tautz TJ. Malignant Hyperthermia: A Clinical Review. Adv Anesth. 2019 Dec;37:35-51. Full-text for Emory users.
Rechenmacher SJ, Fang JC. Bridging Anticoagulation: Primum Non Nocere. J Am Coll Cardiol. 2015 Sep 22;66(12):1392-403.
Full-text for Emory users.
Conclusions: Periprocedural anticoagulation management is a common clinical dilemma with limited evidence (but 1 notable randomized trial) to guide our practices. Although bridging anticoagulation may be necessary for those patients at highest risk for TE, for most patients it produces excessive bleeding, longer length of hospital stay, and other significant morbidities, while providing no clear prevention of TE. Unfortunately, contemporary clinical practice, as noted in physician surveys, continues to favor interruption of OAC and the use of bridging anticoagulation. While awaiting the results of additional randomized trials, physicians should carefully reconsider the practice of routine bridging and whether periprocedural anticoagulation interruption is even necessary.
Central Illustration. Bridging Anticoagulation: Algorithms for Periprocedural Interrupting and Bridging Anticoagulation. Decision trees for periprocedural interruption of chronic oral anticoagulation (top) and for periprocedural bridging anticoagulation (bottom). OAC = oral anticoagulation.
Hornor MA, Duane TM, Ehlers AP, et al. ACS Guidelines for the Perioperative Management of Antithrombotic Medication. J Am Coll Surg. 2018 Nov;227(5):521-536.e1.
Full-text for Emory users.
One discussion this week focused on the perioperative management of NOACs.
Reference: DynaMed Plus [Internet]. Ipswich (MA): EBSCO Information Services. 1995 -. Record No. 227537, Periprocedural management of patients on long-term anticoagulation; [updated 2018 Oct 10, cited 2018 Oct 12; [about 26 screens]. Emory login required.
Summary: The information below is from DynaMed Plus (2018). To view full information on the topic, click on the citation above.
Lightner AL. Perioperative Management of Biologic and Immunosuppressive
Medications in Patients With Crohn’s Disease. Dis Colon Rectum. 2018 Apr;61(4): 428-431.
EVALUATION AND TREATMENT ALGORITHMS
A discussion during a previous conference included the perioperative management of patients with atrial fibrillation receiving a direct oral anticoagulant (DOAC).
Reference: Douketis JD, et al. Perioperative management of patients with atrial fibrillation receiving a direct oral anticoagulant. JAMA Internal Medicine. 2019 Aug 5; doi:10/1001/jamainternmed.2019.2431
Summary: Each year, 1 in 6 patients with AF, or an estimated 6 million patients worldwide, will require perioperative anticoagulant management. When DOAC regimens became available for clinical use in AF, starting in 2010, no studies had been conducted to inform the timing of perioperative DOAC therapy interruption and resumption, whether heparin bridging should be given, and whether preoperative coagulation function testing was needed. Uncertainty about the perioperative management of DOACs may be associated with unsubstantiated practices and increased harm to patients.
One discussion this week included the use of Foley catheters.
Reference: Meddings J, et al. Michigan Appropriate Periopeartive (MAP) criteria for urinary catheter use in common general and orthopaedic surgeries: results obtained using the RAND/UCLA Appropriateness Method. BMJ Quality & Safety. 2019 Jan;28(1):56-66. doi:10.1136/bmjqs-2018-008025
Summary: Indwelling urinary catheters are commonly used for patients undergoing general and orthopaedic surgery. Despite infectious and non-infectious harms of urinary catheters, there is limited guidance available to surgery teams regarding appropriate perioperative catheter use.
Meddings et al (2019) used the RAND Corporation/University of California Los Angeles (RAND/UCLA) Appropriateness Method 21 to formally rate the appropriateness of urinary catheter placement and timing for removal across routine general and
orthopaedic surgical procedures in adults, as rated by clinicians in different clinical settings across the US and informed by the available literature involving perioperative urinary catheter use.
(Meddings et al, 2019, p.61)
Surgical Focus 