RESUMEN
Objective: To summarize the available evidence about the perioperative management of patients who are receiving long-term antiplatelet therapy and require elective surgery/procedures. Methods: This systematic review supports the development of the American College of Chest Physicians guideline on the perioperative management of antiplatelet therapy. A literature search of MEDLINE, EMBASE, Scopus and Cochrane databases was conducted from each database's inception to July 16, 2020. Meta-analyses were conducted when possible. Results: In patients receiving long-term antiplatelet therapy and undergoing elective noncardiac surgery, the available evidence did not show a significant difference in major bleeding between a shorter vs longer antiplatelet interruption, with low certainty of evidence (COE). Compared with patients who received placebo perioperatively, aspirin continuation was associated with increased risk of major bleeding (relative risk [RR], 1.31; 95% CI, 1.15-1.50; high COE) and lower risk of major thromboembolism (RR, 0.74; 95% CI, 0.58-0.94; moderate COE). During antiplatelet interruption, bridging with low-molecular-weight heparin was associated with increased risk of major bleeding compared with no bridging (RR, 1.86; 95% CI, 1.24-2.79; very low COE). Continuation of antiplatelets during minor dental and ophthalmologic procedures was not associated with a statistically significant difference in the risk of major bleeding (very low COE). Conclusion: This systematic review summarizes the current evidence about the perioperative management of antiplatelet therapy and highlights the urgent need for further research, particularly with the increasing prevalence of patients taking 1 or more antiplatelet agents.
RESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: Hospital evacuations of patients with special needs are extremely challenging, and it is difficult to train hospital workers for this rare event.Hypothesis/Problem:Researchers developed an in-situ simulation study investigating the effect of standardized checklists on the evacuation of a patient under general anesthesia from the operating room (OR) and hypothesized that checklists would improve the completion rate of critical actions and decrease evacuation time. METHODS: A vertical evacuation of the high-fidelity manikin (SimMan3G; Laerdal Inc.; Norway) was performed and participants were asked to lead the team and evacuate the manikin to the ground floor after a mock fire alarm. Participants were randomized to two groups: one was given an evacuation checklist (checklist group [CG]) and the other was not (non-checklist group [NCG]). A total of 19 scenarios were run with 28 participants. RESULTS: Mean scenario time, preparation phase of evacuation, and time to transport the manikin down the stairs did not differ significantly between groups (P = .369, .462, and .935, respectively). The CG group showed significantly better performance of critical actions, including securing the airway, taking additional drug supplies, and taking additional equipment supplies (P = .047, .001, and .001, respectively). In the post-evacuation surveys, 27 out of 28 participants agreed that checklists would improve the evacuation process in a real event. CONCLUSION: Standardized checklists increase the completion rate of pre-defined critical actions in evacuations out of the OR, which likely improves patient safety. Checklist use did not have a significant effect on total evacuation time.