BackgroundWhether nonobstetric surgery during gestation is associated with a higher risk of spontaneous abortion or adverse delivery outcomes is still unclear.MethodsWe performed a retrospective case-control study using a Longitudinal Health Insurance Database (LHID 2000) containing claim-data of 1 million randomly selected beneficiaries. We compared the incidences and estimated the adjusted odds ratios (aOR) with 95% confidence interval (95% CI) for spontaneous abortion, adverse delivery outcomes, cesarean delivery, and prolonged hospital stay to determine the risk of adverse outcomes in women who had nonobstetric surgery during gestation as compared to those who did not have any surgery during gestation.ResultsAfter exclusion, we were left with 114,852 delivery and 3999 abortion cases in our study; and 462 (0.39%) of them had nonobstetric surgery under general or regional anesthesia during pregnancy. The leading surgeries were repair of cervical os (33.12%), appendectomy (17.32%), ovarian surgeries (13.64%), and fixation of fractured bone (8.01%).The risk of spontaneous abortion (4.23% vs. 2.43%, aOR:1.53; 95% CI: 1.01–2.31), antepartum hemorrhage (7.14% vs. 2.83%, aOR: 2.51; 95% CI: 1.74–3.61), pre-eclampsia/eclampsia (2.60% vs. 1.01%, aOR: 2.35; 95% CI: 1.30–4.23), gestational diabetes (2.38% vs. 0.69%, aOR: 3.12; 95% CI: 1.69–5.78), prematurity (9.06 vs. 4.90%, aOR: 3.31; 95% CI: 2.54–4.31), cesarean section (43.55% vs. 33.76%, aOR: 1.41; 95% CI: 1.17–1.71), and prolonged hospital stay (1.82% vs. 5.91%, aOR: 3.23; 95% CI: 2.16–4.83) were higher in those women who had nonobstetric surgery after adjusting for age and comorbidities.ConclusionsNonobstetric surgery during gestation were associated with a higher risk of spontaneous abortion, adverse delivery outcomes, cesarean section, and prolonged hospital stay.

Background: The primary objective of this study was to compare the risk of hypotension, as well as the induction and recovery characteristics between remimazolam and propofol in patients receiving surgery under general anesthesia.Methods: The Embase, Medline, Google scholar, and the Cochrane Library databases were searched from inception to March 2022 for randomized controlled trials The primary outcome was the risk of post-induction hypotension between the two agents, while the secondary outcomes included anesthetic depth, induction efficacy, time to loss of consciousness (LOC), hemodynamic profiles, time to eye opening, extubation time as well as the incidence of injection pain and postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV).Results: Meta-analysis of eight studies published from 2020 to 2022 involving 738 patients revealed a significantly lower risk of post-induction hypotension with the use of remimazolam compared to that with propofol [risk ratio (RR) = 0.57, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.43 to 0.75, p < 0.0001, I2 = 12%, five studies, 564 patients]. After anesthetic induction, the anesthetic depth measured by bispectral index (BIS) was lighter in the remimazolam group than that in the propofol group (MD = 9.26, 95% confidence interval: 3.06 to 15.47, p = 0.003, I2 = 94%, five studies, 490 patients). The time to loss of consciousness was also longer in the former compared to the latter (MD = 15.49 s, 95%CI: 6.53 to 24.46, p = 0.0007, I2 = 61%, three studies, 331 patients). However, the use of remimazolam correlated with a lower risk of injection pain (RR = 0.03, 95%CI: 0.01 to 0.16, p < 0.0001, I2 = 0%, three studies, 407 patients) despite comparable efficacy of anesthetic induction (RR = 0.98, 95%CI: 0.9 to 1.06, p = 0.57, I2 = 76%, two studies, 319 patients). Our results demonstrated no difference in time to eye opening, extubation time, and risk of PONV between the two groups.Conclusion: Remimazolam was associated with a lower risk of post-induction hypotension after anesthetic induction compared with propofol with similar recovery characteristics. Further studies are required to support our findings.Systematic Review Registration:https://www.crd.york.ac.uk/prospero/; Identifier: CRD42022320658.

Background Literature suggests that nonobstetric surgery during gestation is associated with a higher risk of spontaneous abortion, prematurity, and a higher cesarean section rate, but the direct impact on fetal outcomes is still unclear. In this study, we aimed to investigate whether nonobstetric surgery during pregnancy is associated with negative fetal outcomes by analysing a nation-wide database in Taiwan. Methods This population-based retrospective observational case–control study was based on the linkage of Taiwan’s National Health Insurance Research Database, Birth Reporting Database, and Maternal and Child Health Database between 2004 and 2014. For every pregnancy with nonobstetric surgery during gestation, four controls were randomly matched according to maternal age and delivery year. We estimated adjusted odds ratios (aOR) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) of adverse fetal outcomes with the non-surgery group as the reference. The primary outcomes involved stillbirth, prematurity, low birth weight, low Apgar scores, and neonatal and infant death. Results Among 23,721 identified pregnancies, 4,747 underwent nonobstetric surgery. Pregnancies with nonobstetric surgery had significantly higher risks of prematurity (aOR: 1.46; 95% CI: 1.31–1.62), lower birth weight (aOR: 1.49; 95% CI: 1.33–1.67), Apgar scores < 7 (1 min, aOR: 1.58; 95% CI: 1.33–1.86; 5 min, aOR: 1.34; 95% CI: 1.03–1.74), neonatal death (aOR: 2.01; 95% CI: 1.18–3.42), and infant death (aOR: 1.69; 95% CI: 1.12–2.54) than those without nonobstetric surgery after adjustment for socioeconomic deprivation, hospital level, and other comorbidities. Surgery performed in the third trimester was associated with a significantly increased rate of prematurity (aOR: 1.38; 95% CI: 1.03–1.85), but lower rates of stillbirth (aOR: 0.1; 95% CI: 0.01–0.75) and Apgar score < 7 at the 5th minute (aOR: 0.2; 95% CI: 0.05–0.82), than surgery performed in the first trimester. Conclusions Pregnancies with nonobstetric surgery during gestation were associated with increased risks of prematurity, low birth weight, low Apgar scores, neonatal and infant death, longer admission, and higher medical expenses than those without surgery. Furthermore, surgery in the third trimester was associated with a higher rate of prematurity than surgery performed in the first trimester. Trial registration Not applicable.

Assessment of risk before lung resection surgery can provide anesthesiologists with information about whether a patient can be weaned from the ventilator immediately after surgery. However, it is difficult for anesthesiologists to perform a complete integrated risk assessment in a time-limited pre-anesthetic clinic. We retrospectively collected the electronic medical records of 709 patients who underwent lung resection between 1 January 2017 and 31 July 2019. We used the obtained data to construct an artificial intelligence (AI) prediction model with seven supervised machine learning algorithms to predict whether patients could be weaned immediately after lung resection surgery. The AI model with Naïve Bayes Classifier algorithm had the best testing result and was therefore used to develop an application to evaluate risk based on patients’ previous medical data, to assist anesthesiologists, and to predict patient outcomes in pre-anesthetic clinics. The individualization and digitalization characteristics of this AI application could improve the effectiveness of risk explanations and physician–patient communication to achieve better patient comprehension.

No abstract