background:There is no consensus on which drugs/techniques/strategies can affect mortality in the perioperative period of cardiac surgery. With the aim of identifying these measures, and suggesting measures for prioritized future investigation we performed the first international consensus conference on this topic. methods: The consensus was a continuous international internet-based process with a final meeting on June 28th 2010 in Milan at the Vita-Salute University. Participants included 340 cardiac anesthesiologists, cardiac surgeons and cardiologists from 65 countries all over the world. A comprehensive literature review was performed to identify topics that subsequently generated position statements for discussion, voting and ranking. results: of the 17 major topics with a documented mortality effect, seven were subsequently excluded after further evaluation due to concerns about clinical applicability and/or study methodology. The following topics are documented as reducing mortality: administration of insulin, levosimendan, volatile anesthetics, statins, chronic beta-blockade, early aspirin therapy, the use of preoperative intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation and referral to high-volume centers. The following are documented as increasing mortality: administration of aprotinin and aged red blood cell transfusion. These interventions were classified according to the level of evidence and effect on mortality and a position statement was generated. conclusion: This international consensus conference has identified the non-surgical interventions that merit urgent study to achieve further reductions in mortality after cardiac surgery: insulin, intra-aortic balloon counterpulsation, levosimendan, volatile anesthetics, statins, chronic beta-blockade, early aspirin therapy, and referral to high-volume centers. The use of aprotinin and aged red blood cells may result in increased mortality.

Within the study's limitations, including a collagen-containing dressing into a standard care protocol compared with standard care potentially affords the NHS a cost-effective (dominant) treatment since it improves outcomes for less cost.

ObjectiveThis study aimed to estimate the cost-effectiveness of Coblation compared with cold steel tonsillectomy in adult and paediatric patients in the UK.MethodDecision analysis was undertaken by combining published clinical outcomes with resource utilisation estimates derived from a panel of clinicians.ResultsUsing a cold steel procedure instead of Coblation is expected to generate an incremental cost of more than £2000 for each additional avoided haemorrhage, and the probability of cold steel being cost-effective was approximately 0.50. Therefore, the cost-effectiveness of the two techniques was comparable. When the published clinical outcomes were replaced with clinicians’ estimates of current practice, Coblation was found to improve outcome for less cost, and the probability of Coblation being cost-effective was at least 0.70.ConclusionA best-case scenario suggests Coblation affords the National Health Service a cost-effective intervention for tonsillectomy in adult and paediatric patients compared with cold steel procedures. A worst-case scenario suggests Coblation affords the National Health Service an equivalent cost-effective intervention for adult and paediatric patients.

Despite the unwarranted variation in the provision of wound care observed in this study, the use of the EAE device resulted in some improved clinical outcomes and patient-reported outcomes, for the same or less cost as standard care, by 24 weeks. Clinicians managing VLUs may wish to consider the findings from this study when making treatment decisions.