European Society of Anaesthesiology.

AimTo compare the 2-stage and 4-stage basic life support teaching technique. The second aim was to test if students’ self-evaluated knowledge was in accordance with their actual knowledge.MethodsA total of 126 first-year students of the Faculty of Medicine in Ljubljana were involved in this parallel study conducted in the academic year 2009/2010. They were divided into ten groups. Five groups were taught the 2-stage model and five the 4-stage model. The students were tested in a scenario immediately after the course. Questionnaires were filled in before and after the course. We assessed the absolute values of the chest compression variables and the proportions of students whose performance was evaluated as correct according to our criteria. The results were analyzed with independent samples t test or Mann-Whitney-U test. Proportions were compared with χ2 test. The correlation was calculated with the Pearson coefficient.ResultsThere was no difference between the 2-stage (2S) and the 4-stage approach (4S) in the compression rate (126 ± 13 min-1 vs 124 ± 16 min -1, P = 0.180, independent samples t test), compression depth (43 ± 7 mm vs 44 ± 8 mm, P = 0.368, independent samples t test), and the number of compressions with correct hand placement (79 ± 32% vs 78 ± 12, P = 0.765, Mann-Whitney U-test). However, students from the 4-stage group had a significantly higher average number of compressions per minute (70 ± 13 min -1 2S, 78 ± 12 min-1 4S, P = 0.02, independent samples t test). The percentage of students with all the variables correct was the same (13% 2S, 15% 4S, P = 0.741, χ2 test). There was no correlation between the students’ actual and self-evaluated knowledge (P = 0.158, Pearson coefficient = 0.127).ConclusionsThe 4-stage teaching technique does not significantly improve the quality of chest compressions. The students’ self-evaluation of their performance after the course was too high.

Background Local anesthetic wound infusion has become an invaluable technique in multimodal analgesia. The effectiveness of wound infusion of 0.2% ropivacaine delivered by patient controlled analgesia (PCA) pump has not been evaluated in minimally invasive cardiac surgery. We tested the hypothesis that 0.2% ropivacaine wound infusion by PCA pump reduces the cumulative dose of opioid needed in the first 48 h after minithoracothomy aortic valve replacement (AVR). Methods In this prospective, randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study, 70 adult patients (31 female and 39 male) were analyzed. Patients were randomized to receive 0.2% ropivacaine or 0.9% saline wound infusion by PCA pump for 48 h postoperatively. PCA pump was programmed at 5 ml h − 1 continuously and 5 ml of bolus with 60 min lockout. Pain levels were assessed and recorded hourly by Numeric Rating Scale (NRS). If NRS score was higher than three the patient was administered 3 mg of opioid piritramide repeated and titrated as needed until pain relief was achieved. The primary outcome was the cumulative dose of the opioid piritramide in the first 48 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes were frequency of NRS scores higher than three, patient’s satisfaction with pain relief, hospital length of stay, side effects related to the local anesthetic and complications related to the wound catheter. Results The cumulative dose of the opioid piritramide in the first 48 h after minithoracotomy AVR was significantly lower ( p < 0.001) in the ropivacaine (R) group median 3 mg (IQR 6 mg) vs. 9 mg (IQR 9 mg). The number of episodes of pain where NRS score was greater than three median 2 (IQR 2), vs 3 (IQR 3), ( p = 0.002) in the first 48 h after surgery were significantly lower in the ropivacaine group, compared to control. Patient satisfaction with pain relief in our study was high. There were no wound infections and no side-effects from the local anesthetic. Conclusions Wound infusion of local anesthetic by PCA pump significantly reduced opioid dose needed and improves pain control postoperatively. We have also shown that it is a feasible method of analgesia and it should be considered in the multimodal pain control strategy following minimally invasive cardiac surgery. Trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov NCT03079830 , date of registration: March 15, 2017. Retrospecitvely registered.

Background Recently adopted mini-thoracotomy approach for surgical aortic valve replacement has shown benefits such as reduced pain and shorter recovery, compared to more conventional mini-sternotomy access. However, whether limited exposure of the heart and ascending aorta resulting from an incision in the second intercostal space may lead to increased intraoperative cerebral embolization and more prominent postoperative neurologic decline, remains inconclusive. The aim of our study was to assess potential neurological complications after two different minimal invasive surgical techniques for aortic valve replacement by measuring cerebral microembolic signal during surgery and by follow-up cognitive evaluation. Methods Trans-cranial Doppler was used for microembolic signal detection during aortic valve replacement performed via mini-sternotomy and mini-thoracotomy. Patients were evaluated using Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination Revised Test before and 30 days after surgical procedure. Results A total of 60 patients were recruited in the study. In 52 patients, transcranial Doppler was feasible. Of those, 25 underwent mini-sternotomy and 27 had mini-thoracotomy. There were no differences between groups with respect to sex, NYHA class distribution, Euroscore II or aortic valve area. Patients in mini-sternotomy group were younger (60.8 ± 14.4 vs.72 ± 5.84, p = 0.003), heavier (85.2 ± 12.4 vs.72.5 ± 12.9, p = 0.002) and had higher body surface area (1.98 ± 0.167 vs. 1.83 ± 0.178, p = 0.006). Surgery duration was longer in mini-sternotomy group compared to mini-thoracotomy (158 ± 24 vs. 134 ± 30 min, p < 0.001, respectively). There were no differences between groups in microembolic load, length of ICU or total hospital stay. Total microembolic signals count was correlated with cardiopulmonary bypass duration (5.64, 95%CI 0.677–10.60, p = 0.027). Addenbrooke’s Cognitive Examination Revised Test score decreased equivalently in both groups (p = 0.630) (MS: 85.2 ± 9.6 vs. 82.9 ± 11.4, p = 0.012; MT: 85.2 ± 9.6 vs. 81.3 ± 8.8, p = 0.001). Conclusion There is no difference in microembolic load between the groups. Total intraoperative microembolic signals count was associated with cardiopulmonary bypass duration. Age, but not micorembolic signals load, was associated with postoperative neurologic decline. Trial registry number clinicaltrials.gov, NCT02697786 14.