General anaesthesia for obstetric surgery has distinct characteristics that may contribute towards a higher risk of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia. The primary aim of this study was to investigate the incidence, experience and psychological implications of unintended conscious awareness during general anaesthesia in obstetric patients. From May 2017 to August 2018, 3115 consenting patients receiving general anaesthesia for obstetric surgery in 72 hospitals in England were recruited to the study. Patients received three repetitions of standardised questioning over 30 days, with responses indicating memories during general anaesthesia that were verified using interviews and record interrogation. A total of 12 patients had certain/ probable or possible awareness, an incidence of 1 in 256 (95%CI 149-500) for all obstetric surgery. The incidence was 1 in 212 (95%CI 122-417) for caesarean section surgery. Distressing experiences were reported by seven (58.3%) patients, paralysis by five (41.7%) and paralysis with pain by two (16.7%). Accidental awareness occurred during induction and emergence in nine (75%) of the patients who reported awareness. Factors associated with accidental awareness during general anaesthesia were: high BMI (25-30 kg.m -2 ); low BMI (<18.5 kg.m -2 ); out-of-hours surgery; and use of ketamine or thiopental for induction. Standardised psychological impact scores at 30 days were significantly higher in awareness patients (median (IQR [range]) 15 (2.7-52.0 [2-56]) than in patients without awareness 3 (1-9 [0-64]), p = 0.010. Four patients had a provisional diagnosis of post-traumatic stress disorder. We conclude that direct postoperative questioning reveals high rates of accidental awareness during general anaesthesia for obstetric surgery, which has implications for anaesthetic practice, consent and follow-up.

The major purpose of this article was to compare the discriminative value of different algorithms and serum biomarkers in the differential diagnosis of adnexal masses. We performed a retrospective study with 247 women with adnexal neoplasia, submitted to surgical treatment and with a histological diagnosis. The evaluation of the area under the curve (AUC) for isolated CA-125 and HE4, and for ROMA and RMI-II, showed a better specificity of HE4 and RMI-II in premenopausal women. In the postmenopausal group, ROMA and RMI-II were the algorithms with a better performance. Impact Statement What is already known on this subject? CA-125 remains the most commonly used biomarker used to predict the behaviour of an adnexal mass, but it has a low sensitivity for stage I tumours. Other isolated serum markers have emerged more recently, such as HE4, as well as more complex algorithms, such as RMI or ROMA. It remains unclear which is the best marker/algorithm to predict the behaviour of an adnexal mass. What do the results of this study add? Our findings showed that ROMA is a suitable marker for postmenopausal women, with no advantage found in the premenopausal women when compared with an isolated HE4. What are the implications of these findings for clinical practice and/or further research? The different algorithms of the preoperative discrimination of ovarian neoplasia appear to have different AUC, SN and SP in the pre- or the postmenopausal patients. For the premenopausal women, the use of ROMA does not seem to have any advantage over the isolated use of HE4, which does not lose specificity even when the borderline tumours are considered for discrimination. In the postmenopausal women, ROMA is a valid algorithm with a good sensitivity. The RMI-II showed a good performance in both groups, although it depends on the ultrasound findings and has an important interobserver variability. This information allows a more targeted selection of markers and algorithms to be requested prior to surgery of ovarian neoplasms regarding the menopausal status of each patient.

No abstract

No abstract