Display options
Share it on

J Cardiothorac Vasc Anesth. 2021 Aug 08; doi: 10.1053/j.jvca.2021.08.003. Epub 2021 Aug 08.

Cerebrospinal Fluid Drainage in Thoracic and Thoracoabdominal Endovascular Aortic Repair: A Survey of Current Clinical Practice in European Medical Centers.

Journal of cardiothoracic and vascular anesthesia

Kavita Houthoff Khemlani, Geert Willem Schurink, Wolfgang Buhre, Jan Uwe Schreiber

Affiliations

  1. Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands; Department of Anesthesia, Maxima Medical Center, Veldhoven, The Netherlands. Electronic address: [email protected].
  2. Department of Vascular Surgery, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.
  3. Department of Anesthesia and Pain Management, Maastricht University Medical Center, Maastricht, The Netherlands.

PMID: 34507885 DOI: 10.1053/j.jvca.2021.08.003

Abstract

OBJECTIVES: The aim of this survey was to evaluate the daily clinical practice in European hospitals regarding the modalities to prevent spinal cord ischemia, with an emphasis on cerebrospinal fluid drainage (CSFD), in patients undergoing thoracic and thoracoabdominal endovascular repair.

DESIGN: A 21-item online survey on current practice of spinal cord protection with an emphasis on CSFD.

SETTING: Online service using Castor EDC software.

PARTICIPANTS: Members of the European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care and European Society of Vascular Surgeons.

INTERVENTIONS: None.

MEASUREMENTS AND MAIN RESULTS: One hundred eighty invitations were sent and 104 were used for analysis. A majority of respondents used a written protocol for spinal cord protection during endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal repair (81/104 = 78%). The most common protective measures used were CSFD (79/81 = 98%), controlled hypertension (59/81 = 73%), drugs (11/81 = 14%), and hypothermia (6/81 = 7%). The two most common indications for placement of a spinal catheter were the length of the stent (83/104 = 80%) and location of aneurysm (71/104 = 68%). Preventive placement of the spinal drain (96/104) is the most common approach. In the subgroup of high-volume centers, 86% (12/14) of the respondents used a written protocol and all protocols include CSFD. Ninety-two percent (11/12) had included controlled arterial hypertension in the protocol compared with 70% (48/69) of the non-high-volume centers respondents.

CONCLUSIONS: The majority of European centers use a written protocol that includes CSFD. This survey showed the similarities and differences in the management of CSFD in patients undergoing endovascular thoracic and thoracoabdominal repair.

Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Anesthesia; Cerebral spinal fluid drainage; Spinal cord ischemia, European survey; thoracic and thoracoabdominal endovascular repair

Conflict of interest statement

Declaration of Competing Interest None.

Publication Types