Simulation in vascular access surgery

In the last years, simulation training has become widespread in different areas of medicine due to social expectations, political accountability and professional regulation. Different types of simulators allow to improve knowledge, skills, communication and team behavior. Simulation sessions have been proven to shorten the learning curve and allow education in a safe environment. Patients on dialysis are an expanding group. They often suffer from several comorbidities and need complex surgical procedures with regard to their dialysis access. Therefore, education in evidence-based algorithms is as important as teaching of practical skills. In this chapter, we are presenting an overview of available dialysis access training modalities. We are convinced that simulation will become more important in the near future and has a substantial impact on strategies to improve aspects of patient safety. © 2015 S. Karger AG, Basel.

Careful and safe vascular access creation.

Morbidity and mortality are significant in hemodialysis patients, and every vascular access (VA) is prone to complications - some more, some less. The risk of complications rises from arteriovenous fistulae to arteriovenous grafts and peaks in nontunneled central lines. Strategies to achieve complete evaluation of the patient and precise planning mark the start of successful VA creation. Furthermore, preoperative considerations include safety checklists, team time-out procedures, and antibiotic prophylaxis. Intraoperative technical features and postoperative aspects of documentation and surveillance schemes complete careful and safe VA creation.

Simulation in vascular access surgery training.

Rapidly growing technical developments and working time constraints call for changes in trainee formation. In reality, trainees spend fewer hours in the hospital and face more difficulties in acquiring the required qualifications in order to work independently as a specialist. Simulation-based training is a potential solution. It offers the possibility to learn basic technical skills, repeatedly perform key steps in procedures and simulate challenging scenarios in team training. Patients are not at risk and learning curves can be shortened. Advanced learners are able to train rare complications. Senior faculty member's presence is key to assess and debrief effective simulation training. In the field of vascular access surgery, simulation models are available for open as well as endovascular procedures. In this narrative review, we describe the theory of simulation, present simulation models in vascular (access) surgery, discuss the possible benefits for patient safety and the difficulties of implementing simulation in training.

Novel bone-anchored vascular access on the mastoid for hemodialysis: concept and preclinical trials

GOAL We present the development of a boneanchored port for the painless long-term hemodialytic treatment of patients with renal failure. This port is implanted behind the ear. METHODS The port was developed based on knowledge obtained from long-term experience with implantable hearing devices, which are firmly anchored to the bone behind the ear. This concept of bone anchoring was adapted to the requirements for a vascular access during hemodialysis. The investigational device is comprised of a base plate that is firmly fixed with bone screws to the bone behind the ear (temporal bone). A catheter leads from the base plate valve block through the internal jugular vein and into the right atrium. The valves are opened using a special disposable adapter, without any need to puncture the blood vessels. Between hemodialysis sessions the port is protected with a disposable cover. RESULTS Flow rate, leak tightness and purification were tested on mockups. Preoperative planning and the surgical procedure were verified in 15 anatomical human whole head specimens. CONCLUSION Preclinical evaluations demonstrated the technical feasibility and safety of the investigational device. SIGNIFICANCE Approximately 1.5 million people are treated with hemodialysis worldwide, and 25% of the overall cost of dialysis therapy results from vascular access problems. New approaches towards enhancing vascular access could potentially reduce the costs and complications of hemodialytic therapy.

Determinants of haemodialysis access survival

Vascular access patency is of vital importance for patients requiring haemodialysis. This analysis validates potential risk factors and benefits in patients undergoing vascular access procedures.

Polytetrafluoroethylene and bovine mesenterial vein grafts for hemodialysis access: a comparative study

PURPOSE: This study aimed to evaluate the safety and patency rate of bovine mesenterial vein grafts (BMVG) for vascular access (VA) in hemodialysis patients (HDP), compared to expanded polytetrafluorethylene (ePTFE grafts) over a mid- to long-term period. METHODS: Patency and complication rate of 23 consecutive HDP with BMVG for VA were compared to a control group consisting of 23 similar HDP with ePTFE grafts. In both groups, the graft was placed preferably in a forearm loop configuration. The same surgeon performed all procedures. All patients were followed over a period of 4 yrs. RESULTS: Graft placement was successful in all patients. Patency rates did not differ significantly in both groups. However, there were less severe complications in the BMVG group. CONCLUSION: The BMVG is a viable alternative for HD access in patients where autologous construction is not possible, and should be given priority in patients with a failed ePTFE graft or high risk for infection.

Nosocomial infections in dialysis access.

Nosocomial infections in patients requiring renal replacement therapy have a high impact on morbidity and mortality. The most dangerous complication is bloodstream infection (BSI) associated with the vascular access, with a low BSI risk in arteriovenous fistulas or grafts and a comparatively high risk in central venous catheters. The single most important measure for preventing BSI is therefore the reduction of catheter use by means of early fistula formation. As this is not always feasible, prevention should focus on educational efforts, hand hygiene, surveillance of dialysis-associated events, and specific measures at and after the insertion of catheters. Core measures at the time of insertion include choosing the optimal site of insertion, the use of maximum sterile barrier precautions, adequate skin antisepsis, and the choice of catheter type; after insertion, access care needs to ensure hub disinfection and regular dressing changes. The application of antimicrobial locks is reserved for special situations. Evidence suggests that bundling a selection of the aforementioned measures can significantly reduce infection rates. The diagnosis of central line-associated BSI (CLABSI) is based on clinical signs and microbiological findings in blood cultures ideally drawn both peripherally and from the catheter. The prompt installation of empiric antibiotic treatment covering the most commonly encountered organisms is key regarding CLABSI treatment. Catheter removal is recommended in complicated cases or if cultures yield Staphylococcus aureus, enterococci, Pseudomonas or fungi. In other cases, guide wire exchange or catheter salvage strategies with antibiotic lock solutions may be acceptable alternatives.

Key points for patient safety in dialysis access.

For more than 15 years, patient safety has been an issue in different domains of medicine. There is evidence for this subject and also a great need for information. First, we should be familiar with the basic terminology such as the relationship between adverse events and errors, and understand the variations of error. In patient management, besides skills and knowledge (evidence-based medicine), the ability (competence) of healthcare professionals to act and react in unexpected situations is key to prevent and treat adverse events. Not only healthcare professionals should be involved in the process but also healthy people in a way that they understand and patients in a way that they are actively involved. This paper will show how a more general view of patient safety can and should be implemented in the daily work of caregivers dealing with dialysis access in different aspects. A key factor to advance in this subject is to be open-minded and sensualized for this topic. The reader should get an idea of how an institution can create a culture of safety.

Team training to establish a safety culture in dialysis access surgery.

Operating room (OR) team safety training and learning in the field of dialysis access is well suited for the use of simulators, simulated case learning and root cause analysis of adverse outcomes. The objectives of OR team training are to improve communication and leadership skills, to use checklists and to prevent errors. Other objectives are to promote a change in the attitudes towards vascular access from learning through mistakes in a nonpunitive environment, to positively impact the employee performance and to increase staff retention by making the workplace safer, more efficient and user friendly.

Pitfall in pediatric dialysis: malposition of a dialysis catheter mimicking azygos continuation syndrome

Central venous catheters are established as vascular access in hemodialysis therapy. Vascular catheter misdirection may occur and is a well known problem. We present a rare catheter malposition in a young dialysis patient with consequent dilatation of the azygos vein system, simulating the appearance of an azygos continuation syndrome.

Safety and feasibility of percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale without intra-procedural echocardiography in 825 patients

BACKGROUND: Percutaneous closure of patent foramen ovale (PFO) is generally performed using intra-procedural guidance by transoesophageal (TEE) or intracardiac (ICE) echocardiography. While TEE requires sedation or general anaesthesia, ICE is costly and adds incremental risk, and both imaging modalities lengthen the procedure. METHODS: A total of 825 consecutive patients (age 51 +/- 13 years; 58% male) underwent percutaneous PFO closure solely under fluoroscopic guidance, without intra-procedural echocardiography. The indications for PFO closure were presumed paradoxical embolism in 698 patients (95% cerebral, 5% other locations), an embolic event with concurrent aetiologies in 47, diving in 51, migraine headaches in 13, and other reasons in 16. An atrial septal aneurysm was associated with the PFO in 242 patients (29%). RESULTS: Permanent device implantation failed in two patients (0.2%). There were 18 procedural complications (2.2%), including embolization of the device or parts of it in five patients with successful percutaneous removal in all cases, air embolism with transient symptoms in four patients, pericardial tamponade requiring pericardiocentesis in one patient, a transient ischaemic attack with visual symptoms in one patient, and vascular access site problems in seven patients. There were no long-term sequelae. Contrast TEE at six months showed complete abolition of right-to-left shunt via PFO in 88% of patients, whereas a minimal, moderate or large residual shunt persisted in 7%, 3%, and 2%, respectively. CONCLUSIONS: This study confirms the safety and feasibility of percutaneous PFO closure without intra-procedural echocardiographic guidance in a large cohort of consecutive patients.

Risk of acute kidney injury in patients with severe aortic valve stenosis undergoing transcatheter valve replacement

BACKGROUND: Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) for high-risk and inoperable patients with severe aortic stenosis is an emerging procedure in cardiovascular medicine. Little is known of the impact of TAVI on renal function. METHODS: We analysed retrospectively renal baseline characteristics and outcome in 58 patients including 2 patients on chronic haemodialysis undergoing TAVI at our institution. Acute kidney injury (AKI) was defined according to the RIFLE classification. RESULTS: Fifty-eight patients with severe symptomatic aortic stenosis not considered suitable for conventional surgical valve replacement with a mean age of 83 +/- 5 years underwent TAVI. Two patients died during transfemoral valve implantation and two patients in the first month after TAVI resulting in a 30-day mortality of 6.9%. Vascular access was transfemoral in 46 patients and transapical in 12. Estimated glomerular filtration rate (eGFR) increased in 30 patients (56%). Fifteen patients (28%) developed AKI, of which four patients had to be dialyzed temporarily and one remained on chronic renal replacement therapy. Risk factors for AKI comprised, among others, transapical access, number of blood transfusions, postinterventional thrombocytopaenia and severe inflammatory response syndrome (SIRS). CONCLUSIONS: TAVI is feasible in patients with a high burden of comorbidities and in patients with pre-existing end-stage renal disease who would be otherwise not considered as candidates for conventional aortic valve replacement. Although GFR improved in more than half of the patients, this benefit was associated with a risk of postinterventional AKI. Future investigations should define preventive measures of peri-procedural kidney injury.

Perioperative anaesthetic management of mediastinal mass in adults

Mediastinal mass syndrome remains an anaesthetic challenge that cannot be underestimated. Depending on the localization and the size of the mediastinal tumour, the clinical presentation is variable ranging from a complete lack of symptoms to severe cardiorespiratory problems. The administration of general anaesthesia can be associated with acute intraoperative or postoperative cardiorespiratory decompensation that may result in death due to tumour-related compression syndromes. The role of the anaesthesiologist, as a part of the interdisciplinary treatment team, is to ensure a safe perioperative period. However, there is still no structured protocol available for perioperative anaesthesiological procedure. The aim of this article is to summarize the genesis of and the diagnostic options for mediastinal mass syndrome and to provide a solid detailed methodology for its safe perioperative management based on a review of the latest literature and our own clinical experiences. Proper anaesthetic management of patients with mediastinal mass syndrome begins with an assessment of the preoperative status, directed foremost at establishing the localization of the tumour and on the basis of the clinical and radiological findings, discerning whether any vital mediastinal structures are affected. We have found it helpful to assign 'severity grade' (using a three-grade clinical classification scale: 'safe', 'uncertain', 'unsafe'), whereby each stage triggers appropriate action in terms of staffing and apparatus, such as the provision of alternatives for airway management, cardiopulmonary bypass and additional specialists. During the preoperative period, we are guided by a 12-point plan that also takes into account the special features of transportation into the operating theatre and patient monitoring. Tumour compression on the airways or the great vessels may create a critical respiratory and/or haemodynamic situation, and therefore the standard of intraoperative management includes induction of anaesthesia in the operating theatre on an adjustable surgical table, the use of short-acting anaesthetics, avoidance of muscle relaxants and maintenance of spontaneous respiration. In the case of severe clinical symptoms and large mediastinal tumours, we consider it absolutely essential to cannulate the femoral vessels preoperatively under local anaesthesia and to provide for the availability of cardiopulmonary bypass in the operating theatre, should extracorporeal circulation become necessary. The benefits of establishing vascular access under local anaesthesia clearly outweigh any associated degree of patient discomfort. In the case of patients classified as 'safe' or 'uncertain', a preoperative consensus with the surgeons should be reached as to the anaesthetic approach and the management of possible complications.

Percutaneous left-ventricular support with the Impella-2.5-assist device in acute cardiogenic shock: results of the Impella-EUROSHOCK-registry

BACKGROUND Acute cardiogenic shock after myocardial infarction is associated with high in-hospital mortality attributable to persisting low-cardiac output. The Impella-EUROSHOCK-registry evaluates the safety and efficacy of the Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device in patients with cardiogenic shock after acute myocardial infarction. METHODS AND RESULTS This multicenter registry retrospectively included 120 patients (63.6±12.2 years; 81.7% male) with cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction receiving temporary circulatory support with the Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device. The primary end point evaluated mortality at 30 days. The secondary end point analyzed the change of plasma lactate after the institution of hemodynamic support, and the rate of early major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events as well as long-term survival. Thirty-day mortality was 64.2% in the study population. After Impella-2.5-percutaneous left-ventricular assist device implantation, lactate levels decreased from 5.8±5.0 mmol/L to 4.7±5.4 mmol/L (P=0.28) and 2.5±2.6 mmol/L (P=0.023) at 24 and 48 hours, respectively. Early major adverse cardiac and cerebrovascular events were reported in 18 (15%) patients. Major bleeding at the vascular access site, hemolysis, and pericardial tamponade occurred in 34 (28.6%), 9 (7.5%), and 2 (1.7%) patients, respectively. The parameters of age >65 and lactate level >3.8 mmol/L at admission were identified as predictors of 30-day mortality. After 317±526 days of follow-up, survival was 28.3%. CONCLUSIONS In patients with acute cardiogenic shock from acute myocardial infarction, Impella 2.5-treatment is feasible and results in a reduction of lactate levels, suggesting improved organ perfusion. However, 30-day mortality remains high in these patients. This likely reflects the last-resort character of Impella-2.5-application in selected patients with a poor hemodynamic profile and a greater imminent risk of death. Carefully conducted randomized controlled trials are necessary to evaluate the efficacy of Impella-2.5-support in this high-risk patient group.