Background: Anemia remains one of the most common comorbidities in intensive care patients worldwide. The cause of anemia is often multifactorial and triggered by underlying disease, comorbidities, and iatrogenic factors, such as diagnostic phlebotomies. As anemia is associated with a worse outcome, especially in intensive care patients, unnecessary iatrogenic blood loss must be avoided. Therefore, this scoping review addresses the amount of blood loss during routine phlebotomies in adult (>17 years) intensive care patients and whether there are factors that need to be improved in terms of patient blood management (PBM). Methods: A systematic search of the Medline Database via PubMed was conducted according to PRISMA guidelines. The reported daily blood volume for diagnostics and other relevant information from eligible studies were charted. Results: A total of 2167 studies were identified in our search, of which 38 studies met the inclusion criteria (9 interventional studies and 29 observational studies). The majority of the studies were conducted in the US (37%) and Canada (13%). An increasing interest to reduce iatrogenic blood loss has been observed since 2015. Phlebotomized blood volume per patient per day was up to 377 mL. All interventional trials showed that the use of pediatric-sized blood collection tubes can significantly reduce the daily amount of blood drawn. Conclusion: Iatrogenic blood loss for diagnostic purposes contributes significantly to the development and exacerbation of hospital-acquired anemia. Therefore, a comprehensive PBM in intensive care is urgently needed to reduce avoidable blood loss, including blood-sparing techniques, regular advanced training, and small-volume blood collection tubes.

Background: Over the recent years, technological advances of wrist-worn fitness trackers heralded a new era in the continuous monitoring of vital signs. So far, these devices have primarily been used for sports. Objective: However, for using these technologies in health care, further validations of the measurement accuracy in hospitalized patients are essential but lacking to date. Methods: We conducted a prospective validation study with 201 patients after moderate to major surgery in a controlled setting to benchmark the accuracy of heart rate measurements in 4 consumer-grade fitness trackers (Apple Watch 7, Garmin Fenix 6 Pro, Withings ScanWatch, and Fitbit Sense) against the clinical gold standard (electrocardiography). Results: All devices exhibited high correlation (r≥0.95; P<.001) and concordance (rc≥0.94) coefficients, with a relative error as low as mean absolute percentage error <5% based on 1630 valid measurements. We identified confounders significantly biasing the measurement accuracy, although not at clinically relevant levels (mean absolute error<5 beats per minute). Conclusions: Consumer-grade fitness trackers appear promising in hospitalized patients for monitoring heart rate. Trial Registration: ClinicalTrials.gov NCT05418881; https://www.clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05418881

Artificial intelligence (AI) is predicted to play an increasingly important role in perioperative medicine in the very near future. However, little is known about what anesthesiologists know and think about AI in this context. This is important because the successful introduction of new technologies depends on the understanding and cooperation of end users. We sought to investigate how much anesthesiologists know about AI and what they think about the introduction of AI-based technologies into the clinical setting. In order to better understand what anesthesiologists think of AI, we recruited 21 anesthesiologists from 2 university hospitals for face-to-face structured interviews. The interview transcripts were subdivided sentence-by-sentence into discrete statements, and statements were then grouped into key themes. Subsequently, a survey of closed questions based on these themes was sent to 70 anesthesiologists from 3 university hospitals for rating. In the interviews, the base level of knowledge of AI was good at 86 of 90 statements (96%), although awareness of the potential applications of AI in anesthesia was poor at only 7 of 42 statements (17%). Regarding the implementation of AI in anesthesia, statements were split roughly evenly between pros (46 of 105, 44%) and cons (59 of 105, 56%). Interviewees considered that AI could usefully be used in diverse tasks such as risk stratification, the prediction of vital sign changes, or as a treatment guide. The validity of these themes was probed in a follow-up survey of 70 anesthesiologists with a response rate of 70%, which confirmed an overall positive view of AI in this group. Anesthesiologists hold a range of opinions, both positive and negative, regarding the application of AI in their field of work. Survey-based studies do not always uncover the full breadth of nuance of opinion amongst clinicians. Engagement with specific concerns, both technical and ethical, will prove important as this technology moves from research to the clinic.

Laparoscopic techniques have established themselves as a major part of modern surgery. Their implementation in every surgical discipline has played a vital part in the reduction of perioperative morbidity and mortality. Precise robotic surgery, as an evolution of this, is shaping the present and future operating theatre that an anesthetist is facing. While incisions get smaller and the impact on the organism seems to dwindle, challenges for anesthetists do not lessen and could even become more demanding than in open procedures. This review focuses on the pathophysiological effects of contemporary laparoscopic and robotic procedures and summarizes anesthetic challenges and strategies for perioperative management.

The close monitoring of blood pressure during a caesarean section performed under central neuraxial anaesthesia should be the standard of safe anaesthesia. As classical oscillometric and invasive blood pressure measuring have intrinsic disadvantages, we investigated a novel, non-invasive technique for continuous blood pressure measuring. Methods: In this monocentric, retrospective data analysis, the reliability of continuous non-invasive blood pressure measuring using ClearSight^® (Edwards Lifesciences Corporation) is validated in 31 women undergoing central neuraxial anaesthesia for caesarean section. In addition, patients and professionals evaluated ClearSight^® through questioning. Results: 139 measurements from 11 patients were included in the final analysis. Employing Bland–Altman analyses, we identified a bias of −10.8 mmHg for systolic, of −0.45 mmHg for diastolic and of +0.68 mmHg for mean arterial blood pressure measurements. Pooling all paired measurements resulted in a Pearson correlation coefficient of 0.7 for systolic, of 0.67 for diastolic and of 0.75 for mean arterial blood pressure. Compensating the interindividual differences in linear regressions of the paired measurements provided improved correlation coefficients of 0.73 for systolic, of 0.9 for diastolic and of 0.89 for mean arterial blood pressure measurements. Discussion: Diastolic and mean arterial blood pressure are within an acceptable range of deviation from the reference method, according to the Association for the Advancement of Medical Instrumentation (AAMI) in the patient collective under study. Both patients and professionals prefer ClearSight^® to oscillometric blood pressure measurement in regard of comfort and handling.

Background: Hemoglobin (Hb) is a crucial parameter in perioperative care due to its essential role for oxygen transport and tissue oxygenation. Accurate Hb monitoring allows for timely interventions to address perioperative anemia and, thus, prevent morbidity and mortality. Traditional Hb measurements rely on invasive blood sampling, which significantly contributes to iatrogenic anemia and poses discomfort and increased infection risks. The advent of non-invasive devices like Masimo’s Rad-67™, which measures Hb using pulse CO-oximetry (SpHb), offers a promising alternative. This study evaluates the accuracy of SpHb compared to clinical standard blood gas analysis (BGA) in perioperative patients. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed 335 paired Hb measurements with an interval <15 min between SpHb and BGA in the operating theater and post-anesthesia care unit of a university hospital. Patients experiencing hemodynamic instability, acute bleeding, or critical care were excluded. Statistical analysis included Bland–Altman plots and Pearson correlation coefficients (PCCs) to assess the agreement between SpHb and BGA. Potential confounders, e.g., patient age, skin temperature, sex, perfusion index (PI), and atrial fibrillation, were also analyzed. Results: The bias of the SpHb compared to BGA according to Bland–Altman was 0.00 g/dL, with limits of agreement ranging from −2.70 to 2.45 g/dL. A strong correlation was observed (r = 0.79). Overall, 57.6% of the paired measurements showed a deviation between the two methods of ≤±1 g/dL; however, this applied to only 33.3% of the anemic patients. Modified Clark’s Error Grid analysis showed 85.4% of values fell within clinically acceptable limits. Sex was found to have a statistically significant, but not clinically relevant, effect on accuracy (p = 0.02). Conclusions: The Rad-67^TM demonstrates reasonable accuracy for non-invasive SpHb, but exhibits significant discrepancies in anemic patients with overestimating low values. While it offers potential for reducing iatrogenic blood loss, SpHb so far should not replace BGA in critical clinical decision-making.