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.

Filip P A Casselman, Marcus D Lance, Aamer Ahmed, Alice Ascari, Juan Blanco-Morillo, Daniel Bolliger, Maroua Eid, Gabor Erdoes, Renard Gerhardus Haumann, A

Transcatheter aortic valve implantation (TAVI) is an alternative to surgery for high-risk patients with severe aortic valve stenosis. Periprocedural stroke is reported at an incidence up to 10%. Magnetic resonance imaging studies have identified new onset of clinically silent ischaemic cerebral lesions more frequently (68–84%). So far, few data are available about cerebral embolism during TAVI. The aim of this study was to determine the frequency of high-intensity transient signals (HITS) and to explore differences in the HITS pattern between transfemoral and transapical access and between self-expanding (SE) and balloon-expandable (BE) deployment technique. Transcranial Doppler (TCD) ultrasound recordings of 44 patients undergoing TAVI (age 78 ± 6 years; logistic EuroSCORE 28 ± 15%; transfemoral access, n = 32; transapical access, n = 12; SE, n = 27; BE, n = 17) were analysed for HITS during the following intervals: (i) instrumentation prior to valvuloplasty, (ii) balloon valvuloplasty, (iii) prosthesis deployment (DP) and (iv) post-implantation (PI) including any re-dilatation episodes. The total procedural load of HITS and HITS frequency in procedural intervals were compared between different access routes and DP techniques. Periprocedural neurocognitive impairment was assessed clinically and by the confusion assessment method (CAM) prior to TAVI and on post-procedural days 1 and 4–6. TCD recordings demonstrated the occurrence of HITS in all patients. DP was associated with the highest load of HITS. Access route did not significantly influence the total burden of periprocedural HITS. During procedures using the SE type, a slightly larger total load of HITS was observed than with the BE type (P = 0.024). This was mainly due to more HITS during the DP (P = 0.027) and the PI interval (P = 0.002). No incidence of delirium was detected by CAM ratings. Two patients suffered a new onset of stroke within the 2 weeks following the procedure. In-hospital death and 30-day mortality were 0/44. HITS are observed during all procedural intervals in TAVI. The embolic events appear to peak during DP. In our series, the overall cerebral embolic load did not differ between the transfemoral and the transapical access route. TCD monitoring in TAVI is useful to identify periods and manipulations associated with an increased cerebral embolic load and may help to further enhance the safety of this procedure.

Clinical practice guidelines consolidate and evaluate all pertinent evidence on a specific topic available at the time of their formulation. The goal is to assist physicians in determining the most effective management strategies for patients with a particular condition. These guidelines assess the impact on patient outcomes and weigh the risk-benefit ratio of various diagnostic or therapeutic approaches. While not a replacement for textbooks, they provide supplementary information on topics relevant to current clinical practice and become an essential tool to support the decisions made by specialists in daily practice. Nonetheless, it is crucial to understand that these recommendations are intended to guide, not dictate, clinical practice, and should be adapted to each patient's unique needs. Clinical situations vary, presenting a diverse array of variables and circumstances. Thus, the guidelines are meant to inform, not replace, the clinical judgement of healthcare professionals, grounded in their professional knowledge, experience and comprehension of each patient's specific context. Moreover, these guidelines are not considered legally binding; the legal duties of healthcare professionals are defined by prevailing laws and regulations, and adherence to these guidelines does not modify such responsibilities. The European Association for Cardio-Thoracic Surgery (EACTS), the European Association of Cardiothoracic Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (EACTAIC) and the European Board of Cardiovascular Perfusion (EBCP) constituted a task force of professionals specializing in cardiopulmonary bypass (CPB) management. To ensure transparency and integrity, all task force members involved in the development and review of these guidelines submitted conflict of interest declarations, which were compiled into a single document available on the EACTS website (https://www.eacts.org/resources/clinical-guidelines). Any alterations to these declarations during the development process were promptly reported to the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP. Funding for this task force was provided exclusively by the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP, without involvement from the healthcare industry or other entities. Following this collaborative endeavour, the governing bodies of EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP oversaw the formulation, refinement, and endorsement of these extensively revised guidelines. An external panel of experts thoroughly reviewed the initial draft, and their input guided subsequent amendments. After this detailed revision process, the final document was ratified by all task force experts and the leadership of the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP, enabling its publication in the European Journal of Cardio-Thoracic Surgery, the British Journal of Anaesthesia and Interdisciplinary CardioVascular and Thoracic Surgery. Endorsed by the EACTS, EACTAIC and EBCP, these guidelines represent the official standpoint on this subject. They demonstrate a dedication to continual enhancement, with routine updates planned to ensure that the guidelines remain current and valuable in the ever-progressing arena of clinical practice.