[Current approaches to anesthetic management in thoracic surgery-An evaluation from the German Thoracic Registry].

BACKGROUND: While many hospitals in Germany perform thoracic surgery, anesthetic techniques and methods that are actually used are usually only known for individual departments. This study describes the general anesthetic management of three typical thoracic surgical procedures across multiple institutions.
MATERIAL AND METHODS: The German Thoracic Registry recorded 4614 patients in 5 institutions between 2016 and 2019. Hospitals with a minimum number of more than 50 thoracic procedures per year are eligible for inclusion in the registry. To analyze the anesthetic management, a matching process yielded three comparable patient groups (n = 1506) that differed solely in the surgical procedure. Three surgical procedures with varying degrees of invasiveness were selected: Group A = video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) with wedge resection, group B = VATS with lobectomy, group C = open thoracotomy. Statistical analysis was performed descriptively using relative and absolute frequencies. Dichotomous variables were compared using the χ2-test.
RESULTS: The study enrolled patients with a median age of 65.6 years. The mean value of the American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) classification was 2.8. One lung ventilation was most commonly performed (group A = 98.2%, group B = 99.4%, group C = 98.0%) with double lumen tubes (DLT). Bronchial blockers (group A = 0.2%, group B = 0.4%, group C = 0%) were rarely used. Primary bronchoscopy was used to control double lumen tubes after insertion in the majority of cases (group A = 77.5%, group B = 73.1%, group C= 79.7%). Continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP, group A = 1.2%, group B = 1.4%, group C = 5.1%) and jet ventilation (group A = 1.6%, group B = 1.6%, group C = 1.4%) were rarely used intraoperatively. In group C, the administration of a vasopressor was also more frequently required (group A = 59.9%, group B = 77.8%, group C = 86%). A central venous catheter was established in 30.1% of all patients in group A, 39.8% in group B and 73.3% in group C. Patients in group A received an arterial catheter less frequently (71.7%) when compared to groups B (96.4%) and C (95.2%). Total intravenous anesthesia with propofol was used in most patients (group A = 67.7%, group B 61.6%, group C 75.7%). Propofol supplemented by volatile anesthetics was used less frequently (group A = 28.5%, group B = 35.5%, group C = 23.7%). With increasing invasiveness of the surgical procedure, placement of an epidural catheter was preferred (group A = 18.9%, group B = 29.5%, group C = 64.1%). Paravertebral catheters (group A = 7.6%, group B = 4.4%, group C = 4.8%) or a single infiltration of the paravertebral space were performed less frequently (group A = 7.8%, group B = 17.7%, group C = 11.6%). Postoperatively, some patients (3.4-25.7%) were transferred to the general ward. The largest proportion of patients transferred to a general ward underwent less invasive thoracic procedures (group A). When the extent of resection was greater (group B and group C) patients were mostly transferred to an intermediate care unit (IMC) or an intensive care unit (ICU). The insertion of invasive catheters was neither associated with the patients' ASA classification nor preoperative pathologic pulmonary function.
CONCLUSION: Our data indicate that less invasive thoracic operations are associated with a reduction of invasive anesthetic procedures. As the presented data are descriptive, further studies are required to determine the impact of invasive anesthetic procedures on patient-related outcomes. This evaluation of the anesthetic management in experienced thoracic anesthesiology departments represents the next step towards establishing national quality standards and promoting structural quality in thoracic anesthesia.