Skip Navigation LinksHome > February 2009 - Volume 123 - Issue 2 > Lethal Pulmonary Embolisms Are Avoidable: Reply
Plastic & Reconstructive Surgery:
doi: 10.1097/PRS.0b013e3181959673
Letters

Lethal Pulmonary Embolisms Are Avoidable: Reply

Keyes, Geoffrey R. M.D.

Free Access
Article Outline
Collapse Box

Author Information

American Association for Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgery Facilities, Inc., Keyes Surgery Center, Los Angeles, Calif. 90069

Sir:

I appreciate Dr. Friedberg’s comments and efforts to reduce the incidence of postsurgical pulmonary embolism.

The choice of anesthetic technique is important to obtain optimal surgical care. In addition to anesthesia, patient selection with attention to thorough medical evaluation in view of the procedure or procedures to be performed is of utmost importance.

The development of a deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism in postoperative patients is a multifactorial problem. Iverson et al.1 have delineated the multiple components of diagnosis and care necessary to minimize the potential for initiation of either event. It is unfortunate that we do not yet have statistics on hospital-based postoperative patients who develop pulmonary embolism for comparison with our outpatient data.2

There are two topics I would like to address in discussing Dr. Friedberg’s technique: the definition of general anesthesia and the cause of pulmonary embolisms.3,4

General anesthesia commences when a patient is unarousable, even by painful stimulation, and has loss of consciousness through the administration of an inhalation agent or intravenous drug, such as propofol or ketamine. These patients may be able to maintain a patent airway and adequate ventilation, although airway support is often required. The potential for ketamine or propofol, used alone or in combination, to induce a state of general anesthesia must be considered when choosing their use for any procedure.

The level of analgesia necessary to perform an abdominoplasty may require a patient’s consciousness to be on the border of general anesthesia and, as such, would render the patient immobile. In this scenario, attendant potential sequelae related to airway management may occur. Dr. Friedberg has adopted the use of the Bispectral Index (Aspect Medical Systems, Inc., Natick, Mass.) monitor to assess brain function during the delivery of intravenous ketamine and propofol to “prevent” general anesthesia from occurring based on the Bispectral Index numerical value.4

The American Society of Anesthesiologists advisory on intraoperative monitoring of depth of anesthesia recommends the use of multiple modalities, including clinical signs and conventional monitoring systems (e.g., electrocardiogram, blood pressure, heart rate, capnography). The use of brain function monitors, in general, parallels other established correlates of depth of anesthesia. The general applicability of these monitors in assessing intraoperative awareness has not been firmly established.5

Numerous studies have reported a significant reduction in the incidence of deep vein thrombosis when regional anesthesia is used for both fractured and elective hip surgery.6 In the report by Lofsky, six of the 12 patients who sustained pulmonary emboli were managed intraoperatively with intravenous sedation.7 The choice of anesthetic technique and its effect on the incidence of pulmonary embolism require further study.

I suspect prolonged surgery and immobilization as the culprits in the genesis of deep vein thromboses, particularly in patients with a hereditary or clinical predisposition. However, deep vein thromboses and pulmonary embolisms occur in a variety of clinical settings and their evolution—specifically, with abdominoplasty—has yet to be elucidated.

A random case study would be helpful to further clarify anesthetic choice for abdominoplasty surgery.

Geoffrey R. Keyes, M.D.

American Association for Accreditation of Ambulatory Surgery Facilities, Inc.

Keyes Surgery Center

Los Angeles, Calif. 90069

Back to Top | Article Outline

REFERENCES

1. Iverson RE, Lynch DJ, ASPS Task Force on Patient Safety in Office-Based Surgery Facilities. Patient safety in office-based surgery facilities: I. Procedures in the office-based surgery setting. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2002;110:1785–1792.

2. Keyes GR, Singer R, Iverson R, et al. Mortality in outpatient surgery. Plast Reconstr Surg. 2008;122:245–253.

3. Friedberg BL. Preface. In: Anesthesia in Cosmetic Surgery. New York: Cambridge University Press; 2007:xviii.

4. Friedberg BL. Propofol-ketamine technique, dissociative anesthesia for office surgery: A five-year review of 1264 cases. Aesthetic Plast Surg. 1999;23:70–75.

5. Practice advisory for intraoperative awareness and brain function monitoring: A report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Intraoperative Awareness. Anesthesiology 2006;104:847–864.

6. Prins MH, Hirsh J. A comparison of general anesthesia and regional anesthesia as a risk factor for deep vein thrombosis following hip surgery: A critical review. Thromb Haemost. 1990;64:497–500.

7. Lofsky AS. Deep venous thrombosis and pulmonary embolism in plastic surgery office procedures. Napa, Calif.: The Doctors’ Company Newsletter; 2005 Available at: http://www.thedoctors.com/risk/specialty/anesthesiology/J4254.asp.

Back to Top | Article Outline
Section Description

Letters to the Editor, discussing material recently published in the Journal, are welcome. They will have the best chance of acceptance if they are received within 8 weeks of an article's publication. Letters to the Editor may be published with a response from the authors of the article being discussed. Discussions beyond the initial letter and response will not be published. Letters submitted pertaining to published Discussions of articles will not be printed. Letters to the Editor are not usually peer reviewed, but the Journal may invite replies from the authors of the original publication. All Letters are published at the discretion of the Editor.

Authors will be listed in the order in which they appear in the submission. Letters should be submitted electronically via PRS' enkwell, at www.editorialmanager.com/prs/.

We reserve the right to edit Letters to meet requirements of space and format. Any financial interests relevant to the content of the correspondence must be disclosed. Submission of a Letter constitutes permission for the American Society of Plastic Surgeons and its licensees and asignees to publish it in the Journal and in any other form or medium.

The views, opinions, and conclusions expressed in the Letters to the Editor represent the personal opinions of the individual writers and not those of the publisher, the Editorial Board, or the sponsors of the Journal. Any stated views, opinions, and conclusions do not reflect the policy of any of the sponsoring organizations or of the institutions with which the writer is affiliated, and the publisher, the Editorial Board, and the sponsoring organizations assume no responsibility for the content of such correspondence.

©2009American Society of Plastic Surgeons

Login

Article Tools

Share