ALGORITHM FOR MANAGEMENT OF HYPERTENSIVE PATIENTS UNDERWENT UROLOGY INTERVENTIONS

Aim. To study the efficacy of cardiovascular non-invasive complex assessment and pre-operative preparation in hypertensive patients needed in surgical treatment of urology dis- eases.
Material and methods. Males (n=883), aged 40 to 80 years were included into the study. The main group consisted of patients that underwent laparotomic nephrectomy (LTN group; n=96) and patients who underwent laparoscopic nephrectomy (LSN group; n=53). Dynamics of ambulatory blood pressure monitoring (ABPM) data was analyzed in these groups in the immediate postoperative period. The efficacy of a package of non-invasive methods for cardiovascular system assessment was studied. ABPM was performed after nephrectomy (2-nd and 10-th days after surgery) in patients with complaints of vertigo episodes or intense general weakness to correct treatment.
Results. In LTN group hypotension episodes or blood pressure (BP) elevations were observed in 20 (20.8%) and 22 (22.9%) patients, respectively, on the 2-nd day after the operation. These complications required antihypertensive treatment correction. Patients with hypotension episodes were significantly older than patients with BP elevation and had significantly lower levels of 24-hour systolic BP, night diastolic BP and minimal night systolic BP. Re-adjustment of antihypertensive treatment on the 10-th postoperative day was required to 2 (10%) patients with hypotension episodes and to 1 (4.5%) patient with BP elevation. Correction of antihypertensive therapy was required to all patients in LSN group on the day 2, and to 32 (60.4%) patients on the 10-th day after the operation. Reduction in the incidence of complications (from 1.2% in 2009 to 0.3% in 2011, p<0.001) was observed during the application of cardiovascular non-invasive complex assessment and preoperative preparation in hypertensive patients.
Conclusion. The elaborated management algorithm for patients with concomitant hypertension is recommended to reduce the cardiovascular complications in the early postoperative period.

1. Kaafarani H.M., Atluri P.V., Thornby J., Itani K.M. beta-Blockade in noncardiac surgery: outcome at all levels of cardiac risk. Arch Surg 2008; 143(10): 940–4.

2. Landesberg G., Mosseri M., Zahger D., et al. Myocardial infarction after vascular surgery: the role of prolonged stress-induced, ST depression-type ischemia. J Am Coll Cardiol 2001; 37(7): 1839–45.

3. Parker S.D., Breslow M.J., Frank S.M., et al. Perioperative Ischemia Randomized Anesthesia Trial Study Group. Catecholamine and cortisol responses to lower extremity revascularization: correlation with out- come variables. Crit Care Med 1995; 23(12):1954–61.

4. London M.J. Multilead precordial ST-segment monitoring: “the next generation”? Anesthesiology 2002; 96(2): 259–61.

5. Eagle K.A. B.P, Calkins H., et al. ACC/AHA guideline update for perioperative cardiovascular evaluation for noncardiac surgery-executive summary. A report of the American College of Cardiology/American Heart Association Task force on practice guidelines (Committee to update 1996 guidelines on perioperative cardiovascular evaluation for noncardiac surgery). Circulation 2002; 105:1257–67.

6. Maia P.C., Abelha F.J. Predictors of major postoperative cardiac complications in a surgical ICU. Rev Port Cardiol 2008; 27(3): 321–328.

7. Older P., Smith R. Experience with the preoperative invasive measurement of haemodynamic, respiratory and renal function in 100 elderly patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery. Anaesth Intens Care 1988; 16(4): 389–395.

8. National guidelines for the diagnosis and treatment of hypertension (fourth revision). Systemic Hypertension

9. ; (3): 5–26. Russian (Национальные рекомендации по диагностике и лечению артериальной гипертонии (четвертый пересмотр). Системные гипертензии 2010; (3): 5–26).

10. Vasjuk Y.A., ed. Guidelines for functional diagnosis in cardiology: the modern methods and clinical interpretation. Moscow: Prakticheskaya meditsina; 2012. Russian (Васюк Ю.А., редактор. Руководство по функциональной диагностике в кардиологии: современные методы и клиническая интерпритация. М.: Практическая медицина; 2012).

11. Setiati S. Perioperative assessment and management of the elderly. Acta Med Indones 2007; 39(4): 194–201.

12. Auerbach A., Goldman L. Assessing and reducing the cardiac risk of noncardiac surgery. ; 113(10): 1361–76.

13. Mangano D.T., Hollenberg M., Fegert G., et al. Perioperative myocardial ischemia in patients undergoing noncardiac surgery-I: Incidence and severity during the 4 day perioperative period. The Study of Perioperative Ischemia (SPI) Research Group. J Am Coll Cardiol 1991; 17(4): 843–50.

14. Kheterpal S., O'Reilly M., Englesbe M.J., et al. Preoperative and intraoperative predictors of cardiac adverse events after general, vascular, and urological surgery. Anesthesiology 2009; 110(1): 58–66.

15. Knapp R., Frauscher F., Helweg D. et al. Age-related changes in resistive index following extracorporeal shock wave lithotripsy. J Urol 1995; 154(3): 955–8.

16. Lee T.H., Marcantonio E.R., Mangione C.M., et al. Derivation and prospective validation of a simple index for prediction of cardiac risk of major noncardiac surgery. Circulation 1999; 100(10): 1043–9.

17. Hernandez A.F., Whellan D.J., Stroud S., et al. Outcomes in heart failure patients after major noncardiac surgery. J Am Coll Cardiol 2004; 44(7): 1446–1453.