Top Vendors

Exam Simulator Price Table 250-403 Vendors Entry Tests
IT Service Vendors About Us Exam Simulator Price Table
250-403 Vendors Entry Tests IT Service Vendors
About Us Exam Simulator Price Table 250-403 Exam Simulator

250-403 Administration of Symantec(TM)(R) Management Platform 7.1

Study Guide Prepared by Killexams.com Symantec Dumps Experts


Killexams.com 250-403 Dumps and Real Questions 2019

Latest and 100% real exam Questions - Memorize Questions and Answers - Guaranteed Success in exam



250-403 exam Dumps Source : Administration of Symantec(TM)(R) Management Platform 7.1

Test Code : 250-403
Test Name : Administration of Symantec(TM)(R) Management Platform 7.1
Vendor Name : Symantec
Q&A : 174 Real Questions

What do you mean with the aid of 250-403 exam?
I might probably advocate it to my partners and accomplices. I were given 360 of imprints. I was enchanted with the effects I had been given with the assist test guide 250-403 exam route dump. I commonly idea actual and tremendous researchwere the reaction to all or any exams, until I took the assistance of killexams.com brain promote off to pass my exam 250-403. Fantastically fulfill.


wherein can i am getting know-how modern day 250-403 examination?
I passed 250-403 paper Within two weeks,thanks for your extraordinary QA test materials.Score 96 percentage. I am very assured now that I will do better in my remaining 3 Exams and honestly use your practice dump and propose it to my pals. Thank you very a great deal to your top class online trying out engine product.


Get 250-403 certified with actual take a look at question financial institution.
i bought 250-403 instruction % and passed the exam. No issues in any respect, the whole lot is exactly as they promise. smooth exam experience, no problems to record. thank you.


I were given 250-403 certified in 2 days training.
Passing the 250-403 exam turned into long due as my career development changed into associated with it. but continually got afraid of the subject which seemed truely hard to me. i used to be about to pass the test until i discovered the query and answer by using killexams.com and it made me so at ease! Going through the materials became no trouble in any respect because the technique of supplying the subjects are cool. the fast and precise answers helped me cram the quantities which regarded hard. passed nicely and were given my merchandising. thanks, killexams.


proper area to get 250-403 present day mind dump paper.
My brother saden me telling me that I wasnt going to go through the 250-403 exam. I be aware after I look outdoor the window, such a lot of one of a kind humans need to be seen and heard from and they simply want the attention people however i can tell you that we students can get this attention while we pass our 250-403 test and i will inform you how I cleared my 250-403 test it turned into simplest when I were given my test questions from killexams.com which gave me the hope in my eyes collectively for all time.


250-403 actual query bank is real have a look at, authentic result.
To get success in 250-403 exam. Humans agree with that a student have to possess sharp brain. Although its miles genuine but it isnt entirely true on account that in conjunction with the pupil, the instruct or the teacher need to also be rightly certified and knowledgeable. I experience blessed that I was acquainted with this killexams.com in which I met such awesome educators who taught me a way to clear my 250-403 test and were given me through them with a breeze. I thank them with the lowest of my coronary heart.


Get these Q&As and visit holidays to put together.
The 250-403 exam is supposed to be a very diffcult exam to clear But I cleared it last week in my first attempt. The killexams.com Q&As guided me well and I was well prepared. Advice to other students - dont take this exam lightly and study very well.


I want modern dumps of 250-403 examination.
I am strolling into an IT firm and consequently I from time to time find out any time to prepare for 250-403 exam. Therefore, I ariseto an easy conclusion of killexams.com Q&A dumps. To my wonder it worked like wonders for me. I need to clear upall of the questions in least feasible time than supplied. The questions look like quite smooth with top class reference manual. I secured 939 marks which became in reality a extremely good surprise for me. First rate way to killexams!


Just try these actual test questions and success is yours.
ive searched perfect dump for this unique subject matter over on line. but I could not find an appropriate one that perfectly explains best the wanted and critical things. whilst i discovered killexams.com brain dump material i was genuinely amazed. It simply included the essential things and not anything crushed within the dumps. i am so excited to locate it and used it for my coaching.


Benefits of 250-403 certification.
In order to have a study and put together for my 250-403 check, I used killexams.com QA and exam simulator. All way to this quite remarkable killexams.com. Thanks for assisting me in clearing my 250-403 test.


Symantec Administration of Symantec(TM)(R) Management

EFI adds experienced executive to Board of directors | killexams.com Real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

November 08, 2018 sixteen:05 ET | source: EFI

Addition of Janice Chaffin Expands Board to Eight individuals

FREMONT, Calif., Nov. 08, 2018 (GLOBE NEWSWIRE) -- Electronics For Imaging, Inc. (Nasdaq: EFII), an international chief in consumer-focused digital printing innovation, nowadays announced the appointment of Janice Chaffin to its Board of directors.

Ms. Chaffin is an skilled know-how trade government, specializing in strategic marketing and international operations. She has held several senior executive positions with Symantec organisation, including serving as neighborhood president of its consumer business unit from 2007 to 2013. Ms. Chaffin additionally serves on the boards of directors of Nasdaq-traded corporations Synopsys, Inc. and PTC Inc. She is an Advisory Council member for Illuminate Ventures and a member of the Board of guests for the UCLA Anderson faculty of administration. up to now she served on the boards of Informatica supplier and overseas game technology, together with the working Committee of privately held Ancestry.com.  

Gill Cogan, Chairman of EFI’s Board of administrators, commented, “along with her confirmed expertise in international advertising, method, business construction, R&D management and product building, Janice is an excellent addition to the EFI board.”

“i am excited in regards to the alternatives forward for EFI, and that i seem forward to contributing to the enterprise’s increase and strategic path,” talked about Ms. Chaffin.

Commenting on the appointment, EFI CEO bill Muir stated, “Janice is a confirmed leader and innovator within the application and hardware industries. We seem to be forward to taking advantage of her talents as we continue to develop our business.”

ahead of leading Symantec's buyer business unit, Ms. Chaffin served because the company's executive vice president and chief advertising officer from 2006 to 2007, and as senior vice chairman and chief advertising officer from 2003 to 2006. earlier than becoming a member of Symantec, Ms. Chaffin worked for greater than twenty years at Hewlett-Packard company in numerous administration and advertising management positions. Ms. Chaffin graduated summa cum laude from the institution of California, San Diego, with a Bachelor of Arts diploma in Political Science, and earned a master of company Administration from the school of California, los angeles, where she turned into an Edward W. Carter Fellow.

About EFIEFI™ is a worldwide know-how business, based mostly in Silicon Valley, and is main the worldwide transformation from analog to digital imaging. we are captivated with fueling customer success with items that boost competitiveness and raise productiveness. To do this, we enhance leap forward applied sciences for the manufacturing of signage, packaging, textiles, ceramic tiles, and personalized documents, with a wide array of printers, inks, digital entrance ends, and a complete enterprise and construction workflow suite that transforms and streamlines the total production manner. (www.efi.com)

Contact information:

Investor RelationsJoAnn HorneMarket highway Partnersir@efi.com415-445-3233

Fremont, California, u.s.

Electronics For Imaging, Inc.

formats purchasable:


the way to installation the correct DLP items for the correct jobs | killexams.com Real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

Nation states, cybercriminals and unscrupulous competitors are all vying to steal delicate assistance from prone groups. records loss prevention (DLP) products assist companies offer protection to sensitive suggestions through keeping it at ease. These DLP products determine information at rest on file servers or in the cloud, records in action throughout networks and information in use on endpoint devices.

records loss prevention tools can be found either as part of standalone committed DLP suites for commercial enterprise-huge coverage, or are integrated into different protection items, similar to endpoint security equipment and community utility gateways.

this article examines three DLP utilization scenarios -- and the common issues linked to them -- to more suitable support readers make the correct resolution when purchasing DLP items.

In these eventualities, the cybersecurity groups -- working with area count specialists from departments that process delicate counsel and business compliance specialists -- have identified the records paths, communications protocols and statistics codecs of sensitive advice. detailed enterprise technique managers and compliance experts have categorized this counsel based on the company's facts classification policy, and the legal branch and compliance workforce labored collectively on e-discovery considerations, renovation of proof, and monitoring provider and business affiliate compliance.

the primary situation examines how a standalone DLP suite could be used; the 2nd, how a DLP suite and security tools with built-in DLP aspects may be employed; and the last one, how assorted security equipment with built-in DLP points might possibly be used to obtain the same influence.

The standalone DLP situation

A regional clinical core has a knowledge core containing sufferers' personally identifiable information (PII) and protected health guidance (PHI), The PII and PHI is shared with health insurance suppliers and is accessible to healthcare gurus at workstations, cell-records carts and capsules. consumer billing is dealt with via a 3rd-birthday party seller.

The scientific middle at present makes use of Symantec Endpoint coverage with encryption guide from Symantec Encryption for e mail encryption on windows and Macintosh OSX hosts. The logs from the endpoint insurance policy and DLP servers pass to the Splunk SIEM equipment.

The Symantec DLP Suite presents coverage for records at use, information in transit and statistics in storage (key elements to the success of any DLP product) and, importantly, integrates well with the deployed Symantec Encryption products. for instance, Symantec Endpoint avoid analyzes statistics earlier than it's transferred to detachable media, and might immediately encrypt delicate assistance because it is stored on the removable media.

statistics in transit is addressed by using Symantec community computer screen with companion modules Symantec network evade for internet and Symantec network steer clear of for electronic mail.

sensitive statistics on endpoints is covered by means of an agent containing both Endpoint stay away from for statistics in use, and Symantec records Loss Prevention Endpoint discover for information at rest. These modules are enabled by means of licensing. Endpoint prevent is used to video display and stop sensitive advice from being copied to removable media like CD-R/DVD-R and USB contraptions. it is additionally configured to steer clear of facts from being printed, faxed, or copied into reminiscence to paste to one other document. sensitive facts is prevented from leaving the endpoint via network protocols like FTP, SMTP and IM.

The scientific middle also created policies to cease facts from being despatched to cloud file-sharing sites and social media sites. The agent pop-up characteristic is enabled to notify the user of a DLP policy violation, and as a result give a boost to protection awareness working towards. To address data at leisure on endpoints, the Endpoint find module scans file storage on workstations and laptops. it's configured to each move unauthorized sensitive assistance to a safer network quarantine place, and generate a DLP incident alert for extra motion by way of the cybersecurity body of workers.

facts at relaxation for community-based statistics storage is dealt with via the licensed modules of network find and network protect. The scientific core has configured network discover to always scan file servers, network access storage and databases for sensitive counsel, and then (in accordance with policy) uses community protect to immediately copy, relocate or quarantine uncovered confidential information.

mobile contraptions corresponding to iPhones and iPads are addressed by using information Loss Prevention for cell. This product uses a digital inner most network (VPN) connection known as VPN on Demand in the course of the clinical middle's mobile device administration (MDM) product to contact its Symantec DLP servers, and hence enforce DLP coverage. mobile evade for web is used to observe and block personal facts detected in HTML site visitors. Symantec cell e mail video display is configured to tune exclusive assistance when it is downloaded from the clinical core's network to the native e-mail client on supported Apple iOS contraptions.

The facts Loss Prevention facts perception commercial enterprise product gives the scientific middle with file usage and possession evaluation that can be used with the aid of a lot of departmental teams liable for safeguarding delicate information. counsel from data perception is shared by way of a self-service portal with additional info provided by custom Splunk dashboards which are created by means of the medical core's cybersecurity crew.

The blended DLP state of affairs

A medical health insurance company has a crucial workplace with regional income workplaces and outlying container workplaces. insurance applicants' PII and PHI are collected with the aid of coverage agents at the outlying places of work and despatched to the domestic workplace to determine coverage eligibility. insurance agent PII, akin to employment records and opinions, are handled at the regional earnings office and kept on the domestic office file servers.

The domestic workplace processes customer funds and reimburses fitness suppliers for client healthcare claims. furthermore, it compiles agent fee stories, investigates consumer claim fraud, handles worker personnel concerns, and addresses customer grievances. The felony branch handles complaints, by former shoppers and former agents; client billing is dealt with by a 3rd-party vendor.

The business begun using a few McAfee products administered through McAfee ePolicy Orchestrator (ePO). These included VirusScan commercial enterprise, equipment control and finished facts insurance plan for records encryption. chance log statistics from ePO is at present exported to the enterprise's SIEM product, business protection supervisor.

The enterprise uses ePO to manage guidelines for and to distribute McAfee DLP Endpoint to its windows and Mac hosts. It opted to construct upon built-in DLP points found in its endpoint protection suite's McAfee gadget manage for portable facts contraptions. the use of the adventure won from this product, it selected to add licenses for McAfee DLP Endpoint for desktop and mobile contraptions.

This DLP product addresses sensitive facts in use through utility control and monitoring records circulation to portable storage media and portable storage contraptions. The DLP endpoint brokers, meanwhile, are used to video display and quarantine information in use all the way through the enterprise. Working with complete records insurance policy, the agents are in a position to encrypt delicate tips when it's copied to moveable storage media.

information loss prevention tools can be found both as part of standalone committed DLP suites for commercial enterprise-large insurance, or are integrated into other safety items, such as endpoint protection tools and community utility gateways.

The company uses DLP display screen, a standalone DLP product to display screen information in transit over the business's inner networks. sensitive data passing to external networks is filtered by using McAfee DLP avoid, an inline DLP product meant to dam sensitive tips from leaving the enterprise over lots of protocols such as FTP, IM, SMTP and HTTP/HTTPS.

McAfee's DLP find file scanners address statistics at rest. they're used at the domestic workplace to monitor and quarantine sensitive statistics at its data middle. All movements are correlated and interesting hobbies are reviewed as a minimum daily by means of the cybersecurity crew. Periodic reports are prepared for the records owners, so company methods can also be monitored and adjusted as fundamental.

the usage of the DLP supervisor, customized detection and correlation rules help the business protect its highbrow property, manufacturing operations and conform to exchange laws. The cybersecurity and compliance specialist displays routine said by business protection manager's SIEM indicators. Periodic reports from the SIEM and DLP manager are prepared for the data house owners so business tactics can be monitored and adjusted as integral.

DLP manager, DLP display screen, DLP find and DLP keep away from are used by way of the business on the McAfee DLP 5500 appliance and in virtual computing device configurations.

meanwhile, integrated DLP points in Sophos' UTM and subsequent-gen firewall home equipment, along with the McAfee DLP endpoint agents, are in use on the regional and outlying places of work to display screen and quarantine information and communications that do not meet compliance instructions. Outbound webmail and cloud-based file-sharing functions are blocked in any respect perimeters.

company cellular gadgets are managed through McAfee enterprise Mobility administration. File sharing with authorized parties is carried out through a at ease file sharing product determined at the domestic workplace. assurance agents use terminal server-primarily based functions to procedure coverage applications and service latest valued clientele from company-offered tablets. The enterprise is investigating virtual desktop environments and embedded working programs hosts to replace time-honored PCs whose difficult drives can also unintentionally contain PII or PHI in temporary files.

The blended built-in DLP situation

A small but growing technology company has developed a number of creative products applying both actual and firmware components. It continues a headquarters, a modest manufacturing facility specializing in only-in-time manufacturing, a research and construction campus, and places of work located in the a ways East for negotiation with a variety of digital suppliers. in preference to having a valuable campus, the dispersed nature of the enterprise presents some communications and collaboration challenges.

The business's records crown jewels include its intellectual property in the form of engineering files, diagrams, standards, firmware source code and product assembly guidance. supporting documents consist of enterprise lists, materials inventories, contractual agreements, software versioning, analysis databases and notes. Collaboration is robotically carried out via net conferencing.

Its strategic plans and new product documentation would be of particular activity to rivals.

in this state of affairs, the cybersecurity consultants and business-technique consultants have accomplished their homework, with additional work performed by the company's compliance specialist and its lawyers on foreign traffic in arms regulations, Export Administration laws concerns, and monitoring third-party contractor and enterprise compliance.

It has opted to construct upon integrated DLP features present in its style Micro Inc.'s endpoint security application for desktops and AirWatch enterprise cell equipment management to tackle statistics in use and in transit on enterprise and worker BYOD mobile instruments. Its cybersecurity body of workers has additionally created customized DLP guidelines for its Sourcefire IDS/IPS sensors observed on the headquarters, R&D campus and manufacturing plant. Proofpoint electronic mail gateway and its DLP coverage facets have been elevated to the business privateness suite to block or encrypt e mail with delicate counsel at the perimeters of the main sites.

Websense TRITON items for the HTTP security gateway and mobile net insurance policy are used to cover internet traffic for records in transit at the perimeters and on cellular devices. Websense TRITON cell protection is used to give protection to cellular gadget net classes and ensure enterprise web filtering is applied continuously throughout all systems.

Code green Networks CI-appliance DLP file scanners are latest at the enterprise headquarters, R&D campus and manufacturing plant to handle data at rest present in SAN installations, administrative file servers, net servers, databases, SharePoint servers, research wikis and cloud components. The associate Code eco-friendly content Inspection Agent examines endpoints at faraway websites as directed via the CI-equipment.

customized detection and correlation guidelines within the LogRhythm SIEM assist give protection to its highbrow property, manufacturing operations and comply with trade laws. The cybersecurity and compliance professional computer screen activities suggested by LogRhythm SIEM signals. Periodic studies from the SIEM are prepared for the information house owners so business procedures can also be monitored and adjusted as integral.

The enterprise makes use of trend Micro AV products with licenses for integrated records Loss Prevention. All vogue Micro products are centrally managed the use of fashion Micro handle supervisor. statistics at relaxation on enterprise home windows and Mac desktops and laptops are addressed the use of OfficeScan. The integrated DLP facets in ScanMail Suite assist to establish delicate tips in the trade mail store, and manage incoming and outgoing email, thus addressing insider collaboration scenarios.

Airwatch by using VMware addresses the company's MDM needs and gives a versatile DLP administration strategy, using cellular app protection alternate options and container alternatives for securing company supplies and featuring employee privacy on worker-supplied mobile instruments. Containers and information in transit are encrypted the usage of FIPS-compliant AES-256 encryption. Airwatch application whitelists and blacklists ensure cell instruments don't seem to be getting used to skip company DLP guidelines. whereas Airwatch comfortable content Collaboration ensures documents cleared for company partners can also be securely shared from mobile devices with out exposing additional info.

Which DLP products are right for you?

The previous eventualities illustrated how DLP items could be employed, first the usage of a DLP business product, then a DLP business answer augmented via safety items with integrated points, and finally a totally integrated solution capitalizing on safety items that could both be tailored to a DLP role, or which already have DLP points.

In all eventualities, we regarded cellular devices in addition to stationary computing infrastructures. We even in-built the natural tendency to count on present DLP product lines well general to a company. Our selection of DLP products do not constitute endorsements however simply show how they -- and an identical DLP items --could be utilized in given eventualities.


Spirent Communications' (SPMYY) CEO Eric Hutchinson on Q2 2017 consequences - profits call Transcript | killexams.com Real Questions and Pass4sure dumps

No outcomes found, are trying new key phrase!income restructure plan is heading in the right direction and riding better effectiveness from a decreased earnings drive even as we do additionally invest in training to support new product launches and further enhance our key accoun...

Unquestionably it is hard assignment to pick dependable certification questions/answers assets regarding review, reputation and validity since individuals get sham because of picking incorrectly benefit. Killexams.com ensure to serve its customers best to its assets concerning exam dumps update and validity. The vast majority of other's sham report dissension customers come to us for the brain dumps and pass their exams joyfully and effortlessly. We never trade off on our review, reputation and quality on the grounds that killexams review, killexams reputation and killexams customer certainty is imperative to us. Uniquely we deal with killexams.com review, killexams.com reputation, killexams.com sham report objection, killexams.com trust, killexams.com validity, killexams.com report and killexams.com scam. On the off chance that you see any false report posted by our rivals with the name killexams sham report grievance web, killexams.com sham report, killexams.com scam, killexams.com protest or something like this, simply remember there are constantly awful individuals harming reputation of good administrations because of their advantages. There are a huge number of fulfilled clients that pass their exams utilizing killexams.com brain dumps, killexams PDF questions, killexams hone questions, killexams exam simulator. Visit Killexams.com, our specimen questions and test brain dumps, our exam simulator and you will realize that killexams.com is the best brain dumps site.

[OPTIONAL-CONTENTS-2]


000-371 questions and answers | P9530-039 free pdf | 00M-232 mock exam | NS0-121 bootcamp | LOT-918 cram | 9L0-206 study guide | 920-336 dump | 000-465 VCE | CAT-200 Practice Test | 70-346 real questions | 500-052 practice questions | HP0-063 practice exam | 000-P02 test prep | 000-341 real questions | JN0-662 braindumps | ACF-CCP exam questions | 9L0-401 questions and answers | 70-334 sample test | C2090-930 braindumps | 000-010 pdf download |


Free Pass4sure 250-403 question bank
killexams.com offer you to attempt its free demo, you will see the common UI and besides you will surmise that its easy to change the prep mode. Our investigation direct questions contain finish brain dump examcollection. killexams.com offers you three months free updates of 250-403 Administration of Symantec(TM)(R) Management Platform 7.1 exam brain dump questions. Our affirmation group is always available at back end who refreshes the material as and when required.

killexams.com have its specialists operating ceaselessly for the gathering of real test questions of 250-403. All the pass 4 sure Questions and Answers of 250-403 gathered by our cluster are looked into and updated by our 250-403 certification cluster. we have an approach to keep related to the candidates showed up within the 250-403 exam to induce their reviews regarding the 250-403 exam, we have an approach to gather 250-403 exam tips and traps, their expertise regarding the procedures utilised as an area of the important 250-403 exam, the errors they wiped out the important exam and later on enhance our braindumps as required. Click http://killexams.com/pass4sure/exam-detail/250-403 killexams.com Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under; WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for all exams on website PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders larger than $69 DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders larger than $99 SEPSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for All Orders When you expertise our killexams.com Questions and Answers, you will feel certain regarding each one of the themes of exam and feel that your information has been considerably captive forward. These pass4sure Questions and Answers are not merely practice questions, these are real test Questions and Answers that are sufficient to pass the 250-403 exam first attempt.

If you are searching for 250-403 Practice Test containing Real Test Questions, you are at correct place. killexams.com have aggregated database of questions from Actual Exams keeping in mind the end goal to enable you to plan and pass your exam on the main attempt. All preparation materials on the site are Up To Date and checked by our specialists.

killexams.com give most recent and updated Pass4sure Practice Test with Actual Exam Questions and Answers for new syllabus of Symantec 250-403 Exam. Practice our Real Questions and Answers to Improve your knowledge and pass your exam with High Marks. We guarantee your achievement in the Test Center, covering every one of the subjects of exam and improve your Knowledge of the 250-403 exam. Pass without any doubt with our exact questions.

Our 250-403 Exam PDF contains Complete Pool of Questions and Answers and Dumps checked and confirmed including references and explanations (where material). Our objective to collect the Questions and Answers isnt just to pass the exam at first attempt however Really Improve Your Knowledge about the 250-403 exam points.

250-403 exam Questions and Answers are Printable in High Quality Study Guide that you can download in your Computer or some other gadget and begin setting up your 250-403 exam. Print Complete 250-403 Study Guide, convey with you when you are at Vacations or Traveling and Enjoy your Exam Prep. You can get to updated 250-403 Exam Q&A from your online record whenever.

killexams.com Huge Discount Coupons and Promo Codes are as under;
WC2017 : 60% Discount Coupon for all exams on website
PROF17 : 10% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $69
DEAL17 : 15% Discount Coupon for Orders greater than $99
FEBSPECIAL : 10% Special Discount Coupon for All Orders


Download your Administration of Symantec(TM)(R) Management Platform 7.1 Study Guide promptly in the wake of purchasing and Start Preparing Your Exam Prep Right Now!

[OPTIONAL-CONTENTS-4]


Killexams P2180-039 questions and answers | Killexams 00M-662 braindumps | Killexams 9A0-394 real questions | Killexams 000-456 real questions | Killexams HP2-Z21 dump | Killexams 412-79v9 braindumps | Killexams HP0-717 exam prep | Killexams TB0-105 test questions | Killexams JN0-360 questions answers | Killexams 00M-155 practice exam | Killexams MA0-102 real questions | Killexams 00M-246 practice questions | Killexams HP0-M53 test prep | Killexams HP0-J64 practice test | Killexams 98-380 dumps questions | Killexams 312-49 brain dumps | Killexams HP0-M15 VCE | Killexams HPE0-S48 cram | Killexams OG0-081 questions and answers | Killexams 850-001 Practice Test |


[OPTIONAL-CONTENTS-5]

View Complete list of Killexams.com Brain dumps


Killexams HP2-056 questions and answers | Killexams 250-310 Practice test | Killexams 000-610 braindumps | Killexams 000-M221 real questions | Killexams 000-R11 practice test | Killexams 000-280 dumps | Killexams E20-393 dump | Killexams 646-580 examcollection | Killexams 70-543-VB cram | Killexams P8010-088 practice exam | Killexams 000-299 VCE | Killexams HP2-H22 study guide | Killexams QQ0-401 exam prep | Killexams HP0-J66 study guide | Killexams HP0-M34 mock exam | Killexams ES0-003 practice questions | Killexams 310-105 brain dumps | Killexams 190-720 practice test | Killexams 920-173 questions answers | Killexams 000-537 practice questions |


Administration of Symantec(TM)(R) Management Platform 7.1

Pass 4 sure 250-403 dumps | Killexams.com 250-403 real questions | [HOSTED-SITE]

Spirent Communications' (SPMYY) CEO Eric Hutchinson on Q2 2017 Results - Earnings Call Transcript | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

No result found, try new keyword!So, we can see here the increased revenue of the same level of product development expenditure and we do continue to focus our R&D activity to match key ... and further develop our key account managem...

Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine Guideline on Intraoperative Management of Adult Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

The purpose of the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine (SASM) Guideline on Intraoperative Management of Adult Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea (OSA) is to present recommendations based on the available scientific evidence. In light of a paucity of well-designed, high-quality studies in this perioperative field, a large part of the present recommendations was developed by experts in the field taking into account published evidence in the literature and utilizing consensus processes, including the grading of the level of evidence. At times, when specific information on patients with OSA was not available in the literature, evidence in highly correlated patient populations, specifically those with obesity, was considered if appropriate. When this was the case, it is explicitly stated in various parts of this document.

The guideline presented may not be suitable for all clinical settings and patients. Thus, its consideration requires an assessment of appropriateness by clinicians on an individualized basis. Among many factors, the existence of institutional protocols, individual patient-related conditions, the invasiveness of an intervention, and the availability of resources need to be considered. The present practice guideline is not intended to define standards or represent absolute requirements for patient care. Adherence to this guideline cannot guarantee successful outcomes but rather should aid health care professionals and institutions to formulate plans for improved management of patients with OSA. The present recommendations reflect the current state of knowledge and its interpretation by a group of experts in the field at the time of publication. Periodic reevaluations of the literature will be needed, and novel scientific evidence should be considered between updates. Deviations from this guideline in the practical setting may be justifiable, and such deviations should not be interpreted as a basis for negligence claims.

OSA is a common and frequently undiagnosed disorder defined by the repeated collapse of the upper airway with resultant blood oxygen desaturation events during sleep.1,2 OSA has been associated with adverse long-term health outcomes and has been linked to increased perioperative complication risk.3–5 Indeed, a comprehensive review of the literature performed by a task force appointed by SASM revealed substantial risk for adverse events, especially pulmonary complications, to be associated with OSA in the perioperative period.6 Based on the elevated risk for perioperative complications, the recently published SASM Guideline on Preoperative Screening and Assessment of Adults With Obstructive Sleep Apnea recommends that attempts should be made to appropriately identify patients with OSA, with the goal to raise awareness among providers, mitigate risk, and improve outcomes.7 While recommendations for preoperative screening and assessment of patients with OSA and their optimal preparation for surgery are now available, there is a paucity of evidence-based guidance for the intraoperative management of this patient population. Thus, there remains a lack of evidence-based practice recommendations regarding techniques for airway management, selection of anesthetic agents, and drugs, as well as choice of anesthetic technique.

This document is derived from results of an extensive consensus process based on a systematic literature search, review, and analysis performed by experts in the field. It is a follow-up to the previously published SASM Guideline on Preoperative Screening and Assessment of Adult Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea.7 Given the large amount of related literature in this arena, this study focuses only on intraoperative patient care. Postoperative care issues are not considered and may be the subject of future projects.

What Other Guidelines and Reviews Are Available?

Previous OSA-related practice guidelines8–12 have been published by the American Society of Anesthesiologists,8,9 the Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia,10 the American Academy of Sleep Medicine,11 the SASM,7 the International Bariatric Consensus Guideline Group,13 and the task force on best practice recommendations for the anesthetic perioperative care and pain management in weight loss surgery.14

Why Was This Guideline Developed and How Does It Differ From Existing Guidelines?

This guideline was developed to provide evidence-based recommendations for the intraoperative management of patients with OSA. Therefore, a careful examination of the current literature using a systematic review approach with a focus on airway management, commonly used anesthesia-related drugs and agents, and anesthetic techniques in this patient population was conducted. The task force recognizes that there has been recent progress in attempts to subcategorize patients with OSA according to anatomic predisposition, arousal thresholds, muscle responsiveness, and ventilatory control characteristics.15 However, given the lack of evidence in this context, statements were made referring to patients with OSA as a general group. Nevertheless, phenotypic subcategorization may allow the development of individual risk profiling in the future.

Aims

The aim of this guideline was to present recommendations based on the best current evidence. Clinical research as it relates to best perioperative practices in OSA is burdened by numerous difficulties. The intraoperative setting involves a multitude of concurrent interventions and use of anesthetic medications, making it difficult to single out specific factors that potentially drive the adverse outcome. Lack of preoperative polysomnography data within publications represents a further challenge, making it difficult to include information of the impact of disease severity. Ethical considerations in study designs regarding the randomization of patients with known OSA were additional obstacles in this context. Furthermore, the task force recognizes that there is a tendency to underreport medical complications, rendering it difficult to establish the true perioperative risk.16 Presenting the current available evidence and its limitations should raise awareness regarding the need for high-quality studies in the future.

Specific aims were to: (1) evaluate considerations of difficult airway management in patients with OSA, (2) assess the impact of individual anesthesia-related drugs and agents in the care of patients with OSA, and (3) evaluate best anesthetic techniques in this patient population. To achieve these aims, a question-driven approach was sought.

In areas lacking sufficient published evidence, the task force sought to establish expert consensus while considering related literature. Patients affected by sleep-disordered breathing unrelated to OSA, including hypoventilation syndromes, periodic breathing, and central apnea unrelated to OSA, were not considered in this project. This decision was made a priori to reduce the influence of heterogeneity in our assessment given the lack of evidence on which to base recommendations for these specific populations.

GUIDELINE TASK FORCE

The task force was comprised of 14 members of SASM, an international society devoted to advancing the care for clinical problems shared by anesthesiology and sleep medicine clinicians. Given that this project included only intraoperative aspects, the task force included 12 anesthesiologists and 2 anesthesiology research fellows. Members of the task force share expertise on the topic of sleep-disordered breathing in the perioperative setting and included practitioners from both academic and nonacademic settings from various parts of the United States, Canada, and Europe.

METHODS Research Questions

A systematic review of the literature addressing the intraoperative management of patients with OSA was conducted after search terms were developed by the task force. Three groups were established, each focusing on one of the focus areas (Table 1). Group 1 investigated whether patients with OSA are at increased risk for difficult airway management. Group 2 investigated the impact of various anesthesia-related drugs and agents used in the intraoperative care of patients with OSA. Group 3 evaluated the effect of anesthesia technique in patients with OSA. Leaders and group members are listed in the acknowledgments section of the article.

Literature Search Strategy

With the help of a research librarian, a literature search was performed for each group, including publications from 1946 to September 2016. Databases searched included (1) Medline, (2) ePub Ahead of Print/Medline In-process, (3) Embase, (4) Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, (5) Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, (6) PubMed-NOT-Medline, and (7) ClinicalTrials.Gov. The search focused on studies of adult individuals (≥18 years of age) and published in English. Continued literature surveillance was done through January 2018.

Excerpt of the Controlled Vocabulary Terms and Key Words Included in the Systematic Search.

Group 1: “sleep apnea, obstructive,” “obstructive sleep apnea,” “obstructive sleep apnea syndrome,” “sleep disordered breathing,” “obesity hypoventilation syndrome,” “apnoea or apnea,” “hypopnoea or hypopnea,” “airway,” “intubation,” “extubation,” “airway management,” “airway obstruction,” “airway extubation,” “intubation, intratracheal,” “intubation.mp,” “laryngeal masks,” “respiration, artificial,” “positive pressure respiration,” “respiratory mechanics,” “continuous positive airway pressure,” “supine position,” “apap.mp,” “bipap.mp,” “cpap.mp,” “facemask,” “ventilat.mp,” “patient positioning,” “difficult mask ventilation,” “supraglottic airway devices,” and “surgical airway.”

Group 2: “sleep apnea, obstructive,” “obstructive sleep apnea,” “obstructive sleep apnea syndrome,” “sleep disordered breathing,” “obesity hypoventilation syndrome,” “apnoea or apnea,” “hypopnoea or hypopnea,” “postoperative period,” “complications or outcome,” “perioperative care,” “perioperative complications,” “intraoperative complications,” “postoperative complications,” “outcome,” “risk,” “morbidity,” “mortality and death,” “anesthesia,” “anesthetics,” “anesthetics, intravenous,” “inhalational anesthesia,” “volatile anesthesia,” “anesthetics local,” “analgesia, opioid,” “hypnotics and sedatives,” “adverse effects,” “intravenous regional anesthesia,” “sedation,” “sedatives,” “short acting,” “nonsteroid of nonsteroid or nasaids,” “opioid,” “complication,” “muscle relaxant,” “rocuronium, atracurium,” “cis-atracurium,” “vecuronium,” “mivacurium,” “suxamethonium or succinylcholine,” “rapacuronium,” “pancuronium,” “skeletal muscle relaxant,” “neuromuscular reversal agents,” “sugammadex,” “residual neuromuscular block,” “drug effects,” “adverse effects,” “adverse drug reactions,” “abnormalities drug induced,” “adverse drug events,” “adverse drug reactions reporting systems,” “morbidity,” and “mortality.”

Group 3: “sleep apnea, obstructive,” “obstructive sleep apnea,” “obstructive sleep apnea syndrome,” “sleep disordered breathing,” “obesity hypoventilation syndrome,” “apnoea or apnea,” “hypopnoea or hypopnea,” “postoperative period,” “complications or outcome,” “perioperative care,” “perioperative complications,” “intraoperative complications,” “postoperative complications,” “outcome,” “risk,” “morbidity,” “mortality and death,” “anesthesia, epidural,” “anesthesia, spinal,” “anesthesia, general,” “major conduction anesthesia,” “treatment outcome,” “treatment failure,” “mortality,” “outcome,” “peripheral nerve blocks,” “nerve blocks,” “anesthesia regional,” “anesthesia technique,” “sedation,” “sedative medication,” “deep sedation,” “secure airway,” “airway,” “multimodal analgesia,” “balanced anesthesia,” “opioid sparing,” and “opioids.”

Full search strategies in Medline for all groups are reported in the Supplemental Digital Content 1, SASM Guideline Intraoperative OSA Appendix, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373; Supplemental Digital Content 2, Search Anesthesia Technique, http://links.lww.com/AA/C374; Supplemental Digital Content 3, Search Difficult Airway and OSA, http://links.lww.com/AA/C375; Supplemental Digital Content 4, Search Intraoperative Medication Use in Patients With OSA, http://links.lww.com/AA/C376; Supplemental Digital Content 5, Search Strategy NMBA, http://links.lww.com/AA/C377.

Furthermore, detailed reviews addressing difficult airway, anesthesia-related drugs and agents, specifically those involving neuromuscular blocking agents (NMBAs) and opioids, were conducted and summarized in separate systematic reviews by the respective SASM focus groups (members listed in the acknowledgments) to share the evidence gathered and expand the scope of the present guideline.

Study Selection

In the respective groups, ≥2 reviewers assessed titles and abstracts for eligibility by using the standardized format of the Covidence platform.17 This step was followed by a full-text review and data extraction. Furthermore, a citation search by a manual review of references from primary or review articles was performed to compile additional relevant results. Any disagreements were resolved by consensus among reviewers or by consulting with the respective SASM groups via face-to-face meetings, teleconferences, or email communications. Study designs considered included randomized controlled trials (RCTs), prospective and retrospective observational studies, case series, systematic reviews, and meta-analyses. Within this literature, the presence or risk for OSA was based on polysomnography, screening questionnaires, clinical assessment, chart diagnosis, medical history, or International Classification of Diseases (ICD)-9 codes from administrative or billing records, while studies reported on at least 1 outcome of interest. Existing guidelines were cross-checked for completeness of references.

Data extracted from these studies included type of study, demographic data, comorbidities, procedure type, anesthesia-related interventions and medications, adverse events, as well as other clinically important outcomes and effects.

Exclusion Criteria.

Exclusion criteria were: nonhuman studies, non-English language, review articles, single case reports, studies reporting on the chronic use of medications commonly used intraoperatively such as chronic opioid medication, and studies without outcome reporting. For group 3, studies not directly comparing anesthesia modalities were also excluded.

Level of Evidence and Recommendations

The Oxford Level of Evidence (Oxford LOE) tool was utilized to evaluate the quality of evidence of individual studies.18 Grading the strength of recommendations and quality of the underlying evidence enhances the usefulness of clinical practice guidelines.19 Therefore, the approach according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development, and Evaluation (GRADE) system20,21 was utilized with regard to the body of evidence and the development of guideline recommendations.22 As specified by GRADE, the quality of evidence is classified into high, moderate, low, and very low levels, according to factors that include study methodology, consistency and precision of results, and directness of evidence.19 These levels were assigned to the body of evidence of each respective recommendation within their focus area and reflect the confidence in estimates of the true effect.21 When moving from evidence to recommendations, the GRADE approach focuses on 4 factors: balance between benefit and harm, certainty of evidence, values and preferences, and resource considerations.22 The strength of recommendation is separated into strong and weak and defines the extent to which one can be confident that the desirable consequences outweigh its undesirable consequences (Table 2).23

In-person SASM Intraoperative Guideline Task Force meetings took place at special sessions during the SASM annual meetings in Chicago, IL (2016), and Boston, MA (2017), as well as the International Anesthesia Research Society annual meeting in Washington, DC (2017). Furthermore, multiple teleconferences and electronic communications took place throughout this time period. Preliminary results and implications of findings were presented and discussed at the 2017 SASM annual meeting in Boston, MA.

1. DIFFICULT AIRWAY AND OSA
  • 1.1. Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for difficult airway management and do special precautions need to be taken?
  • 1.1. Recommendation: Known or suspected OSA should be considered an independent risk factor for difficult intubation, difficult mask ventilation, or a combination of both. Adequate difficult airway management precautions should be taken.
  • Level of evidence: Moderate; Grade of recommendation: Strong

    Rationale

    The perception of OSA as an important risk factor for difficult airway management is widely held among anesthesiologists and intensive care physicians. In the absence of RCTs, several prospective and retrospective controlled studies have supported this assumption.24–39

    Association Between OSA and Difficult Airway Management

    After applying the designated search strategy and removing duplicates, 4806 references were screened for title and/or abstract. After reviewing 25 full-text articles, 16 studies were identified as reporting on the association between difficult airway management and OSA, while 9 studies were excluded.40–47 A detailed summary of associations between OSA and various difficult airway management components is provided in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A1, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373.

    Among the included studies, 5 were retrospective24,25,27,35,36 and 11 were prospective controlled studies.26,28–34,37–39 Ten studies confirmed OSA by overnight polysomnography24,25,27,29,35 or electronic database entries,28,30,31,34,37 3 used the STOP-Bang screening questionnaire,33,38,39 2 identified patients by clinical diagnosis,26,36 and 1 used both polysomnography and the STOP-Bang questionnaire.32

    In total, 266,603 patients were included in 16 studies. Of those patients, 32,052 had OSA (identified by polysomnography, electronic database, chart or clinical diagnoses, and STOP-Bang questionnaires) and 234,551 did not. In summary, 12 studies reported on difficult intubation,24–29,31–33,35,38,39 6 on difficult mask ventilation,28,30,31,36,38,39 2 on both difficult intubation and mask ventilation,28,37 and 2 on failed supraglottic airway.27,34 Several studies reported >1 difficult airway outcome. No study was available on the need for a surgical airway (Supplemental Digital Content, Table A1, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373).

    Concerning difficult intubation and OSA, 7 of 12 studies showed positive associations.24,25,28,33,35,38,39 Of 6 studies, 5 demonstrated a significant impact of OSA on difficult mask ventilation.28,30,36,38,39 In the 2 studies that reported on combined difficult intubation and mask ventilation, both demonstrated a significant impact of OSA.28,37 Although 5 studies assessing difficult intubation26,27,29,31,32 and 1 study evaluating difficult mask ventilation31 did not find a significant association with OSA, the overall estimates showed a positive association between OSA and difficult airway. This finding suggests that patients with OSA are at increased risk of difficult airway management compared to patients without OSA. Detailed data, analysis, and results on the association between OSA and difficult airway will be reported in a separate systematic review with meta-analysis by the SASM airway focus group (members listed in acknowledgments).

    One prospective controlled study34 reported on the use of the LMA Unique® (Teleflex Incorporated, Morrisville, NC), and an additional retrospective investigation27 reported on a separate unspecified supraglottic airway device. No significant association was found between OSA and failed supraglottic devices.

    Prevalence of OSA in Patients With Difficult Intubation

    Two studies elucidated the association between OSA and difficult intubation in a reverse manner by investigating the rate of OSA among patients with difficult intubation. In a retrospective study, Hiremath et al,24 using an apnea-hypopnea index (AHI) ≥10 as a cutoff, found that 53% of patients with difficult airway had OSA. This finding was confirmed by a prospective controlled study by Chung et al.29 using an AHI ≥5 as a cutoff for OSA diagnosis. Patients who were determined to have a difficult airway were referred for polysomnography after surgery, and 66% were shown to have OSA.

    Kim and Lee35 showed that patients with an AHI ≥40 had a significantly higher prevalence of difficult intubation. For patients with OSA with AHIs ≤40, 40–70, and ≥70, the incidence of difficult intubation was 3.3%, 19.3%, and 27.6%, respectively.35 Anatomical skeletal and soft tissue changes may contribute to a difficult airway in OSA. However, these observations are “hypothesis-generating” rather than “hypothesis-proving” findings. The shared anatomical abnormalities explain the positive association between difficult airway and OSA.

    A number of studies evaluated the association of difficult airway management with OSA using the STOP-Bang questionnaire to identify patients at high risk of OSA.32,33,38,39 The sensitivity and specificity of the STOP-Bang questionnaire can vary according to the prevalence and severity of OSA.48 This variation can create false-positive and false-negative cases in both OSA and non-OSA groups, leading to potential misclassification bias.

    One of the contributing factors for adverse respiratory events in patients with OSA is the increased risk of difficult airway management, such as difficult intubation, difficult mask ventilation, or both. In a recent report, there were 7 litigation cases where OSA was associated with either death or anoxic brain injury due to difficult airway management in the form of failure to reintubate in the postoperative period.49 Knowledge about the association between OSA and difficult airway may improve perioperative airway management and decrease airway-related complications.

    In view of ethical considerations, it is difficult to perform RCTs in patients with OSA to determine its associations with difficult airway management. As a result, only observational prospective and retrospective studies are available in the literature. The end estimates of these studies indicate that there is an increased risk of difficult airway management in patients with OSA. Due to the large number of trials and large patient numbers, the overall quality of the body of evidence was considered to be moderate using the GRADE approach20,21 and the Oxford LOE.18

    2. INTRAOPERATIVE MEDICATION USE IN PATIENTS WITH OSA

    A large body of literature supports the notion that the effects of surgery and anesthesia pose unique hazards to patients with OSA.5,50,51 Anesthetic agents and analgesic drugs interact with consciousness, sleep, and ventilatory drive,52,53 and thus they deserve consideration when caring for patients with OSA. In addition, upper airway and pulmonary physiology, including upper airway dilator muscle activity, are impacted by pharmacological and mechanical elements (airway manipulation) of anesthesia with possible increased detriment in OSA.54–56 The following section discusses questions related to the effects of various agents and drugs commonly utilized intraoperatively in patients with OSA.

    2.1 Neuromuscular Blocking Agents
  • 2.1.1 Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for postoperative respiratory complications from the use of NMBAs?
  • 2.1.1 Recommendation: Patients with OSA who received NMBAs may be at increased risk of effects of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade, hypoxemia, or respiratory failure.
  • Level of evidence: Low; Grade of recommendation: Weak

  • 2.1.2 Question: Does the choice of neuromuscular blocking reversal agent impact the risk of postoperative respiratory complications in patients with OSA?
  • 2.1.2 Recommendation: Currently, there is insufficient evidence to suggest the preference of any neuromuscular blocking reversal agent to reduce the risks of postoperative respiratory complications in patients with OSA.
  • Level of evidence: Low; Grade of recommendation: No recommendation

    Rationale.

    NMBAs are commonly used to optimize intubation conditions and provide surgical relaxation for various procedures. However, residual neuromuscular blockade has been reported to occur in ≤64% of patients in postanesthesia care units.57 The use of NMBAs and residual neuromuscular blockade has been associated with significant postoperative respiratory complications such as hypoxemia,58 upper airway obstruction,58 and pneumonia.59 High doses of NMBA given during abdominal surgery were associated with an increased risk of 30-day readmission, increased length of hospital stay, and increased hospital cost.60 A retrospective review of a single-center database showed that patients who required tracheal intubation within the first 3 days after surgery had a significantly higher frequency of NMBA administration and reversal with neostigmine.61 Residual neuromuscular blockade may persist despite the administration of neostigmine reversal, especially when neuromuscular monitoring is not utilized.62

    It is unclear whether patients with OSA may be at higher risk for postoperative respiratory complications due to the adverse effects of postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade compared to patients without OSA. Moreover, it is uncertain whether the type of reversal agent impacts the risk of postoperative complications in patients with OSA. Patients with suspected61 or confirmed50,63,64 OSA have been shown to be at increased risk for early postoperative respiratory complications, including emergent intubation,63,64 mechanical ventilation,63,64 noninvasive ventilation,63,64 respiratory failure,50 desaturation,6,50 and pneumonia.64 The use of NMBA was not described in these studies.6,50,63,64 Many patients with OSA are obese and have anatomical risk factors that may increase vulnerability to the effects of residual neuromuscular blockade on the upper airway and pharyngeal function.

    Our literature search yielded 5 studies that were heterogeneous in terms of study design, types of surgery, and types of respiratory complications.65–69 Many studies were excluded because OSA diagnosis or use of NMBA was not described.

    One RCT11 and 2 observational studies66,67 were included to address the question of whether patients with OSA are at a higher risk for postoperative respiratory complications from the use of NMBA compared to patients without OSA. Although the level of evidence was limited (Oxford LOE 2–3), the studies suggest that patients with OSA who received NMBA may be at increased risk of effects of residual neuromuscular blockade, postoperative respiratory failure, and hypoxemia.65–67 The results of our review are consistent with previous studies showing that patients with OSA are at higher risk of postoperative respiratory failure and hypoxemia than patients without OSA.6,61,70,71 Even partial residual neuromuscular blockade that does not evoke respiratory symptoms can impair upper airway dilator muscle function.72 Minimizing the use and dose of NMBA, monitoring the level of neuromuscular blockade, and complete reversal of NMBA before extubation may be particularly important for patients with OSA.9

    While not considering OSA status, reversal of NMBA with sugammadex, a cyclodextrin used to reverse rocuronium,73 has been shown to decrease the incidence of residual paralysis compared to the anticholinesterase inhibitor, neostigmine.74 A recent Cochrane review of 41 studies comparing sugammadex with neostigmine concluded that patients receiving sugammadex versus neostigmine had 40% fewer composite adverse events (bradycardia, postoperative nausea and vomiting, and residual neuromuscular blockade).75 Patients receiving sugammadex had less desaturation and need for transitory oxygen supplementation; however, the OSA status was not reported in these reviews, limiting its value to assess its differential effect in this subpopulation.74,75

    There are limited studies comparing the impact of different neuromuscular blocking reversal agents on postoperative respiratory complications in patients with OSA. We identified 1 RCT68 and 1 observational study69 that compared sugammadex to neostigmine. In the 2 studies, 209 patients with OSA and 185 patients without OSA were included.68,69 The RCT (n = 74) found that patients receiving sugammadex versus neostigmine had less postoperative respiratory complications (desaturation, hypoxemia, apnea, airway manipulation, airway usage, reintubation, continuous positive airway pressure [CPAP] therapy, and invasive mechanical ventilation).68 There was no difference in airway obstruction. The observational study (n = 320) compared sugammadex to a historical cohort of patients who received neostigmine reversal for laparoscopic bariatric surgeries. Patients with OSA who received sugammadex versus neostigmine had less postoperative chest radiographic changes (atelectasis, pleural effusions), 6.9% vs 16.3% (odds ratio [OR], 0.36; 95% CI, 0.18–0.8),69 but there were no differences in postoperative mechanical ventilation or hospital length of stay. Although both studies showed a reduction in some postoperative respiratory complications, the evidence is limited because the number of patients included in the RCT (Oxford LOE: 2) was small,68 and the observational study (Oxford LOE: 3) reported no difference in clinical outcomes.69

    Currently, there is insufficient evidence to recommend the use of sugammadex over neostigmine to reduce the risk of postoperative respiratory complications in patients with OSA. More trials with larger sample sizes are needed in this patient population.

    2.2 Opioids
  • 2.2.1 Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for opioid-related respiratory events?
  • 2.2.1 Recommendation: Patients with OSA may be at increased risk for adverse respiratory events from the use of opioid medications.
  • Level of evidence: Low; Grade of recommendation: Weak

  • 2.2.2 Question: Is pain perception and opioid potency altered in patients with OSA?
  • 2.2.2 Recommendation: The possibility of altered pain perception in patients with OSA should be considered.
  • Level of evidence: Low; Grade of recommendation: Weak

    Rationale.

    While opioids are highly effective in treating moderate to severe pain, their intrinsic capacity to suppress ventilatory drive demands caution in OSA. Despite consensus among perioperative physicians to restrict or avoid opioids in OSA,9 the presence of robust, high-quality scientific evidence to demonstrate the merit of heightened concern and guide safe opioid practice in this population is limited.76

    Nevertheless, despite limitations with respect to the quality of evidence suggesting an adverse impact of acute opioid administration in OSA, current literature indicates that a heightened concern regarding opioid use in this population may be justified. A summary of evidence is provided in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A2, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373.

    Specifically, 17 observational studies exploring the impact of systemic opioid use in OSA were identified. While the majority demonstrated an association between opioid use and adverse perioperative outcomes in OSA,61,77–89 this was not confirmed by all.66,90,91 It should be noted that, particularly among observational analyses, there is notable heterogeneity with regard to the modality of OSA assessment, ranging from the gold standard of polysomnography to identification by screening questionnaires or patient history. Furthermore, potential selection bias should be considered in these studies. In recent publications, a comparison of postoperative complications among patients with and without OSA within the same study cohort revealed that the incidence of postoperative pulmonary (2.49% vs 1.83%), cardiac (2.81% vs 0.23%), gastrointestinal (0.45% vs 0.33%), renal (3.47% vs 1.83%), and thromboembolic (0.41% vs 0.33%) complications was higher in patients with OSA at similar opioid dose levels.88,92 Additional analysis of the impact of opioid dose increase within patients with OSA demonstrated an associated increase in the odds for gastrointestinal complications, prolonged length of stay, and increased hospital cost, while no further increase in risk for pulmonary complications was observed, possibly due to increased levels of monitoring afforded to this population.88 A higher incidence of postoperative complications in OSA versus non-OSA in this context was also found by Blake et al77 and Esclamado et al,80 while the latter conducted their study in upper airway surgery, a procedure with a potentially inherent influence on respiratory outcome.80

    Chung et al79 demonstrated an opioid dose-dependent postoperative worsening of sleep-disordered breathing associated with the severity of OSA (expressed by AHI), although this effect may have been fairly small. Male patients with OSA had a significantly higher central apnea index on postoperative night 1 versus female patients with OSA. In this context, numerous other observational studies took a different approach by investigating the occurrence of critical, life-threatening respiratory events, such as respiratory failure and naloxone requirement and identifying drivers for these complications.61,81–84,86,87 Moreover, a recent systematic review reported that the majority of surgical patients with OSA experiencing perioperative death or near-death events received a morphine equivalent dose of <10 mg/d.89 Subramani et al89 suggested that a dose-response pattern with increased odds for complications at increasing opioid dose levels (ORs of 1.0, 1.5, and 3.0 at opioid doses of <10, 10–25, and >25 mg; P for trend <.005) exists.

    In contrast, others66,85 who restricted their focus to patients with obesity, a population of high OSA prevalence,2 demonstrated that, although postoperative respiratory complications in the context of opioid analgesia were common, surprisingly, OSA could not be established as an independent risk factor.66,85 However, a factor potentially causing an underestimation of a possible deleterious effect of OSA was the postoperative use of positive airway pressure therapy among patients with OSA.85 Moreover, a proof of concept analysis by Wang et al91 suggested that the experimental oral administration of 30 mg controlled-release morphine in 10 volunteers outside the surgical setting paradoxically improved oxygenation through modulating chemoreflexes.91 In summary, evidence from observational analyses suggests that opioid use in the presence of OSA presents a risk factor for postoperative critical respiratory events (Oxford LOE 3–4).61,79,81–84,86,87,89

    With regard to evidence from RCTs, 6 such studies were identified (Oxford LOE 2).93–98 In a volunteer study, Bernards et al94 directly demonstrated that opioid administration during sleep increased the number of central apneas, leading to decreased saturation levels in patients with OSA versus those without OSA.94 Abdelmageed et al93 demonstrated that opioid dose reduction significantly reduced the incidence of central apneas and respiratory events in patients with OSA.93 While interesting, it must be noted that opioid reduction may decrease respiratory depression and related complications in the general population as well.92 Using a nonvalidated OSA prediction instrument, Blake et al95 showed that central apneas and respiratory events were related to the dose of morphine administered postoperatively. However, differences in the occurrence of respiratory complications between patients with standard morphine patient-controlled analgesia and an opioid-sparing regimen could not be established.95

    Other studies explored the safety of neuraxial opioid administration in patients with OSA.99–102 In a systematic review, Orlov et al99 found that the incidence of major cardiorespiratory complications after neuraxial opioid administrations was 4.1% among patients with OSA. However, the authors also emphasized that significant limitations in the quality of evidence and persistent underreporting of adverse events prevented an accurate and robust assessment of true perioperative risk.16,99 A prospective study in patients having a cesarean delivery with intrathecal morphine administration demonstrated that OSA and obesity were associated with approximately a 2-fold increase in risk for desaturation.100 However, another observational analysis of 990 patients undergoing orthopedic surgery with intrathecal morphine could not find an association between OSA and adverse pulmonary events.101

    In summary, limited literature suggests that patients with OSA may be at increased risk for opioid-related respiratory adverse events. However, high-quality evidence to support and prove this notion is largely lacking (Oxford LOE 2–4).

    Pain and Opioid Analgesia in OSA.

    A systematic evaluation of opioid-related respiratory effects in OSA requires focused attention on closely related issues such as pain perception and pharmacology of opioid analgesia. A summary of evidence is provided in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A3, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373 (Oxford LOE 3). Characterizing these relationships is important because the dose of opioids that is required to treat pain, as well as the sensitivity to these medications, directly influence the likelihood of opioid-induced respiratory depression.

    Disturbed sleep continuity and intermittent hypoxia are 2 important features of OSA. Studies in humans have repeatedly demonstrated that fragmented103,104 or chronically curtailed sleep87,105 and insomnia,106 a condition highly comorbid with OSA,107 are associated with heightened sensitivity to pain.108

    Among 3 identified studies examining the response to experimental pain in subjects suffering from OSA, 1 study found that patients with OSA and comorbid temporomandibular joint disorder experienced hypoalgesia to pressure-related pain,109 while another reported a significant increase in pain threshold after restoring sleep continuity with the application of CPAP therapy.110 In contrast, the third investigation found no association between wake-after-sleep-onset or nocturnal nadir blood oxygen saturation (SpO2) polysomnographic parameters and threshold/tolerance to thermal pain.111

    In the context of chronic pain, a retrospective analysis of prospectively collected data from the Cleveland Family Study showed that chronic intermittent hypoxia was associated with more frequent chronic pain complaints, even after adjusting for the potentially hyperalgesic effect of sleep fragmentation and systemic inflammation.112

    Despite the primary goal to focus on the adult patient population in this guideline, a significant amount of evidence originates from the pediatric population and deserves mention here particularly because they show contradictory findings to those found among adults. In children undergoing adenotonsillectomy for treatment of OSA, 2 case–control studies, 1 retrospective113 and 1 prospective,114 showed that patients with a preoperative nocturnal nadir SpO2 <85% required half the dose of morphine to treat postoperative pain, versus those with a nadir SpO2 ≥85%. Two prospective case–control studies in the same population did not confirm these findings.115,116 In the first study, African American children versus Caucasian children with OSA presented with more pain requiring a higher dose of morphine for postoperative analgesia.115 The second study showed that children with OSA (respiratory disturbance index >5) required more morphine for postoperative analgesia, but they also demonstrated a higher incidence of opioid-related respiratory complications.116

    In adults, 1 retrospective analysis found that bariatric patients with nocturnal hypoxemia (expressed as percentage of total sleep time spent at oxygen saturation [SaO2] <90%) required less opioids for postoperative analgesia,117 whereas another prospective study did not detect any association between preoperative nocturnal hypoxemia and postoperative opioid use in general surgical patients with OSA.118 A more detailed and comprehensive summary of evidence on the potential impact of acute opioid analgesia in OSA is provided in a separate systematic review by the SASM opioids focus group (members listed in the acknowledgments).

    2.3 Propofol
  • 2.3.1 Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for adverse events from the use of propofol for procedural sedation?
  • 2.3.1 Recommendation: Patients with OSA may be at increased risk for adverse respiratory events from the use of propofol for procedural sedation.
  • Level of evidence: Moderate; Grade of recommendation: Strong

    Rationale.

    The literature discussed for the purpose of the recommendation reflects evidence of importance for patients receiving propofol for sedation in a procedural setting, that is, drug-induced sleep endoscopy (DISE), gastroenterological endoscopy, or dentistry. The use of propofol to induce general anesthesia purposefully suppresses respiratory activity and was thus deferred in this section.

    Propofol is the most commonly used agent for DISE.119,120 A summary of findings from 5 studies120–124 is shown in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A4, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373 (Oxford LOE: 2–4). Both body mass index (BMI) and severity of OSA correlated with a greater likelihood of a patient having multiple sites of airway collapse and a higher possibility of circumferential and total airway obstruction during DISE.119,125 The goal of propofol administration for DISE is to produce a sleep-like loss of consciousness and muscle relaxation to precipitate pharyngeal narrowing and collapse in vulnerable individuals. To avoid the problem of profound relaxation or central apnea, it has been suggested that initial dosing for DISE be judiciously titrated.120,126

    Attempts have been made to formulate a mathematical equation to model the pharmacokinetics for propofol in patients with obesity (Supplemental Digital Content, Table A5, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373).127–130 Uncertainty regarding dosing scalar adjustments that may be required in patients with obesity, as well as the concomitant use of depressant drugs with synergistic effects (midazolam,131 ketamine,132,133 dexmedetomidine,134 opioids135), further add to the need for heightened vigilance when using propofol for patients with OSA. Propofol has a relatively steep dose-response curve compared to other sedatives/hypnotics, thus underscoring the importance of careful titration.131,136,137 Adverse effects are not uncommon in patients with OSA undergoing procedures with propofol sedation. A summary of findings from 5 studies138–143 is shown in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A6, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373. OSA, increased BMI, male gender, American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status ≥III, initial dose of propofol, and increased age were found to be independent risk factors for hypoxemic incidents. Airway interventions were common in patients receiving propofol, although indications for airway intervention were left to the discretion of the anesthesia provider. Whether precautionary or subsequent to an obstructed airway, apneic, or desaturation episode, such airway interventions were undoubtedly done to prevent or mitigate a sedation-related adverse event. The use of capnography was associated with a decreased incidence of hypoxic events compared to standard monitoring alone during sedation with propofol144 in patients with OSA.140

    2.4 Inhalational Agents
  • 2.4.1 Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for residual effects of inhalational anesthetic agents?
  • 2.4.1 Recommendation: There is a lack of evidence to assess residual effects of inhalational anesthetic agents in the population with OSA.
  • Level of evidence: Moderate; Grade of recommendation: No recommendation

    Rationale.

    There is a lack of scientific literature to guide best intraoperative practices in OSA regarding the preferred technique among various inhalational agents and intravenous propofol for the maintenance of anesthesia. Nevertheless, a significant amount of evidence has been published on the general population and patients with obesity.145 Evidence from the population with obesity may merit consideration in this context, given the close association to OSA,146 reflected in the substantial OSA prevalence of ≤90% in male bariatric patients.147,148 Notably, there is significant overlap between obesity and OSA with regard to challenges in general anesthesia because of altered cardiorespiratory physiology, including decreased functional residual capacity, upper airway obstruction, and the propensity to hypoxemia in perioperative settings.149,150

    This renders the period of emergence and recovery from anesthesia of high concern regarding the risk for detrimental outcomes.56,146

    In this context, 25 studies were identified that compared the efficacy and recovery profile among the most common inhalational agents and intravenous propofol.65,151–174 A summary of evidence is provided in Supplemental Digital Content, Tables A7 and A8, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373. Comparing propofol and isoflurane, propofol was suggested to be associated with a faster recovery from anesthesia and improved postoperative respiratory control in 2 RCTs.154,155 However, sevoflurane was found to be superior to propofol in 2 RCTs due to faster anesthesia recovery and improved hemodynamic stability.152,153 In addition, recently Fassbender et al151 reported no difference with regard to postoperative obstructive and hypoxemic events between the 2 anesthetic agents when combined with remifentanil. Furthermore, comparing propofol and desflurane, 1 study demonstrated that the use of propofol impaired pulmonary function and SpO2 to a greater degree than desflurane,157 while another could not confirm these differences.156 Thus, current evidence indicates that sevoflurane and desflurane might be superior to intravenous propofol in terms of anesthesia recovery in patients with obesity (Oxford LOE: 2).

    Similarly, 4 RCTs conducted in the population with obesity supported the notion that sevoflurane was associated with favorable features compared to isoflurane.65,158–160 In particular, Sudré et al65 demonstrated that sevoflurane embedded in a short-acting anesthetic regimen comprised of remifentanil, rocuronium, and ropivacaine improved emergence from anesthesia and reduced respiratory complications, postoperative anesthesia care unit stay, and hospital length of stay when compared to isoflurane within a long-acting regimen. This analysis emphasized the plausible benefit of generally utilizing short-acting medications with regard to all anesthetic drug classes, including opioids and NMBA, among patients at higher perioperative risk.65 The majority of studies, however, focused on the comparative effectiveness between sevoflurane and desflurane,161,163,165,167 demonstrating improved anesthesia recovery with desflurane (Oxford LOE: 2).162,164,166,168,169,174 Notably, limitations inherent to the nature of these comparisons can prevent the detection of differences. For instance, Eger and Shafer175 showed that differences in postoperative wake-up times among anesthetics were minimal at lower anesthetic concentrations,175 while the duration of anesthesia176 and BMI present important covariates.174

    Summarizing the evidence, a well-designed systematic review by Liu et al171 provided a comprehensive comparison with quantitative analysis of immediate postoperative recovery after desflurane, isoflurane, sevoflurane, and intravenous propofol anesthesia in patients with obesity. In addition, a rather small clinical trial by Juvin et al170 also compared desflurane, isoflurane, and propofol together in 1 analysis. Both Liu et al171 and Juvin et al170 established desflurane as the most favorable anesthetic agent because of its superior postoperative recovery profile. Specifically, it was observed that patients who received desflurane anesthesia required less time to respond to commands, eye opening, hand squeezing, tracheal extubation, and name stating. Moreover, desflurane reduced sedation levels171 and conferred higher postoperative SpO2.170,171

    It appears, therefore, that postoperative recovery might occur faster and with improved hemodynamic stability after anesthesia with desflurane followed by sevoflurane (Supplemental Digital Content, Table A7, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373), and these findings have also been observed in the general population.177–180

    Consistently, desflurane and sevoflurane feature low blood-gas partition coefficients,171 conferring greater intraoperative control of anesthesia depth, as well as rapid and consistent postoperative emergence and recovery.161,181,182

    These properties, in turn, imply earlier achievement of baseline respiratory function with potentially better protection against aspiration and improved oxygenation.183 This has also been supported by the observation of decreases in hypoxemia in clinical trials.170,171 Both obesity and OSA predispose patients to higher risk of postoperative upper airway obstruction and serious hypoxemia,184 thus suggesting a benefit associated with early and rapid recovery of active airway control and alertness.171

    Another intervention, possibly promoting increased safety in OSA, is the intraoperative monitoring of anesthesia depth. This has been suggested by Ibraheim et al172 and Freo et al,173 who demonstrated that monitoring for titration of levels of inhalational agents reduced the required anesthetic dosage and improved the postanesthetic recovery in patients with obesity.

    Furthermore, Katznelson et al185 suggested that recovery time after general anesthesia in patients with and without obesity can be accelerated using either isocapnic or hypercapnic hyperpnea.185

    In summary, the available evidence supports the use of desflurane and sevoflurane in patients with obesity (Oxford LOE: 2). Given the strong association between obesity and OSA, and the benefits of accelerating and improving postoperative anesthesia recovery, these outcomes are desirable and may apply to patients with OSA as well. However, except for 2 RCTs,151,154 no studies specifically in OSA are available, and thus no specific recommendations can be made.

    2.5 Ketamine
  • 2.5.1 Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for adverse events from the use of ketamine?
  • 2.5.1 Recommendation: There is a lack of evidence to assess residual effects of ketamine in the population with OSA.
  • Level of evidence: Very low; Grade of recommendation: No recommendation

    Rationale.

    The literature is scarce with regard to complications associated with ketamine in patients with OSA.

    Ketamine has mostly been studied with respect to its potent analgesic effects as a sedative and hypnotic and, more recently, to reduce opioid use.186–188 There are only a few studies involving ketamine use in patients with OSA, but data are insufficient to draw any firm conclusions.189,190

    Adverse effects of ketamine, such as neuropsychiatric effects, signs of increased sympathetic system activation (hypertension and tachycardia), and hypersalivation, are well documented in patients without OSA.191,192 Although patients with OSA are not specifically studied, these adverse events most likely translate to increased risk in this patient population as well. Adverse events are mostly seen in patients who received high doses, meaning >0.5 mg/kg boluses and 100 µg/kg/h infusions.193

    Ketamine has been shown to have some beneficial effects. Studies demonstrated that ketamine, when combined with other sedative medications, mostly propofol, may decrease respiratory-related adverse effects.194,195 One such prospective observational study looking at sedation-related risk factors (airway obstruction, hypoventilation, and desaturation) for procedural sedation found ketamine to be a protective factor.195 De Oliveira et al194 reported that ketamine decreased duration and severity of hypercapnia in patients undergoing breast surgery under deep sedation.

    Furthermore, Drummond196 studied the effect of ketamine versus midazolam on upper airway function. Interestingly, they found decreased upper airway muscle activity in the midazolam group, which resulted in airway obstruction, whereas no change in muscle activity was observed in the ketamine group. In another study, genioglossus muscle activity, tidal volume, and respiratory rate have been shown to be increased after administration of high and low doses of ketamine in rats.197 Upper airway dilator muscle activity plays an important role in patients who are at risk of upper airway obstruction. Despite the lack of data on ketamine in the patient population with OSA, available information suggests that these patients could benefit from potentially favorable respiratory effects over other sedatives. Firm conclusions, however, cannot be drawn at this time.

    2.6 Benzodiazepines
  • 2.6.1 Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for adverse events from intravenous benzodiazepine sedation?
  • 2.6.1 Recommendation: Patients with OSA may be at increased risk for adverse respiratory events from intravenous benzodiazepine sedation. Intravenous benzodiazepine sedation should be used with caution.
  • Level of evidence: Moderate; Grade of recommendation: Weak

    Rationale.

    Although the literature is immature on the topic of differential effects of intravenous benzodiazepine sedation in patients with OSA compared to those without OSA, studies suggest that the use of intravenous benzodiazepines is associated with airway compromise in patients with OSA. Intravenous benzodiazepine sedation is routinely used to induce airway collapse for diagnostic purposes in OSA.

    Much of the literature revolves around the use of intravenous benzodiazepines for DISE in a diagnostic context to examine locations and patterns of obstruction in patients with OSA.119,198–210 Midazolam is the most commonly used intravenous benzodiazepine for DISE. In 7 studies,199,200,202,205,207,208,210 the majority of patients had multilevel obstruction, especially those with higher AHI. Two studies evaluated sleep staging during midazolam-induced sleep. The first showed that patients spent the most time in nonrapid eye movement sleep stage N1 and N2 but not in stage N3 and rapid eye movement (REM) sleep.198 The second reported that patients reached N2 sleep without further deepening of sleep stage.201 Because most obstructive events occur in N1 and N2 sleep, DISE with intravenous midazolam is considered a good option to study obstructive events in patients with OSA.102,105

    Interestingly, Sadaoka et al209 found that patients with OSA had oxygen desaturation and apneas during DISE with intravenous diazepam more frequently than simple snorers.

    Another category of studies described the use of intravenous benzodiazepines for sleep imaging.211–214 Thus, a retrospective analysis by Lee et al213 compared 53 patients with OSA to 10 simple snorers. All patients with OSA had desaturation events after 2 mg of midazolam, but none in the simple snorers group had such events.213

    We identified 5 studies evaluating intravenous benzodiazepines in the context of other endoscopic or surgical procedures.215–219 Midazolam was used either alone or in combination with fentanyl. One study did not specify which benzodiazepines were used.218 Three studies215,216,219 compared outcomes between patients with and without OSA. In a retrospective cohort study by Adler et al,215 215 patients undergoing routine endoscopy were randomized to 4 groups: patients with OSA undergoing endoscopy with propofol or midazolam + fentanyl and patients without OSA undergoing endoscopy with propofol or midazolam + fentanyl. A comparison of patients with and without OSA receiving midazolam and fentanyl showed that desaturation events and other complications were not significantly different.215 Notably, doses of midazolam and fentanyl needed for colonoscopy were slightly lower in patients with OSA, although the procedure time was moderately longer.

    Cha et al216 published a prospective study that compared cardiopulmonary complications during routine esophagogastroduodenoscopy under sedation with midazolam between 31 patients with OSA and 65 healthy controls. Patients with OSA received a higher dose of midazolam than patients without OSA, but cardiopulmonary complications were not increased in patients with OSA.

    Mador et al219 conducted a prospective study in 904 patients undergoing endoscopy to investigate whether OSA, assessed by the Berlin questionnaire, increases the risk of complications during sedation with midazolam and fentanyl. Major complications were observed in 3.25% of patients with low risk for OSA and in 1.9% of patients with high risk for OSA (OR, 0.6; 95% CI, 0.26–1.46; P = .21). Minor complications were observed in 10.56% of patients with low OSA risk and 10.63% of patients with high OSA risk (OR, 1.01; 95% CI, 0.65–1.56; P = 1.0), suggesting that OSA was not associated with increased risk for cardiopulmonary complications during endoscopy under sedation with midazolam and fentanyl in this analysis.

    In conclusion, 5 studies directly compared outcomes between patients with and without OSA after intravenous benzodiazepine sedation in the context of anesthesia.209,213,215,216,219 However, only 2 studies209,213 were able to establish a higher risk for respiratory complications in patients with OSA (Oxford LOE: 3). A summary of evidence is provided in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A9, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373.

    2.7 α-2 Agonists
  • 2.7.1 Question: Are patients with OSA at increased risk for adverse events from the use of α-2 agonists?
  • 2.7.1 Recommendation: There is a lack of evidence to assess adverse effects of α-2 agonists in the OSA population.
  • Level of evidence: Low; Grade of recommendation: No recommendation

    Rationale.

    Dexmedetomidine and clonidine are centrally acting α-2 agonists with sedative, analgesic, and sympatholytic properties. Dexmedetomidine, in particular, has been suggested to cause minimal respiratory depression. Because OSA is associated with an increased risk of adverse postoperative pulmonary events,6 the potentially favorable respiratory profile and analgesic-sparing effects theoretically make α-2 agonists appealing for this population. When assessing the risk of adverse events with the use of α-2 agonists, no eligible studies compared patients with OSA to patients without OSA. The majority of studies focused on OSA or bariatric populations, comparing the use of α-2 agonists to either placebo or other medications. The body of literature is limited by a small total number of subjects, inconsistent results, lack of uniformity in outcomes, and low adverse event rates. Although many studies demonstrate statistical differences in hemodynamic parameters with α-2 agonists, the translation into clinically meaningful outcome differences is not supported at this time.

    Four studies123,124,220,221 compared the use of dexmedetomidine to propofol in DISE as summarized in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A10, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373 (propofol in DISE has also been discussed in Section 2.3). In a series by Capasso et al,123 patients receiving propofol had a significantly increased likelihood of complete tongue base obstruction versus partial or no obstruction compared to those receiving dexmedetomidine. The 2 other studies that examined aspects of airway obstruction did not demonstrate significant differences between the dexmedetomidine and comparison groups.220,221

    Three DISE studies measured intraprocedural respiratory and hemodynamic parameters. Two studies demonstrated a decrease in respiratory rate and lower SpO2 with propofol compared to dexmedetomidine.124,221 In the study by Cho et al,220 mean SpO2 of the dexmedetomidine-remifentanil and propofol groups did not differ; however, it was significantly lower in the propofol-remifentanil group.220 This study showed no hemodynamic differences, a finding shared by Kuyrukluyildiz et al.124 Conversely, Yoon et al221 observed similar mean arterial pressure (MAP) but lower mean heart rate (HR) with dexmedetomidine and no episodes of clinically significant bradycardia. Kuyrukluyildiz et al124 measured postprocedure outcomes, finding significantly lower MAP and HR with dexmedetomidine. Mean SpO2 and respiratory rate were higher with dexmedetomidine, although only 1 patient receiving propofol required additional oxygen supplementation.124

    These 4 studies were examined in a systematic review, which concluded that dexmedetomidine appeared to yield a more stable cardiopulmonary profile, while propofol offered a faster onset, a shorter half-life, and potentially a greater degree of airway obstruction.222 The authors emphasized that neither propofol nor dexmedetomidine has been validated in replicating the obstruction that occurs during sleep. The obstructive patterns could be due to drug effect rather than reflective of the natural sleep state. Consequently, additional investigation is necessary to ascertain the optimal sedative in DISE.

    Other Procedures.

    For studies involving procedures other than DISE, adverse events were characterized according to respiratory effects, hemodynamic effects, and recovery profile (Supplemental Digital Content, Table A11, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373).

    Two studies reported respiratory outcomes during sedation procedures. In a descriptive series of 20 patients at high risk of OSA, 13 required interventions for airway obstruction and 2 for desaturation during endoscopy with combined dexmedetomidine–propofol sedation.134 An RCT in upper respiratory procedures demonstrated that, compared to propofol target-controlled infusion, dexmedetomidine use resulted in lower desaturation incidence, higher SpO2 at most time points, and lower rates of airway obstruction.223

    Data are limited regarding respiratory effects of dexmedetomidine in the postoperative recovery period. A descriptive series of bariatric patients reported adequate saturations with supplemental oxygen without the need for CPAP.224 Studies with quantitative data suggest that intraoperative use of dexmedetomidine may not affect the respiratory rate in bariatric patients225 and when compared to placebo may have a better recovery profile in individuals undergoing uvuloplasty.93 In another group of patients receiving postoperative sedation after uvulopalatopharyngoplasty, the dexmedetomidine group experienced less severe and less frequent cough during extubation and less respiratory depression compared to the propofol group.226 Finally, in a retrospective review comparing patients undergoing airway reconstruction surgery who received dexmedetomidine versus those who did not, neither group required interventions for airway compromise.227

    Two studies examined the effect of clonidine on respiratory parameters and sleep in patients with OSA.228,229 In an RCT of 8 patients, clonidine compared to placebo suppressed the amount of time in REM sleep and decreased apnea duration during REM while not affecting overall AHI.228 Minimum SpO2 levels were higher in the clonidine group (86% ± 1.5% vs 84% ± 1.0%), reaching statistical but arguably not clinical significance. Pawlik et al229 performed an RCT in patients with OSA undergoing ear, nose, and throat surgery, with patients receiving either oral clonidine or placebo the night before and 2 hours before surgery. AHI in the night of surgery did not differ from baseline or between the 2 treatment groups. In both groups, the desaturation index decreased on the preoperative night, the day of the operation, and the postoperative night compared to their respective baseline measurements but did not differ between groups.

    The hemodynamic effects of α-2 agonists were assessed according to varied outcome measures, including vital sign measurements, categorical descriptors, and need for rescue medications. Intraoperatively, 3 studies demonstrated significantly lower MAPs with α-2 agonists,229–231 while 1 study showed no difference.232 Heart rate was significantly lower with dexmedetomidine in 3 studies,223,229,230 while no difference to controls was observed in 2 other studies.231,232 Chawla et al227 reported transient loading dose hypertension followed by “titratable, controlled hypotension, and bradycardia.” Three studies223,227,231 demonstrated less frequent use of rescue antihypertensives or β blockers among α-2 agonist groups intraoperatively; 1 study showed this postoperatively.229 Furthermore, 1 study demonstrated a greater incidence of need for phenylephrine support in patients receiving dexmedetomidine.231 In studies reporting the need for atropine and/or ephedrine, the overall incidence was low, and no differences were reported between treatment groups.223,229 Among studies that measured postoperative hemodynamics, there was inconsistency as to whether MAP was decreased with α-2 agonists229–231 or similar to that of the control patients.93,225 Xu et al226 also characterized outcomes according to categorical variables and found a decreased incidence of hypertension and tachycardia, as well as an increased incidence of bradycardia in the dexmedetomidine-treated group; the frequency of hypotension did not differ.

    The potential role of α-2 agonists in modulating the sympathetic response is of clinical interest. Four studies226,229,231,233 examined the effects of α-2 agonists on hemodynamics at points of stimulation, such as intubation, incision, and extubation. Only 1 study compared the measurements of each group to their respective baseline values,226 while all compared the measurements between treatment groups. Blood pressure and HR in the α-2 agonist groups were either lower than or similar to their control groups. Another group observed less frequent spikes in MAP and HR in clonidine-treated patients, but this was not statistically significant.234

    The effects of α-2 agonists on recovery profile varied. Three studies demonstrated shorter time to extubation with α-2 agonists,226,230,234 1 showed no difference compared to control patients,231 and another showed increased time to extubation.93 One series described prolonged drowsiness with dexmedetomidine,134 while another study showed no difference in sedation score compared to control patients.93 End points related to postoperative nausea/vomiting were examined in 1 observational study225 and 3 RCTs.93,226,231

    In summary, the literature on the differential effect of α-2-agonists in patients with and without OSA is limited and results are nonuniform (Oxford LOE: 2–4). While a trend in statistical outcomes for some cardiorespiratory parameters may be observed, the clinical impact of these findings remains unknown.

    3. ANESTHESIA TECHNIQUE
  • 3.1 Question: Should regional anesthesia be preferred over general anesthesia in patients with OSA?
  • 3.1 Recommendation: When applicable, regional anesthesia is preferable over general anesthesia in patients with OSA.
  • Level of evidence: Moderate; Grade of recommendation: Strong

    Rationale

    A wide range of literature and earlier guidelines have favored the use of regional anesthesia techniques and multimodal analgesic approaches among patients with OSA despite little scientific evidence to support this practice.8,9 To address this matter, a systematic literature search was performed to summarize evidence on preferable anesthesia techniques in patients with OSA.

    Anesthesia Technique as a Modifier of Postoperative Outcome.

    With regard to comparative effectiveness between general and regional anesthesia specifically in patients with OSA, 6 observational studies were identified.61,235–239 A summary of evidence is provided in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A12, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373. Overall, studies indicated that the utilization of regional as opposed to general anesthesia would improve postoperative outcome.79,235–239 The largest population-based analysis included >30,000 patients with OSA from >400 US hospitals undergoing joint arthroplasty procedures.235 Adjusted risk of numerous major complications was significantly lower in patients with OSA who received neuraxial anesthesia versus general anesthesia. Furthermore, the addition of neuraxial to general anesthesia versus the use of general anesthesia alone was associated with improved outcome profiles. Additionally, the utilization of peripheral nerve blocks was associated with decreased odds for mechanical ventilation, critical care admissions, and prolonged hospital length of stay.235

    Subsequent studies236,239 confirmed the previous findings, while 1 suggested benefits with regard to mortality.239 Notably, in a prospective analysis investigating drivers of postoperative worsening of sleep-disordered breathing, Chung et al79 demonstrated that the utilization of general anesthesia was associated with an increased central apnea index postoperatively, while 72-hour total opioid dose was a driver of increased AHI. This finding suggests that the residual effects of general anesthesia may affect postoperative sleep architecture and sleep-disordered breathing in OSA.

    Given the necessity of airway manipulation under general anesthesia, other challenges inherent to OSA should be considered as well. The higher risk for a difficult airway in OSA has been discussed in Section 1. However, challenges with regard to airway complications in patients with OSA appear to also extend to the time for emergence from anesthesia and the immediate postoperative period, potentially leading to the requirement of emergent airway interventions.240,241 Thus, consistent with the underlying pathogenesis of OSA, perioperative complications in these patients may be driven by upper airway obstruction.240,241 Recently, Ramachandran et al61 showed that OSA was an independent predictor of respiratory complications and unplanned intubation after general anesthesia.

    Another potential hazard associated with the use of general anesthesia is the frequent need for neuromuscular blockade. As described in Section 2.1, studies suggest that patients with OSA who received NMDA may be at increased risk for effects of residual neuromuscular blockade and respiratory failure compared to the general population.67,242 Therefore, the use of regional anesthesia may offer advantages by virtue of avoiding upper airway effects, although the potential for the need to convert to general anesthesia should always be considered.

    Neural stimulation appears to be essential in initiating the surgical catabolic stress response,243,244 and regional anesthesia utilizing local anesthetics seems to reliably block this effect.245 Given the evidence suggesting potential OSA-related alterations in pain perception and opioid potency due to intermittent hypoxia and sleep fragmentation, as discussed in Section 2.2, regional anesthesia confers benefits by providing effective pain relief while reducing opioid requirement,246,247 a key factor to consider in patients with OSA.112,248

    In summary, despite the lack of high-quality RCTs, some evidence suggests a higher risk of complications with general compared to regional anesthesia in patients with OSA (Oxford LOE 2–4). Thus, regional anesthesia should be considered by anesthesiologists whenever feasible.

    RECOMMENDATIONS: EXECUTIVE SUMMARY
  • Patients with OSA should be considered at increased risk for difficult airway challenges compared to patients without OSA. This particularly applies to difficult intubation, difficult mask ventilation, or both. Data on the placement of supraglottic airway devices are scarce, but available evidence does not suggest a difference between patients with and without OSA. Adequate difficult airway management precautions should be taken in patients with OSA.
  • Anesthetic and analgesic drugs can interact with or impact consciousness, sleep, upper airway anatomy and physiology, arousal responses, muscle activation, and ventilatory drive, potentially increasing perioperative risk in patients with OSA.
  • In patients with OSA, the utilization of NMBA may confer an increased risk for the effects of residual neuromuscular blockade, postoperative respiratory failure, or hypoxemia. Residual neuromuscular blockade could be a driver of the higher incidence of respiratory complications in OSA. While neuromuscular blocking reversal agents can decrease postoperative residual paralysis and respiratory complications, current evidence does not favor any specific neuromuscular reversal agent with regard to outcome.
  • Given the respiratory depressant effects of opioids, patients with OSA may be at increased risk for respiratory complications from the use of these analgesic drugs. Furthermore, chronic intermittent hypoxia and habitual sleep fragmentation may increase pain perception and augment opioid potency in OSA. These factors should be considered when administering opioids to patients with OSA.
  • Patients with OSA receiving propofol for procedural sedation may be at increased risk for respiratory compromise and hypoxemic events. In the absence of certainty regarding dosing and scalar adjustments to concomitant use of other drugs and potential concurrent obesity, the utilization of propofol sedation in OSA requires a heightened level of vigilance as well as careful monitoring and titration to achieve desired effects.
  • There is a lack of evidence on residual effects and anesthesia recovery profiles of inhalational agents and intravenous propofol specifically for the population with OSA. However, evidence in patients with obesity, a population with a high prevalence of OSA, indicates a potential superiority of sevoflurane and desflurane compared to intravenous propofol with regard to emergence and recovery from anesthesia. Comparing sevoflurane and desflurane, the latter has been associated with improved anesthesia recovery in patients with obesity.
  • Evidence on the impact of ketamine specifically in OSA is largely lacking; however, adverse events such as psychiatric effects, sympathetic system activation, and hypersalivation, as usually observed in the general population during utilization of high doses, likely translate to OSA as well. Notably, however, emerging evidence indicates a potentially favorable impact of ketamine over other sedatives with regard to preservation of upper airway and ventilatory function.
  • Despite the scarcity of data on the comparative effectiveness of intravenous benzodiazepine sedation among patients with and without OSA, intravenous benzodiazepines are known to and are purposefully utilized to induce upper airway collapse for diagnostic purposes of OSA. Thus, the procedure of intravenous benzodiazepine sedation may be associated with airway compromise in OSA.
  • The potentially favorable respiratory profile and analgesic-sparing effects of α-2 agonists may render these drugs beneficial to the population with OSA. However, current literature on the effect of α-2 agonists in patients with OSA is limited and provides heterogeneous results. Thus, despite the detection of trends in statistical outcomes for some cardiorespiratory parameters, the clinical relevance of these findings remains unclear.
  • Evidence on the comparative effectiveness of general versus regional anesthesia in the context of OSA is sparse. Nevertheless, the limited evidence in patients with OSA indicates a higher risk of complications with general compared to regional anesthesia. When feasible, regional anesthesia may confer advantages such as avoidance of upper airway effects and neuromuscular blockade, effective pain management, reduced opioid consumption, and efficient suppression of the systemic stress response. These features may be of benefit to patients with OSA. Given these findings and in the absence of evidence suggesting a disadvantage of regional anesthesia, the utilization of these techniques should be considered preferable over general anesthesia whenever feasible. A summary of evidence is provided in Supplemental Digital Content, Table A9, http://links.lww.com/AA/C373.
  • ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    The SASM task force is divided into 9 groups addressing the questions surrounding (1) airway, (2) neuromuscular blocking agents, (3) opioids, (4) propofol, (5) inhalational agents, (6) benzodiazepines, (7) ketamine, (8) α-2 agonists, and (9) anesthesia technique. The leaders of the respective groups and its individual members were: (1) Difficult airway in OSA: Mahesh Nagappa (Leader), David T. Wong, Frances Chung, Satya Krishna Ramachandran; (2) NMBAs: Jean Wong (Leader), Frances Chung, Mandeep Singh; (3) Opioids: Crispiana Cozowicz (Leader), Anthony G. Doufas, Frances Chung, Stavros G. Memtsoudis; (4) Propofol: Mark H. Stein (Leader), Frances Chung; (5) Inhalational agents: Girish P. Joshi (Leader), Crispiana Cozowicz, Stavros G. Memtsoudis; (6) Ketamine: Meltem Yilmaz (Leader); (7) Benzodiazepines: Stavros G. Memtsoudis (Leader), Lukas Pichler, Crispiana Cozowicz; (8) α 2-agonists: Megan L. Krajewski (Leader), Satya Krishna Ramachandran, Crispiana Cozowicz; and (9) Anesthesia technique: Stavros G. Memtsoudis (Leader), Crispiana Cozowicz. We would like to express special thanks to the following participants in alphabetical order for their significant contribution in the systematic literature search and data analysis process: Marina Englesakis, Library and Information Services, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Rie Goto, Kim Barrett Memorial Library, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY; Bridget Jivanelli, Kim Barrett Memorial Library, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY; Eva E. Mörwald, MD, Department of Anesthesiology, Perioperative Medicine and Intensive Care Medicine, Paracelsus Medical University, Salzburg, Austria; Khawaja Rashid Hafeez, MBBS, FCPS, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Arvind Tuteja, MBBS, Toronto Western Hospital, University Health Network, University of Toronto, Toronto, Ontario, Canada; Vwaire Urhuru, MD, Department of Anesthesia, Critical Care, and Pain Management, Beth Israel Deaconess Medical Center, Boston, MA; Sarah M. Weinstein, BA, Department of Anesthesiology, Hospital for Special Surgery, New York, NY.

    DISCLOSURES

    Name: Stavros G. Memtsoudis, MD, PhD.

    Contribution: This author helped design the study, conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: S. G. Memtsoudis is a director on the boards of the American Society of Regional Anesthesia and Pain Medicine (ASRA) and the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine (SASM). He is a 1-time consultant for Sandoz Inc and the holder of US Patent Multicatheter Infusion System US-2017-0361063. He is the owner of SGM Consulting, LLC, and co-owner of FC Monmouth, LLC. None of these relations influenced the conduct of the present study.

    Name: Crispiana Cozowicz, MD.

    Contribution: This author helped design the study, conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Mahesh Nagappa, MD.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Jean Wong, MD, FRCPC.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: J. Wong has received research grants from Acacia Pharma.

    Name: Girish P. Joshi, MBBS, MD, FFARCSI.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: G. P. Joshi received an honorarium from Baxter Pharmaceuticals, Mallinckrodt Pharmaceuticals, Merck Pharmaceuticals, and Pacira Pharmaceuticals.

    Name: David T. Wong, MD, FRCPC.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Anthony G. Doufas, MD, PhD.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Meltem Yilmaz, MD.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: M. Yilmaz serves on the advisory board of VitaHEAT Medical.

    Name: Mark H. Stein, MD.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Megan L. Krajewski, MD.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Mandeep Singh, MBBS, MD, MSc, FRCPC.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Lukas Pichler, MD.

    Contribution: This author helped analyze the data and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: None.

    Name: Satya Krishna Ramachandran, MD.

    Contribution: This author helped conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: S. K. Ramachandran funded research from Merck, Sharp & Dohme, New Jersey.

    Name: Frances Chung, MBBS, FRCPC.

    Contribution: This author helped design the study, conduct the study, analyze the data, and write the manuscript.

    Conflicts of Interest: F. Chung received research grants from Ontario Ministry of Health and Long-Term Care Innovation Fund, University Health Network Foundation, ResMed Foundation, Acacia Pharma, and Medtronics Inc STOP-Bang tool: proprietary to University Health Network, royalties from Up-To-Date.

    This manuscript was handled by: David Hillman, MD.

    REFERENCES 1. Heinzer R, Vat S, Marques-Vidal P, et al. Prevalence of sleep-disordered breathing in the general population: the HypnoLaus study. Lancet Respir Med. 2015;3:310–318. 2. Peppard PE, Young T, Barnet JH, Palta M, Hagen EW, Hla KM. Increased prevalence of sleep-disordered breathing in adults. Am J Epidemiol. 2013;177:1006–1014. 3. Marin JM, Carrizo SJ, Vicente E, Agusti AG. Long-term cardiovascular outcomes in men with obstructive sleep apnoea-hypopnoea with or without treatment with continuous positive airway pressure: an observational study. Lancet. 2005;365:1046–1053. 4. Yaggi HK, Concato J, Kernan WN, Lichtman JH, Brass LM, Mohsenin V. Obstructive sleep apnea as a risk factor for stroke and death. N Engl J Med. 2005;353:2034–2041. 5. Memtsoudis S, Liu SS, Ma Y, et al. Perioperative pulmonary outcomes in patients with sleep apnea after noncardiac surgery. Anesth Analg. 2011;112:113–121. 6. Opperer M, Cozowicz C, Bugada D, et al. does obstructive sleep apnea influence perioperative outcome? A qualitative systematic review for the Society of Anesthesia and Sleep Medicine Task Force on Preoperative Preparation of Patients With Sleep-Disordered Breathing. Anesth Analg. 2016;122:1321–1334. 7. Chung F, Memtsoudis SG, Ramachandran SK, et al. Society of anesthesia and sleep medicine guidelines on preoperative screening and assessment of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Anesth Analg. 2016;123:452–473. 8. Gross JB, Bachenberg KL, Benumof JL, et al; American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Management. Practice guidelines for the perioperative management of patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Management of patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Anesthesiology. 2006;104:1081–1093. 9. Gross JB, Apfelbaum JL, Caplan RA, et al. Practice guidelines for the perioperative management of patients with obstructive sleep apnea: an updated report by the American Society of Anesthesiologists Task Force on Perioperative Management of Patients With Obstructive Sleep Apnea. Anesthesiology. 2014;120:268–286. 10. Joshi GP, Ankichetty SP, Gan TJ, Chung F. Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia consensus statement on preoperative selection of adult patients with obstructive sleep apnea scheduled for ambulatory surgery. Anesth Analg. 2012;115:1060–1068. 11. Meoli AL, Rosen CL, Kristo D, et al; Clinical Practice Review Committee; American Academy of Sleep Medicine. Upper airway management of the adult patient with obstructive sleep apnea in the perioperative period–avoiding complications. Sleep. 2003;26:1060–1065. 12. Seet E, Chung F. Management of sleep apnea in adults: functional algorithms for the perioperative period: continuing professional development. Can J Anaesth. 2010;57:849–864. 13. de Raaff CAL, Gorter-Stam MAW, de Vries N, et al. Perioperative management of obstructive sleep apnea in bariatric surgery: a consensus guideline. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2017;13:1095–1109. 14. Schumann R, Jones SB, Cooper B, et al. Update on best practice recommendations for anesthetic perioperative care and pain management in weight loss surgery, 2004-2007. Obesity (Silver Spring). 2009;17:889–894. 15. Eckert DJ, White DP, Jordan AS, Malhotra A, Wellman A. Defining phenotypic causes of obstructive sleep apnea: identification of novel therapeutic targets. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2013;188:996–1004. 16. Leape LL. Reporting of adverse events. N Engl J Med. 2002;347:1633–1638. 17. Innovation VH. Covidence systematic review software. Melbourne, Australia. 19. Schünemann HJ, Jaeschke R, Cook DJ, et al; ATS Documents Development and Implementation Committee. An official ATS statement: grading the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations in ATS guidelines and recommendations. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2006;174:605–614. 20. Guyatt GH, Oxman AD, Vist GE, et al; GRADE Working Group. GRADE: an emerging consensus on rating quality of evidence and strength of recommendations. BMJ. 2008;336:924–926. 21. Balshem H, Helfand M, Schünemann HJ, et al. GRADE guidelines: 3. Rating the quality of evidence. J Clin Epidemiol. 2011;64:401–406. 22. Neumann I, Santesso N, Akl EA, et al. A guide for health professionals to interpret and use recommendations in guidelines developed with the GRADE approach. J Clin Epidemiol. 2016;72:45–55. 23. Andrews J, Guyatt G, Oxman AD, et al. GRADE guidelines: 14. Going from evidence to recommendations: the significance and presentation of recommendations. J Clin Epidemiol. 2013;66:719–725. 24. Hiremath AS, Hillman DR, James AL, Noffsinger WJ, Platt PR, Singer SL. Relationship between difficult tracheal intubation and obstructive sleep apnoea. Br J Anaesth. 1998;80:606–611. 25. Siyam MA, Benhamou D. Difficult endotracheal intubation in patients with sleep apnea syndrome. Anesth Analg. 2002;95:1098–1102. 26. Brodsky JB, Lemmens HJ, Brock-Utne JG, Vierra M, Saidman LJ. Morbid obesity and tracheal intubation. Anesth Analg. 2002;94:732–736. 27. Sabers C, Plevak DJ, Schroeder DR, Warner DO. The diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnea as a risk factor for unanticipated admissions in outpatient surgery. Anesth Analg. 2003;96:1328–1335. 28. Kheterpal S, Han R, Tremper KK, et al. Incidence and predictors of difficult and impossible mask ventilation. Anesthesiology. 2006;105:885–891. 29. Chung F, Yegneswaran B, Herrera F, Shenderey A, Shapiro CM. Patients with difficult intubation may need referral to sleep clinics. Anesth Analg. 2008;107:915–920. 30. Kheterpal S, Martin L, Shanks AM, Tremper KK. Prediction and outcomes of impossible mask ventilation: a review of 50,000 anesthetics. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:891–897. 31. Shah PN, Sundaram V. Incidence and predictors of difficult mask ventilation and intubation. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2012;28:451–455. 32. Toshniwal G, McKelvey GM, Wang H. STOP-Bang and prediction of difficult airway in obese patients. J Clin Anesth. 2014;26:360–367. 33. Acar HV, Yarkan Uysal H, Kaya A, Ceyhan A, Dikmen B. Does the STOP-Bang, an obstructive sleep apnea screening tool, predict difficult intubation? Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2014;18:1869–1874. 34. Ramachandran SK, Mathis MR, Tremper KK, Shanks AM, Kheterpal S. Predictors and clinical outcomes from failed Laryngeal Mask Airway Unique™: a study of 15,795 patients. Anesthesiology. 2012;116:1217–1226. 35. Kim JA, Lee JJ. Preoperative predictors of difficult intubation in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Can J Anaesth. 2006;53:393–397. 36. Cattano D, Killoran P, Cai C, Katsiampoura AD, Corso RM, Hagberg CA. Difficult mask ventilation in general surgical population: observation of risk factors and predictors. F1000Res. 2014;3:1–9. 37. Kheterpal S, Healy D, Aziz MF, et al; Multicenter Perioperative Outcomes Group (MPOG) Perioperative Clinical Research Committee. Incidence, predictors, and outcome of difficult mask ventilation combined with difficult laryngoscopy: a report from the multicenter perioperative outcomes group. Anesthesiology. 2013;119:1360–1369. 38. Gokay P, Tastan S, Orhan ME. Is there a difference between the STOP-BANG and the Berlin Obstructive Sleep Apnoea Syndrome questionnaires for determining respiratory complications during the perioperative period? J Clin Nurs. 2016;25:1238–1252. 39. Corso RM, Petrini F, Buccioli M, et al. Clinical utility of preoperative screening with STOP-Bang questionnaire in elective surgery. Minerva Anestesiol. 2014;80:877–884. 40. Aceto P, Perilli V, Modesti C, Ciocchetti P, Vitale F, Sollazzi L. Airway management in obese patients. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2013;9:809–815. 41. Benumof JL. Obstructive sleep apnea in the adult obese patient: implications for airway management. Anesthesiol Clin North America. 2002;20:789–811. 42. Biro P, Bloch KE. Case reports patient with obstructive sleep and difficult airway access. 1995;180:417–421. 43. Corso RM, Cattano D, Buccioli M, Carretta E, Maitan S. Post analysis simulated correlation of the El-Ganzouri airway difficulty score with difficult airway. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2016;66:298–303. 44. Hukins C. Mallampati class is not useful in the clinical assessment of sleep clinic patients. J Clin Sleep Med. 2010;6:545–549. 45. Kim MK, Park SW, Lee JW. Randomized comparison of the Pentax AirWay Scope and Macintosh laryngoscope for tracheal intubation in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea. Br J Anaesth. 2013;111:662–666. 46. Neligan PJ, Porter S, Max B, Malhotra G, Greenblatt EP, Ochroch EA. Obstructive sleep apnea is not a risk factor for difficult intubation in morbidly obese patients. Anesth Analg. 2009;109:1182–1186. 47. Cattano D, Katsiampoura A, Corso RM, Killoran P, Cai C, Hagberg CA. Predictive factors for difficult mask ventilation in the obese surgical population. F1000Research. 2014:1–11. 48. Nagappa M, Liao P, Wong J, et al. Validation of the STOP-Bang Questionnaire as a screening tool for obstructive sleep apnea among different populations: a systematic review and meta-analysis. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0143697. 49. Fouladpour N, Jesudoss R, Bolden N, Shaman Z, Auckley D. Perioperative complications in obstructive sleep apnea patients undergoing surgery: a review of the legal literature. Anesth Analg. 2016;122:145–151. 50. Kaw R, Chung F, Pasupuleti V, Mehta J, Gay PC, Hernandez AV. Meta-analysis of the association between obstructive sleep apnoea and postoperative outcome. Br J Anaesth. 2012;109:897–906. 51. Hai F, Porhomayon J, Vermont L, Frydrych L, Jaoude P, El-Solh AA. Postoperative complications in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a meta-analysis. J Clin Anesth. 2014;26:591–600. 52. Ankichetty S, Wong J, Chung F. A systematic review of the effects of sedatives and anesthetics in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2011;27:447–458. 53. Hillman DR, Chung F. Anaesthetic management of sleep-disordered breathing in adults. Respirology. 2017;22:230–239. 54. McNicholas WT, Ryan S. Obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome: translating science to clinical practice. Respirology. 2006;11:136–144. 55. Ciscar MA, Juan G, Martínez V, et al. Magnetic resonance imaging of the pharynx in OSA patients and healthy subjects. Eur Respir J. 2001;17:79–86. 56. Ehsan Z, Mahmoud M, Shott SR, Amin RS, Ishman SL. The effects of anesthesia and opioids on the upper airway: a systematic review. Laryngoscope. 2016;126:270–284. 57. Murphy GS, Brull SJ. Residual neuromuscular block: lessons unlearned. Part I: definitions, incidence, and adverse physiologic effects of residual neuromuscular block. Anesth Analg. 2010;111:120–128. 58. Murphy GS, Szokol JW, Marymont JH, Greenberg SB, Avram MJ, Vender JS. Residual neuromuscular blockade and critical respiratory events in the postanesthesia care unit. Anesth Analg. 2008;107:130–137. 59. Bulka CM, Terekhov MA, Martin BJ, Dmochowski RR, Hayes RM, Ehrenfeld JM. Nondepolarizing neuromuscular blocking agents, reversal, and risk of postoperative pneumonia. Anesthesiology. 2016;125:647–655. 60. Thevathasan T, Shih SL, Safavi KC, et al. Association between intraoperative non-depolarising neuromuscular blocking agent dose and 30-day readmission after abdominal surgery. Br J Anaesth. 2017;119:595–605. 61. Ramachandran SK, Pandit J, Devine S, Thompson A, Shanks A. Postoperative respiratory complications in patients at risk for obstructive sleep apnea: a single-institution cohort study. Anesth Analg. 2017;125:272–279. 62. Fuchs-Buder T, Nemes R, Schmartz D. Residual neuromuscular blockade: management and impact on postoperative pulmonary outcome. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2016;29:662–667. 63. Mokhlesi B, Hovda MD, Vekhter B, Arora VM, Chung F, Meltzer DO. Sleep-disordered breathing and postoperative outcomes after bariatric surgery: analysis of the nationwide inpatient sample. Obes Surg. 2013;23:1842–1851. 64. Memtsoudis SG, Stundner O, Rasul R, et al. The impact of sleep apnea on postoperative utilization of resources and adverse outcomes. Anesth Analg. 2014;118:407–418. 65. Sudré EC, de Batista PR, Castiglia YM. Longer immediate recovery time after anesthesia increases risk of respiratory complications after laparotomy for bariatric surgery: a randomized clinical trial and a cohort study. Obes Surg. 2015;25:2205–2212. 66. Ahmad S, Nagle A, McCarthy RJ, Fitzgerald PC, Sullivan JT, Prystowsky J. Postoperative hypoxemia in morbidly obese patients with and without obstructive sleep apnea undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery. Anesth Analg. 2008;107:138–143. 67. Pereira H, Xará D, Mendonça J, Santos A, Abelha FJ. Patients with a high risk for obstructive sleep apnea syndrome: postoperative respiratory complications. Rev Port Pneumol. 2013;19:144–151. 68. Ünal DY, Baran İ, Mutlu M, Ural G, Akkaya T, Özlü O. Comparison of sugammadex versus neostigmine costs and respiratory complications in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea. Turk J Anaesthesiol Reanim. 2015;43:387–395. 69. Llauradó S, Sabaté A, Ferreres E, Camprubí I, Cabrera A. Postoperative respiratory outcomes in laparoscopic bariatric surgery: comparison of a prospective group of patients whose neuromuscular blockade was reverted with sugammadex and a historical one reverted with neostigmine. Rev Esp Anestesiol Reanim. 2014;61:565–570. 70. Dowidar AE-RM, Basuni AS, EL-kalla RS, Eid GM. Influence of severity of obstructive sleep apnea on postoperative pulmonary complications in patients undergoing gastroplasty. Tanta Med J. 2016;44:58. 71. Liao P, Yegneswaran B, Vairavanathan S, Zilberman P, Chung F. Postoperative complications in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a retrospective matched cohort study. Can J Anaesth. 2009;56:819–828. 72. Eikermann M, Vogt FM, Herbstreit F, et al. The predisposition to inspiratory upper airway collapse during partial neuromuscular blockade. Am J Respir Crit Care Med. 2007;175:9–15. 73. Abrishami A, Ho J, Wong J, Yin L, Chung F. Sugammadex, a selective reversal medication for preventing postoperative residual neuromuscular blockade. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2009:Cd007362. 74. Abad-Gurumeta A, Ripollés-Melchor J, Casans-Francés R, et al; Evidence Anaesthesia Review Group. A systematic review of sugammadex vs neostigmine for reversal of neuromuscular blockade. Anaesthesia. 2015;70:1441–1452. 75. Hristovska AM, Duch P, Allingstrup M, Afshari A. Efficacy and safety of sugammadex versus neostigmine in reversing neuromuscular blockade in adults. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2017;8:CD012763. 76. Doufas A. Obstructive sleep apnea, pain, and opioid analgesia in the postoperative patient. Curr Anesthesiol Rep. 2014;4:1–9. 77. Blake DW, Chia PH, Donnan G, Williams DL. Preoperative assessment for obstructive sleep apnoea and the prediction of postoperative respiratory obstruction and hypoxaemia. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2008;36:379–384. 78. Bolden N, Smith CE, Auckley D, Makarski J, Avula R. Perioperative complications during use of an obstructive sleep apnea protocol following surgery and anesthesia. Anesth Analg. 2007;105:1869–1870. 79. Chung F, Liao P, Elsaid H, Shapiro CM, Kang W. Factors associated with postoperative exacerbation of sleep-disordered breathing. Anesthesiology. 2014;120:299–311. 80. Esclamado RM, Glenn MG, McCulloch TM, Cummings CW. Perioperative complications and risk factors in the surgical treatment of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Laryngoscope. 1989;99:1125–1129. 81. Etches RC. Respiratory depression associated with patient-controlled analgesia: a review of eight cases. Can J Anaesth. 1994;41:125–132. 82. Lee LA, Caplan RA, Stephens LS, et al. Postoperative opioid-induced respiratory depression: a closed claims analysis. Anesthesiology. 2015;122:659–665. 83. Melamed R, Boland LL, Normington JP, et al. Postoperative respiratory failure necessitating transfer to the intensive care unit in orthopedic surgery patients: risk factors, costs, and outcomes. Perioper Med (Lond). 2016;5:19. 84. Ramachandran SK, Haider N, Saran KA, et al. Life-threatening critical respiratory events: a retrospective study of postoperative patients found unresponsive during analgesic therapy. J Clin Anesth. 2011;23:207–213. 85. Weingarten TN, Hawkins NM, Beam WB, et al. Factors associated with prolonged anesthesia recovery following laparoscopic bariatric surgery: a retrospective analysis. Obes Surg. 2015;25:1024–1030. 86. Weingarten TN, Herasevich V, McGlinch MC, et al. Predictors of delayed postoperative respiratory depression assessed from naloxone administration. Anesth Analg. 2015;121:422–429. 87. Weingarten TN, Chong EY, Schroeder DR, Sprung J. Predictors and outcomes following naloxone administration during phase I anesthesia recovery. J Anesth. 2016;30:116–122. 88. Mörwald EE, Olson A, Cozowicz C, Poeran J, Mazumdar M, Memtsoudis SG. Association of opioid prescription and perioperative complications in obstructive sleep apnea patients undergoing total joint arthroplasties. Sleep Breath. 2018;22:115–121. 89. Subramani Y, Nagappa M, Wong J, Patra J, Chung F. Death or near-death in patients with obstructive sleep apnoea: a compendium of case reports of critical complications. Br J Anaesth. 2017;119:885–899. 90. Madani M. Effectiveness of Stadol NS (butorphanol tartrate) with ibuprofen in the treatment of pain after laser-assisted uvulopalatopharyngoplasty. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2000;58:27–31. 91. Wang D, Somogyi AA, Yee BJ, et al. The effects of a single mild dose of morphine on chemoreflexes and breathing in obstructive sleep apnea. Respir Physiol Neurobiol. 2013;185:526–532. 92. Cozowicz C, Olson A, Poeran J, et al. Opioid prescription levels and postoperative outcomes in orthopedic surgery. Pain. 2017;158:2422–2430. 93. Abdelmageed WM, Elquesny KM, Shabana RI, Abushama HM, Nassar AM. Analgesic properties of a dexmedetomidine infusion after uvulopalatopharyngoplasty in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Saudi J Anaesth. 2011;5:150–156. 94. Bernards CM, Knowlton SL, Schmidt DF, et al. Respiratory and sleep effects of remifentanil in volunteers with moderate obstructive sleep apnea. Anesthesiology. 2009;110:41–49. 95. Blake DW, Yew CY, Donnan GB, Williams DL. Postoperative analgesia and respiratory events in patients with symptoms of obstructive sleep apnoea. Anaesth Intensive Care. 2009;37:720–725. 96. Huang HC, Lee LA, Fang TJ, Li HY, Lo CC, Wu JH. Transnasal butorphanol for pain relief after uvulopalatopharyngoplasty: a hospital-based, randomized study. Chang Gung Med J. 2009;32:390–399. 97. Lee LA, Wang PC, Chen NH, et al. Alleviation of wound pain after surgeries for obstructive sleep apnea. Laryngoscope. 2007;117:1689–1694. 98. Yang L, Sun DF, Wu Y, Han J, Liu RC, Wang LJ. Intranasal administration of butorphanol benefits old patients undergoing H-uvulopalatopharyngoplasty: a randomized trial. BMC Anesthesiol. 2015;15:20. 99. Orlov D, Ankichetty S, Chung F, Brull R. Cardiorespiratory complications of neuraxial opioids in patients with obstructive sleep apnea: a systematic review. J Clin Anesth. 2013;25:591–599. 100. Ladha KS, Kato R, Tsen LC, Bateman BT, Okutomi T. A prospective study of post-cesarean delivery hypoxia after spinal anesthesia with intrathecal morphine 150μg. Int J Obstet Anesth. 2017;32:48–53. 101. Thompson MJ, Clinger BN, Simonds RM, Hochheimer CJ, Lahaye LA, Golladay GJ. Probability of undiagnosed obstructive sleep apnea does not correlate with adverse pulmonary events nor length of stay in hip and knee arthroplasty using intrathecal opioid. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32:2676–2679. 102. Zotou A, Siampalioti A, Tagari P, Paridis L, Kalfarentzos F, Filos KS. Does epidural morphine loading in addition to thoracic epidural analgesia benefit the postoperative management of morbidly obese patients undergoing open bariatric surgery? A pilot study. Obes Surg. 2014;24:2099–2108. 103. Roehrs T, Hyde M, Blaisdell B, Greenwald M, Roth T. Sleep loss and REM sleep loss are hyperalgesic. Sleep. 2006;29:145–151. 104. Smith MT, Edwards RR, McCann UD, Haythornthwaite JA. The effects of sleep deprivation on pain inhibition and spontaneous pain in women. Sleep. 2007;30:494–505. 105. Roehrs TA, Harris E, Randall S, Roth T. Pain sensitivity and recovery from mild chronic sleep loss. Sleep. 2012;35:1667–1672. 106. Haack M, Scott-Sutherland J, Santangelo G, Simpson NS, Sethna N, Mullington JM. Pain sensitivity and modulation in primary insomnia. Eur J Pain. 2012;16:522–533. 107. Luyster FS, Buysse DJ, Strollo PJ Jr.. Comorbid insomnia and obstructive sleep apnea: challenges for clinical practice and research. J Clin Sleep Med. 2010;6:196–204. 108. Finan PH, Goodin BR, Smith MT. The association of sleep and pain: an update and a path forward. J Pain. 2013;14:1539–1552. 109. Smith MT, Wickwire EM, Grace EG, et al. Sleep disorders and their association with laboratory pain sensitivity in temporomandibular joint disorder. Sleep. 2009;32:779–790. 110. Khalid I, Roehrs TA, Hudgel DW, Roth T. Continuous positive airway pressure in severe obstructive sleep apnea reduces pain sensitivity. Sleep. 2011;34:1687–1691. 111. Doufas AG, Tian L, Padrez KA, et al. Experimental pain and opioid analgesia in volunteers at high risk for obstructive sleep apnea. PLoS One. 2013;8:e54807. 112. Doufas AG, Tian L, Davies MF, Warby SC. Nocturnal intermittent hypoxia is independently associated with pain in subjects suffering from sleep-disordered breathing. Anesthesiology. 2013;119:1149–1162. 113. Brown KA, Laferrière A, Moss IR. Recurrent hypoxemia in young children with obstructive sleep apnea is associated with reduced opioid requirement for analgesia. Anesthesiology. 2004;100:806–810. 114. Brown KA, Laferrière A, Lakheeram I, Moss IR. Recurrent hypoxemia in children is associated with increased analgesic sensitivity to opiates. Anesthesiology. 2006;105:665–669. 115. Sadhasivam S, Chidambaran V, Ngamprasertwong P, et al. Race and unequal burden of perioperative pain and opioid related adverse effects in children. Pediatrics. 2012;129:832–838. 116. Sanders JC, King MA, Mitchell RB, Kelly JP. Perioperative complications of adenotonsillectomy in children with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Anesth Analg. 2006;103:1115–1121. 117. Turan A, You J, Egan C, et al. Chronic intermittent hypoxia is independently associated with reduced postoperative opioid consumption in bariatric patients suffering from sleep-disordered breathing. PLoS One. 2015;10:e0127809. 118. Chung F, Liao P, Yegneswaran B, Shapiro CM, Kang W. Postoperative changes in sleep-disordered breathing and sleep architecture in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Anesthesiology. 2014;120:287–298. 119. Vanderveken OM, Maurer JT, Hohenhorst W, et al. Evaluation of drug-induced sleep endoscopy as a patient selection tool for implanted upper airway stimulation for obstructive sleep apnea. J Clin Sleep Med. 2013;9:433–438. 120. De Vito A, Agnoletti V, Berrettini S, et al. Drug-induced sleep endoscopy: conventional versus target controlled infusion techniques: a randomized controlled study. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2011;268:457–462. 121. Rabelo FA, Küpper DS, Sander HH, Fernandes RM, Valera FC. Polysomnographic evaluation of propofol-induced sleep in patients with respiratory sleep disorders and controls. Laryngoscope. 2013;123:2300–2305. 122. Dotan Y, Pillar G, Tov N, et al. Dissociation of electromyogram and mechanical response in sleep apnoea during propofol anaesthesia. Eur Respir J. 2013;41:74–84. 123. Capasso R, Rosa T, Tsou DY, et al. Variable findings for drug-induced sleep endoscopy in obstructive sleep apnea with propofol versus dexmedetomidine. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2016;154:765–770. 124. Kuyrukluyildiz U, Binici O, Onk D, et al. Comparison of dexmedetomidine and propofol used for drug-induced sleep endoscopy in patients with obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Int J Clin Exp Med. 2015;8:5691–5698. 125. Blumen M, Bequignon E, Chabolle F. Drug-induced sleep endoscopy: a new gold standard for evaluating OSAS? Part II: results. Eur Ann Otorhinolaryngol Head Neck Dis. 2017;134:109–115. 126. De Vito A, Carrasco Llatas M, Vanni A, et al. European position paper on drug-induced sedation endoscopy (DISE). Sleep Breath. 2014;18:453–465. 127. Cortínez LI, Anderson BJ, Penna A, et al. Influence of obesity on propofol pharmacokinetics: derivation of a pharmacokinetic model. Br J Anaesth. 2010;105:448–456. 128. Servin F, Farinotti R, Haberer JP, Desmonts JM. Propofol infusion for maintenance of anesthesia in morbidly obese patients receiving nitrous oxide: a clinical and pharmacokinetic study. Anesthesiology. 1993;78:657–665. 129. La Colla L, Albertin A, La Colla G, et al. No adjustment vs adjustment formula as input weight for propofol target-controlled infusion in morbidly obese patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26:362–369. 130. Dong D, Peng X, Liu J, Qian H, Li J, Wu B. Morbid obesity alters both pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics of propofol: dosing recommendation for anesthesia induction. Drug Metab Dispos. 2016;44:1579–1583. 131. Short TG, Chui PT. Propofol and midazolam act synergistically in combination. Br J Anaesth. 1991;67:539–545. 132. Thomas MC, Jennett-Reznek AM, Patanwala AE. Combination of ketamine and propofol versus either agent alone for procedural sedation in the emergency department. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2011;68:2248–2256. 133. Bojak I, Day HC, Liley DT. Ketamine, propofol, and the EEG: a neural field analysis of HCN1-mediated interactions. Front Comput Neurosci. 2013;7:22. 134. Hannallah M, Rasmussen M, Carroll J, Charabaty A, Palese C, Haddad N. Evaluation of dexmedetomidine/propofol anesthesia during upper gastrointestinal endoscopy in patients with high probability of having obstructive sleep apnea. Anaesth Pain Intensive Care. 2013;173. 135. Vuyk J. Pharmacokinetic and pharmacodynamic interactions between opioids and propofol. J Clin Anesth. 1997;9:23S–26S. 136. Sneyd JR, Rigby-Jones AE. New drugs and technologies, intravenous anaesthesia is on the move (again). Br J Anaesth. 2010;105:246–254. 137. Colao J, Rodriguez-Correa D. Rapidly metabolized anesthetics: novel alternative agents for procedural sedation. J Anesth Clin Res. 2016;7:11. 138. Mehta PP, Kochhar G, Kalra S, et al. Can a validated sleep apnea scoring system predict cardiopulmonary events using propofol sedation for routine EGD or colonoscopy? A prospective cohort study. Gastrointest Endosc. 2014;79:436–444. 139. Coté GA, Hovis RM, Ansstas MA, et al. Incidence of sedation-related complications with propofol use during advanced endoscopic procedures. Clin Gastroenterol Hepatol. 2010;8:137–142. 140. Friedrich-Rust M, Welte M, Welte C, et al. Capnographic monitoring of propofol-based sedation during colonoscopy. Endoscopy. 2014;46:236–244. 141. Nagels AJ, Bridgman JB, Bell SE, Chrisp DJ. Propofol-remifentanil TCI sedation for oral surgery. N Z Dent J. 2014;110:85–89. 142. Mador MJ, Abo Khamis M, Nag N, Mreyoud A, Jallu S, Mehboob S. Does sleep apnea increase the risk of cardiorespiratory complications during endoscopy procedures? Sleep Breath. 2011;15:393–401. 143. McVay T, Fang JC, Taylor L, et al. Safety analysis of bariatric patients undergoing outpatient upper endoscopy with non-anesthesia administered propofol sedation. Obes Surg. 2017;27:1501–1507. 144. Deitch K, Miner J, Chudnofsky CR, Dominici P, Latta D. Does end tidal CO2 monitoring during emergency department procedural sedation and analgesia with propofol decrease the incidence of hypoxic events? A randomized, controlled trial. Ann Emerg Med. 2010;55:258–264. 145. Gupta A, Stierer T, Zuckerman R, Sakima N, Parker SD, Fleisher LA. Comparison of recovery profile after ambulatory anesthesia with propofol, isoflurane, sevoflurane and desflurane: a systematic review. Anesth Analg. 2004;98:632–641. 146. Benumof JL. Obesity, sleep apnea, the airway and anesthesia. Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2004;17:21–30. 147. Peromaa-Haavisto P, Tuomilehto H, Kössi J, et al. Prevalence of obstructive sleep apnoea among patients admitted for bariatric surgery: a prospective multicentre trial. Obes Surg. 2016;26:1384–1390. 148. Duarte RL, Magalhães-da-Silveira FJ. Factors predictive of obstructive sleep apnea in patients undergoing pre-operative evaluation for bariatric surgery and referred to a sleep laboratory for polysomnography. J Bras Pneumol. 2015;41:440–448. 149. Adams JP, Murphy PG. Obesity in anaesthesia and intensive care. Br J Anaesth. 2000;85:91–108. 150. Rose DK, Cohen MM, Wigglesworth DF, DeBoer DP. Critical respiratory events in the postanesthesia care unit: patient, surgical, and anesthetic factors. Anesthesiology. 1994;81:410–418. 151. Fassbender P, Bürgener S, Haddad A, Silvanus MT, Peters J. Perioperative incidence of airway obstructive and hypoxemic events in patients with confirmed or suspected sleep apnea: a prospective, randomized pilot study comparing propofol/remifentanil and sevoflurane/remifentanil anesthesia. BMC Anesthesiol. 2018;18:14. 152. Salihoglu Z, Karaca S, Kose Y, Zengin K, Taskin M. Total intravenous anesthesia versus single breath technique and anesthesia maintenance with sevoflurane for bariatric operations. Obes Surg. 2001;11:496–501. 153. Siampalioti A, Karavias D, Zotou A, Kalfarentzos F, Filos K. Anesthesia management for the super obese: is sevoflurane superior to propofol as a sole anesthetic agent? A double-blind randomized controlled trial. Eur Rev Med Pharmacol Sci. 2015;19:2493–2500. 154. Hendolin H, Kansanen M, Koski E, Nuutinen J. Propofol-nitrous oxide versus thiopentone-isoflurane-nitrous oxide anaesthesia for uvulopalatopharyngoplasty in patients with sleep apnea. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 1994;38:694–698. 155. Pizzirani E, Pigato P, Favretti F, et al. The post-anaesthetic recovery in obesity surgery: comparison between two anaesthetic techniques. Obes Surg. 1992;2:91–94. 156. Tanaka P, Goodman S, Sommer BR, Maloney W, Huddleston J, Lemmens HJ. The effect of desflurane versus propofol anesthesia on postoperative delirium in elderly obese patients undergoing total knee replacement: a randomized, controlled, double-blinded clinical trial. J Clin Anesth. 2017;39:17–22. 157. Zoremba M, Dette F, Hunecke T, Eberhart L, Braunecker S, Wulf H. A comparison of desflurane versus propofol: the effects on early postoperative lung function in overweight patients. Anesth Analg. 2011;113:63–69. 158. Sollazzi L, Perilli V, Modesti C, et al. Volatile anesthesia in bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2001;11:623–626. 159. Torri G, Casati A, Albertin A, et al. Randomized comparison of isoflurane and sevoflurane for laparoscopic gastric banding in morbidly obese patients. J Clin Anesth. 2001;13:565–570. 160. Torri G, Casati A, Comotti L, Bignami E, Santorsola R, Scarioni M. Wash-in and wash-out curves of sevoflurane and isoflurane in morbidly obese patients. Minerva Anestesiol. 2002;68:523–527. 161. Arain SR, Barth CD, Shankar H, Ebert TJ. Choice of volatile anesthetic for the morbidly obese patient: sevoflurane or desflurane. J Clin Anesth. 2005;17:413–419. 162. De Baerdemaeker LE, Struys MM, Jacobs S, et al. Optimization of desflurane administration in morbidly obese patients: a comparison with sevoflurane using an “inhalation bolus” technique. Br J Anaesth. 2003;91:638–650. 163. De Baerdemaeker LE, Jacobs S, Den Blauwen NM, et al. Postoperative results after desflurane or sevoflurane combined with remifentanil in morbidly obese patients. Obes Surg. 2006;16:728–733. 164. Bilotta F, Doronzio A, Cuzzone V, Caramia R, Rosa G; PINOCCHIO Study Group. Early postoperative cognitive recovery and gas exchange patterns after balanced anesthesia with sevoflurane or desflurane in overweight and obese patients undergoing craniotomy: a prospective randomized trial. J Neurosurg Anesthesiol. 2009;21:207–213. 165. Ozdogan HK, Cetinkunar S, Karateke F, Cetinalp S, Celik M, Ozyazici S. The effects of sevoflurane and desflurane on the hemodynamics and respiratory functions in laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. J Clin Anesth. 2016;35:441–445. 166. Strum EM, Szenohradszki J, Kaufman WA, Anthone GJ, Manz IL, Lumb PD. Emergence and recovery characteristics of desflurane versus sevoflurane in morbidly obese adult surgical patients: a prospective, randomized study. Anesth Analg. 2004;99:1848–1853. 167. Vallejo MC, Sah N, Phelps AL, O’Donnell J, Romeo RC. Desflurane versus sevoflurane for laparoscopic gastroplasty in morbidly obese patients. J Clin Anesth. 2007;19:3–8. 168. La Colla L, Albertin A, La Colla G, Mangano A. Faster wash-out and recovery for desflurane vs sevoflurane in morbidly obese patients when no premedication is used. Br J Anaesth. 2007;99:353–358. 169. Kaur A, Jain AK, Sehgal R, Sood J. Hemodynamics and early recovery characteristics of desflurane versus sevoflurane in bariatric surgery. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013;29:36–40. 170. Juvin P, Vadam C, Malek L, Dupont H, Marmuse JP, Desmonts JM. Postoperative recovery after desflurane, propofol, or isoflurane anesthesia among morbidly obese patients: a prospective, randomized study. Anesth Analg. 2000;91:714–719. 171. Liu FL, Cherng YG, Chen SY, et al. Postoperative recovery after anesthesia in morbidly obese patients: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials. Can J Anaesth. 2015;62:907–917. 172. Ibraheim O, Alshaer A, Mazen K, et al. Effect of bispectral index (BIS) monitoring on postoperative recovery and sevoflurane consumption among morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic gastric banding. Middle East J Anaesthesiol. 2008;19:819–830. 173. Freo U, Carron M, Innocente F, Foletto M, Nitti D, Ori C. Effects of A-line Autoregression Index (AAI) monitoring on recovery after sevoflurane anesthesia for bariatric surgery. Obes Surg. 2011;21:850–857. 174. McKay RE, Malhotra A, Cakmakkaya OS, Hall KT, McKay WR, Apfel CC. Effect of increased body mass index and anaesthetic duration on recovery of protective airway reflexes after sevoflurane vs desflurane. Br J Anaesth. 2010;104:175–182. 175. Eger EI 2nd, Shafer S. The complexity of recovery from anesthesia. J Clin Anesth. 2005;17:411–412. 176. Ebert TJ, Robinson BJ, Uhrich TD, Mackenthun A, Pichotta PJ. Recovery from sevoflurane anesthesia: a comparison to isoflurane and propofol anesthesia. Anesthesiology. 1998;89:1524–1531. 177. Dexter F, Tinker JH. Comparisons between desflurane and isoflurane or propofol on time to following commands and time to discharge: a meta-analysis. Anesthesiology. 1995;83:77–82. 178. Macario A, Dexter F, Lubarsky D. Meta-analysis of trials comparing postoperative recovery after anesthesia with sevoflurane or desflurane. Am J Health Syst Pharm. 2005;62:63–68. 179. Dexter F, Bayman EO, Epstein RH. Statistical modeling of average and variability of time to extubation for meta-analysis comparing desflurane to sevoflurane. Anesth Analg. 2010;110:570–580. 180. Agoliati A, Dexter F, Lok J, et al. Meta-analysis of average and variability of time to extubation comparing isoflurane with desflurane or isoflurane with sevoflurane. Anesth Analg. 2010;110:1433–1439. 181. Yasuda N, Lockhart SH, Eger EI 2nd, et al. Comparison of kinetics of sevoflurane and isoflurane in humans. Anesth Analg. 1991;72:316–324. 182. Ogunnaike BO, Jones SB, Jones DB, Provost D, Whitten CW. Anesthetic considerations for bariatric surgery. Anesth Analg. 2002;95:1793–1805. 183. Eger EI 2nd.. Age, minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration, and minimum alveolar anesthetic concentration-awake. Anesth Analg. 2001;93:947–953. 184. Juvin P, Marmuse JP, Delerme S, et al. Post-operative course after conventional or laparoscopic gastroplasty in morbidly obese patients. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 1999;16:400–403. 185. Katznelson R, Naughton F, Friedman Z, et al. Increased lung clearance of isoflurane shortens emergence in obesity: a prospective randomized-controlled trial. Acta Anaesthesiol Scand. 2011;55:995–1001. 186. De Kock M, Lavand’homme P, Waterloos H. Balanced analgesia” in the perioperative period: is there a place for ketamine? Pain. 2001;92:373–380. 187. Bell RF, Dahl JB, Moore RA, Kalso E. Perioperative ketamine for acute postoperative pain. Cochrane Database Syst Rev. 2006:CD004603. 188. Laskowski K, Stirling A, McKay WP, Lim HJ. A systematic review of intravenous ketamine for postoperative analgesia. Can J Anaesth. 2011;58:911–923. 189. Luscri N, Tobias JD. Monitored anesthesia care with a combination of ketamine and dexmedetomidine during magnetic resonance imaging in three children with trisomy 21 and obstructive sleep apnea. Paediatr Anaesth. 2006;16:782–786. 190. Cheng X, Huang Y, Zhao Q, Gu E. Comparison of the effects of dexmedetomidine-ketamine and sevoflurane-sufentanil anesthesia in children with obstructive sleep apnea after uvulopalatopharyngoplasty: an observational study. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2014;30:31–35. 191. Strayer RJ, Nelson LS. Adverse events associated with ketamine for procedural sedation in adults. Am J Emerg Med. 2008;26:985–1028. 192. Melendez E, Bachur R. Serious adverse events during procedural sedation with ketamine. Pediatr Emerg Care. 2009;25:325–328. 193. Gorlin AW, Rosenfeld DM, Ramakrishna H. Intravenous sub-anesthetic ketamine for perioperative analgesia. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2016;32:160–167. 194. De Oliveira GS Jr, Fitzgerald PC, Hansen N, Ahmad S, McCarthy RJ. The effect of ketamine on hypoventilation during deep sedation with midazolam and propofol: a randomised, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2014;31:654–662. 195. Taylor DM, Bell A, Holdgate A, et al. Risk factors for sedation-related events during procedural sedation in the emergency department. Emerg Med Australas. 2011;23:466–473. 196. Drummond GB. Comparison of sedation with midazolam and ketamine: effects on airway muscle activity. Br J Anaesth. 1996;76:663–667. 197. Eikermann M, Grosse-Sundrup M, Zaremba S, et al. Ketamine activates breathing and abolishes the coupling between loss of consciousness and upper airway dilator muscle dysfunction. Anesthesiology. 2012;116:35–46. 198. Abdullah VJ, Lee DL, Ha SC, van Hasselt CA. Sleep endoscopy with midazolam: sedation level evaluation with bispectral analysis. Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2013;148:331–337. 199. Bachar G, Feinmesser R, Shpitzer T, Yaniv E, Nageris B, Eidelman L. Laryngeal and hypopharyngeal obstruction in sleep disordered breathing patients, evaluated by sleep endoscopy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2008;265:1397–1402. 200. Bachar G, Nageris B, Feinmesser R, et al. Novel grading system for quantifying upper-airway obstruction on sleep endoscopy. Lung. 2012;190:313–318. 201. Carrasco Llatas M, Agostini Porras G, Cuesta González MT, et al. Drug-induced sleep endoscopy: a two drug comparison and simultaneous polysomnography. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2014;271:181–187. 202. De Corsa E, Fiorita A, Rizzotto G, et al. The role of drug-induced sleep endoscopy in the diagnosis and management of obstructive sleep apnoea syndrome: our personal experience. Acta Otorhinolaryngol Ital. 2013;33:405–413. 203. Gregório MG, Jacomelli M, Figueiredo AC, Cahali MB, Pedreira WL Jr, Lorenzi Filho G. Evaluation of airway obstruction by nasopharyngoscopy: comparison of the Müller maneuver versus induced sleep. Braz J Otorhinolaryngol. 2007;73:618–622. 204. Hamans E, Meeus O, Boudewyns A, Saldien V, Verbraecken J, Van de Heyning P. Outcome of sleep endoscopy in obstructive sleep apnoea: the Antwerp experience. B-ENT. 2010;6:97–103. 205. Hessel NS, de Vries N. Diagnostic work-up of socially unacceptable snoring: II. Sleep endoscopy. Eur Arch Otorhinolaryngol. 2002;259:158–161. 206. Iwanaga K, Hasegawa K, Shibata N, et al. Endoscopic examination of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome patients during drug-induced sleep. Acta Oto laryngol Suppl. 2003;550:36–40. 207. Koo SK, Choi JW, Myung NS, Lee HJ, Kim YJ, Kim YJ. Analysis of obstruction site in obstructive sleep apnea syndrome patients by drug induced sleep endoscopy. Am J Otolaryngol. 2013;34:626–630. 208. Ravesloot MJ, de Vries N. One hundred consecutive patients undergoing drug-induced sleep endoscopy: results and evaluation. Laryngoscope. 2011;121:2710–2716. 209. Sadaoka T, Kakitsuba N, Fujiwara Y, Kanai R, Takahashi H. The value of sleep nasendoscopy in the evaluation of patients with suspected sleep-related breathing disorders. Clin Otolaryngol Allied Sci. 1996;21:485–489. 210. Vroegop AV, Vanderveken OM, Boudewyns AN, et al. Drug-induced sleep endoscopy in sleep-disordered breathing: report on 1,249 cases. Laryngoscope. 2014;124:797–802. 211. Choi JK, Hur YK, Lee JM, Clark GT. Effects of mandibular advancement on upper airway dimension and collapsibility in patients with obstructive sleep apnea using dynamic upper airway imaging during sleep. Oral Surg Oral Med Oral Pathol Oral Radiol Endod. 2010;109:712–719. 212. Hillarp B, Nylander G, Rosén I, Wickström O. Videoradiography of patients with habitual snoring and/or sleep apnea: technical description and presentation of videoradiographic results during sleep concerning occurrence of apnea, type of apnea, and site of obstruction. Acta Radiol. 1996;37:307–314. 213. Lee CH, Mo JH, Kim BJ, et al. Evaluation of soft palate changes using sleep videofluoroscopy in patients with obstructive sleep apnea. Arch Otolaryngol Head Neck Surg. 2009;135:168–172. 214. Lee CH, Hong SL, Rhee CS, Kim SW, Kim JW. Analysis of upper airway obstruction by sleep videofluoroscopy in obstructive sleep apnea: a large population-based study. Laryngoscope. 2012;122:237–241. 215. Adler DG, Kawa C, Hilden K, Fang J. Nurse-administered propofol sedation is safe for patients with obstructive sleep apnea undergoing routine endoscopy: a pilot study. Dig Dis Sci. 2011;56:2666–2671. 216. Cha JM, Jeun JW, Pack KM, et al. Risk of sedation for diagnostic esophagogastroduodenoscopy in obstructive sleep apnea patients. World J Gastroenterol. 2013;19:4745–4751. 217. Cillo JE Jr, Finn R. Hemodynamics and oxygen saturation during intravenous sedation for office-based laser-assisted uvuloplasty. J Oral Maxillofac Surg. 2005;63:752–755. 218. Madan AK, Tichansky DS, Isom J, Minard G, Bee TK. Monitored anesthesia care with propofol versus surgeon-monitored sedation with benzodiazepines and narcotics for preoperative endoscopy in the morbidly obese. Obes Surg. 2008;18:545–548. 219. Mador MJ, Nadler J, Mreyoud A, et al. Do patients at risk of sleep apnea have an increased risk of cardio-respiratory complications during endoscopy procedures? Sleep Breath. 2012;16:609–615. 220. Cho JS, Soh S, Kim EJ, et al. Comparison of three sedation regimens for drug-induced sleep endoscopy. Sleep Breath. 2015;19:711–717. 221. Yoon BW, Hong JM, Hong SL, Koo SK, Roh HJ, Cho KS. A comparison of dexmedetomidine versus propofol during drug-induced sleep endoscopy in sleep apnea patients. Laryngoscope. 2016;126:763–767. 222. Chang ET, Certal V, Song SA, et al. Dexmedetomidine versus propofol during drug-induced sleep endoscopy and sedation: a systematic review. Sleep Breath. 2017;21:727–735. 223. Ma XX, Fang XM, Hou TN. Comparison of the effectiveness of dexmedetomidine versus propofol target-controlled infusion for sedation during coblation-assisted upper airway procedure. Chin Med J (Engl). 2012;125:869–873. 224. Bamgbade OA, Alfa JA. Dexmedetomidine anaesthesia for patients with obstructive sleep apnoea undergoing bariatric surgery. Eur J Anaesthesiol. 2009;26:176–177. 225. Dholakia C, Beverstein G, Garren M, Nemergut C, Boncyk J, Gould JC. The impact of perioperative dexmedetomidine infusion on postoperative narcotic use and duration of stay after laparoscopic bariatric surgery. J Gastrointest Surg. 2007;11:1556–1559. 226. Xu J, Jin C, Cui X, Jin Z. Comparison of dexmedetomidine versus propofol for sedation after uvulopalatopharyngoplasty. Med Sci Monit. 2015;21:2125–2133. 227. Chawla S, Robinson S, Norton A, Esterman A, Taneerananon T. Peri-operative use of dexmedetomidine in airway reconstruction surgery for obstructive sleep apnoea. J Laryngol Otol. 2010;124:67–72. 228. Issa FG. Effect of clonidine in obstructive sleep apnea. Am Rev Respir Dis. 1992;145:435–439. 229. Pawlik MT, Hansen E, Waldhauser D, Selig C, Kuehnel TS. Clonidine premedication in patients with sleep apnea syndrome: a randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled study. Anesth Analg. 2005;101:1374–1380. 230. Feld JM, Hoffman WE, Stechert MM, Hoffman IW, Ananda RC. Fentanyl or dexmedetomidine combined with desflurane for bariatric surgery. J Clin Anesth. 2006;18:24–28. 231. Tufanogullari B, White PF, Peixoto MP, et al. Dexmedetomidine infusion during laparoscopic bariatric surgery: the effect on recovery outcome variables. Anesth Analg. 2008;106:1741–1748. 232. Feld J, Hoffman WE, Paisansathan C, Park H, Ananda RC. Autonomic activity during dexmedetomidine or fentanyl infusion with desflurane anesthesia. J Clin Anesth. 2007;19:30–36. 233. Jayaraman L, Sinha A, Punhani D. A comparative study to evaluate the effect of intranasal dexmedetomidine versus oral alprazolam as a premedication agent in morbidly obese patients undergoing bariatric surgery. J Anaesthesiol Clin Pharmacol. 2013;29:179–182. 234. Sollazzi L, Modesti C, Vitale F, et al. Preinductive use of clonidine and ketamine improves recovery and reduces postoperative pain after bariatric surgery. Surg Obes Relat Dis. 2009;5:67–71. 235. Memtsoudis SG, Stundner O, Rasul R, et al. Sleep apnea and total joint arthroplasty under various types of anesthesia: a population-based study of perioperative outcomes. Reg Anesth Pain Med. 2013;38:274–281. 236. Ambrosii T, Şandru S, Belîi A. The prevalence of perioperative complications in patients with and without obstructive sleep apnoea: a prospective cohort study. Rom J Anaesth Intensive Care. 2016;23:103–110. 237. Liu DY, Cai XL, Liu HY. [Obstructive sleep apnea hypopnea syndrome: surgical complications and strategy for avoidance]. Zhonghua Er Bi Yan Hou Tou Jing Wai Ke Za Zhi. 2009;44:555–560. 238. Liu SS, Chisholm MF, Ngeow J, et al. Postoperative hypoxemia in orthopedic patients with obstructive sleep apnea. HSS J. 2011;7:2–8. 239. Naqvi SY, Rabiei AH, Maltenfort MG, et al. Perioperative complications in patients with sleep apnea undergoing total joint arthroplasty. J Arthroplasty. 2017;32:2680–2683. 240. Biddle C. Comparative aspects of the airway during general anesthesia in obese sufferers of sleep apnea and matched normals. Adv Pract Nurs Q. 1996;2:14–19. 241. Loube DI, Erman MK, Reed W. Perioperative complications in obstructive sleep apnea patients. Sleep Breath. 1997;2:3–10. 242. Xará D, Mendonça J, Pereira H, Santos A, Abelha FJ. Adverse respiratory events after general anesthesia in patients at high risk of obstructive sleep apnea syndrome. Braz J Anesthesiol. 2015;65:359–366. 243. Kehlet H. The stress response to surgery: release mechanisms and the modifying effect of pain relief. Acta Chir Scand Suppl. 1989;550:22–28. 244. Kehlet H. Manipulation of the metabolic response in clinical practice. World J Surg. 2000;24:690–695. 245. O’Neill J, Helwig E. Postoperative management of the physiological effects of spinal anesthesia. J Perianesth Nurs. 2016;31:330–339. 246. Meng T, Zhong Z, Meng L. Impact of spinal anaesthesia vs general anaesthesia on peri-operative outcome in lumbar spine surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised, controlled trials. Anaesthesia. 2017;72:391–401. 247. Macfarlane AJ, Prasad GA, Chan VW, Brull R. Does regional anesthesia improve outcome after total knee arthroplasty? Clin Orthop Relat Res. 2009;467:2379–2402. 248. Lam KK, Kunder S, Wong J, Doufas AG, Chung F. Obstructive sleep apnea, pain, and opioids: is the riddle solved? Curr Opin Anaesthesiol. 2016;29:134–140.

    The Morning Download: New Generation of CIOs Drawn from Beyond IT | killexams.com real questions and Pass4sure dumps

    Good morning. The role of CIO, more tightly integrated than ever into the business, is drawing from a broader pool of candidates, many of whom do not come from the IT departments that bred so many of their predecessors. Eli Lilly & Co. this week named Aarti Shah, a 22-year veteran at the drug company, as its CIO.

    Dr. Shah, who has a doctorate in statistics, has spent decades in the drug company in areas such as global brand development and advanced analytics, but not in IT, CIO Journal's Kim S. Nash reports. She will lead a 1,300-member IT organization. She says her diverse background will be a competitive advantage for the company, because “you have to know the business you want to transform.”

    She isn't alone. MasterCard named Ed McLaughlin to the CIO post in January, after about a decade in bill payment, franchise development and other areas. American Airlines Group appointed Maya Leibman to CIO in 2011, after she worked as president of the airline’s loyalty program. Says Craig Stephenson, managing director of the North American CIO practice at executive-search firm Korn/Ferry International: “With the amount of competition out there, the CIO better know what the customer wants."

    Sharing economy expert says social safety net must be revamped. “I am optimistic … But not everyone’s job will remain or grow. There will be some losers, no doubt about it,” says Arun Sundararajan. He sat down with CIO Journal to discuss his new book, The Sharing Economy: The End of Employment and the Rise of Crowd-Based Capitalism.

    TECHNOLOGY NEWS

    Thieves go high tech to steal cars. Police in Houston think car thieves may be using laptops to electronically hot wire late model Jeep Wranglers and Cherokees, the WSJ's Jeff Bennett reports. Fiat Chrysler Automobiles NV said it is unaware of any such incidents involving its vehicles. Over the last two years, the auto maker, along with General Motors and Tesla Motors, have had to alter their car electronics after learning their vehicles could be hacked.

    Meanwhile...more connected car tech to come. Reuters reports that LG Electronics is working with Volkswagen on a platform that lets drivers connect with external devices such as home security systems. The platform will also include "an alerting system for drivers providing 'recommendations' based on real-time situations." In China, Alibaba and the country's largest automaker SAIC Motor demonstrated a new car running the YunOS operating system, which links with smartphones.

    Old-boys' network infects cybersecurity. Just 10% of professional security employees are women, according to a study by (ISC)2, a non-profit that specializes in cyber training and certification. The FT talks with women security professionals who say that the perception of cybersecurity as an offshoot of hacker culture, and not a multidisciplinary function, may turn off some promising female candidates.

    KKR & Co. agrees to buy business software company Epicor Software Corp. from Apax Partners. The deal is the latest in a streak of technology company buyouts, the WSJ's Matt Jarzemsky notes. Among the recent deals, technology-focused buyout firm Thoma Bravo LLC this month agreed to buy data-analysis company Qlik Technologies for $3 billion. Vista Equity Partners in May agreed to acquire marketing software provider Marketo for $1.8 billion.

    Blackberry to stop making classic smartphone. The device maker resurrected its Classic model with the physical keyboard 18 months ago, but apparently sales (and nostalgia) were not enough to keep the product alive, Reuters reports.

    Drones impede wildfire efforts. Planes and helicopters crucial to fighting wildfires in the West are being grounded as to avoid collision with tiny aircraft flown by hobbyists, the WSJ's Jennifer Calfas reports. Federal Aviation Administration rules prohibit drone operators from flying above 400 feet, and explicitly require them to keep clear of piloted aircraft.

    Fed agency says Symantec vulnerability is 'serious event.' The U.S. Department of Homeland Security's Computer Emergency Readiness Team issued an alert for a vulnerability in Symantec Corp.'s anti-virus software that lets hackers remotely control computers, Reuters reports.

    Apple hopes to make organ donation easier. Owners of iPhones will soon be able to use them to sign up to be an organ, eye and tissue donor. Apple Inc. announced Tuesday that it teamed up with Donate Life America to build donor registration into the Health app in iOS 10, due out this fall, the WSJ's Nathan Olivarez-Giles reports. Apple said the sign-up process will offer information that will explain to iPhone users how such donation works, and that the whole process will take “just a few taps.”

    Live, from Katmai National Park in Alaska. It's the bearcam! For the fourth season viewers can watch brown bears snag spawning salmon as it happens. Verge explains that the setup for 24/7 coverage, offered by Explore.org, was made possible through "a complex network of remote cameras, solar panels, microwave uplinks, and wind turbines."

    It's a nice day for a... Red Hat wedding? At a recent Red Hat Summit, Paul Cormier, Red Hat executive vice president,  officiated a wedding between a client and his betrothed, IDG reports. Said Mr. Cormier: "a successful marriage follows some of the same principles that I talked about in my keynote this morning: your single footprints are moving to a combination of physical, virtual, private and public resources..."

    EVERYTHING ELSE YOU NEED TO KNOW

    Global oil giants investing again. Big oil is taking advantage of cheap drilling. Chevron, Exxon Mobil and several partners on Tuesday committed $37 billion to expand an oil project in Kazakhstan, one of the biggest investments since crude prices collapsed two years ago. They’re not alone. BP PLC last week gave the green light to a multibillion-dollar gas project and last month said it will fast-track a major discovery in Egypt. Italy’s Eni is moving ahead on an Egypt field as well. The world’s biggest energy companies will benefit from a huge drop in drilling costs that has accompanied the oil-price fall.

    German car, parts firms get probe. Germany’s antitrust watchdog launched a steel price-fixing investigation into six companies, including Daimler AG, BMW AG and Volkswagen AG and suppliers Robert Bosch GmbH and ZF Friedrichshafen AG. The watchdog suspects Germany’s leading car makers and two of the world’s biggest car-parts suppliers agreed on prices they would pay for steel products used in cars.

    New outside CEOs often start with tinkering. When boards bring in external CEOs to foment big change, sometimes thinking small is better, writes Joann S. Lublin. Ron Johnson bold plans for J.C. Penney were a dud, for example. Ms. Lublin takes a look at a trio of CEOs, at Laclede Group, Best Buy and Angie’s List Inc., who came to their respective companies and earned credibility by tapping the power of minor actions to gain associates’ support for major transformations.

    Tom Loftus contributed to this article. The Morning Download comes from the editors of CIO Journal and cues up the most important news in business technology every weekday morning. Send us your tips, compliments and complaints. You can get The Morning Download emailed to you each weekday morning by clicking http://on.wsj.com/TheMorningDownloadSignup.



    Direct Download of over 5500 Certification Exams

    3COM [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AccessData [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACFE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Acme-Packet [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACSM [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ACT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Admission-Tests [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ADOBE [93 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AFP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AICPA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AIIM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alcatel-Lucent [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Alfresco [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Altiris [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Amazon [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    American-College [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Android [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APICS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Apple [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AppSense [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    APTUSC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Arizona-Education [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ARM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Aruba [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASIS [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASQ [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ASTQB [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Autodesk [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Avaya [96 Certification Exam(s) ]
    AXELOS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Axis [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Banking [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BEA [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BICSI [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlackBerry [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    BlueCoat [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Brocade [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Objects [11 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Business-Tests [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CA-Technologies [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certification-Board [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Certiport [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CheckPoint [41 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIPS [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cisco [318 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Citrix [48 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CIW [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cloudera [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Cognos [19 Certification Exam(s) ]
    College-Board [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CompTIA [76 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ComputerAssociates [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Consultant [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Counselor [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institue [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CPP-Institute [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CSP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    CWNP [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Dassault [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DELL [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DMI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    DRI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECCouncil [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ECDL [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    EMC [129 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Enterasys [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Ericsson [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ESPA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Esri [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExamExpress [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Exin [40 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ExtremeNetworks [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    F5-Networks [20 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FCTC [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Filemaker [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Financial [36 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Food [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fortinet [13 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Foundry [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    FSMTB [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Fujitsu [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GAQM [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Genesys [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GIAC [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Google [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    GuidanceSoftware [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    H3C [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HDI [9 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Healthcare [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HIPAA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hitachi [30 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hortonworks [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hospitality [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HP [750 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HR [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    HRCI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Huawei [21 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Hyperion [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAAP [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IAHCSMM [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBM [1532 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IBQH [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ICDL [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IEEE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IELTS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IFPUG [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IIBA [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IISFA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Intel [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IQN [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    IRS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISACA [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISC2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISEB [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Isilon [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ISM [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    iSQI [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    ITEC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Juniper [64 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LEED [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Legato [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Liferay [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Logical-Operations [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Lotus [66 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LPI [24 Certification Exam(s) ]
    LSI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Magento [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Maintenance [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McAfee [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    McData [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Medical [69 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Microsoft [374 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Mile2 [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Military [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Misc [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Motorola [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    mySQL [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NBSTSA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCEES [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCIDQ [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NCLEX [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Network-General [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NetworkAppliance [39 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    NIELIT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nokia [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Nortel [130 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Novell [37 Certification Exam(s) ]
    OMG [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Oracle [279 Certification Exam(s) ]
    P&C [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Palo-Alto [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PARCC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PayPal [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Pegasystems [12 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PEOPLECERT [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PMI [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Polycom [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PostgreSQL-CE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Prince2 [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PRMIA [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PsychCorp [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    PTCB [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QAI [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    QlikView [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Quality-Assurance [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RACC [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Real-Estate [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RedHat [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RES [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Riverbed [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    RSA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sair [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Salesforce [5 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SANS [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAP [98 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SASInstitute [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SAT [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCO [10 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SCP [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SDI [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    See-Beyond [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Siemens [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Snia [7 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SOA [15 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Social-Work-Board [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SpringSource [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUN [63 Certification Exam(s) ]
    SUSE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Sybase [17 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Symantec [134 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Teacher-Certification [4 Certification Exam(s) ]
    The-Open-Group [8 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TIA [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Tibco [18 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trainers [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Trend [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    TruSecure [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    USMLE [1 Certification Exam(s) ]
    VCE [6 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veeam [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Veritas [33 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Vmware [58 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Wonderlic [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Worldatwork [2 Certification Exam(s) ]
    XML-Master [3 Certification Exam(s) ]
    Zend [6 Certification Exam(s) ]





    References :


    Dropmark : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/11889542
    Wordpress : http://wp.me/p7SJ6L-22o
    Dropmark-Text : http://killexams.dropmark.com/367904/12875363
    Blogspot : http://killexamsbraindump.blogspot.com/2017/12/symantec-250-403-dumps-and-practice.html
    RSS Feed : http://feeds.feedburner.com/WhereCanIGetHelpToPass250-403Exam
    Box.net : v






    Back to Main Page

    Close 100% Pass Guarantee or Your Money Back

    How to Claim the Refund / Exchange?

    In case of failure your money is fully secure by BrainDumps Guarantee Policy. Before claiming the guarantee all downloaded products must be deleted and all copies of BrainDumps Products must be destroyed.


    Under What Conditions I can Claim the Guarantee?

    Full Refund is valid for any BrainDumps Testing Engine Purchase where user fails the corresponding exam within 30 days from the date of purchase of Exam. Product Exchange is valid for customers who claim guarantee within 90 days from date of purchase. Customer can contact BrainDumps to claim this guarantee and get full refund at Quality Assurance. Exam failures that occur before the purchasing date are not qualified for claiming guarantee. The refund request should be submitted within 7 days after exam failure.


    The money-back-guarantee is not applicable on following cases:

    1. Failure within 7 days after the purchase date. BrainDumps highly recommends the candidates a study time of 7 days to prepare for the exam with BrainDumps study material, any failures cases within 7 days of purchase are rejected because in-sufficient study of BrainDumps materials.
    2. Wrong purchase. BrainDumps will not entertain any claims once the incorrect product is Downloaded and Installed.
    3. Free exam. (No matter failed or wrong choice)
    4. Expired order(s). (Out of 90 days from the purchase date)
    5. Retired exam. (For customers who use our current product to attend the exam which is already retired).
    6. Audio Exams, Hard Copies and Labs Preparations are not covered by Guarantee and no claim can be made against them.
    7. Products that are given for free.
    8. Different names. (Candidate's name is different from payer's name).
    9. The refund option is not valid for Bundles and guarantee can thus not be claimed on Bundle purchases.
    10. Guarantee Policy is not applicable to Admission Tests / Courses, CISSP, EMC, HP, Microsoft, PMI, SAP and SSCP exams as killexams.com provides only the practice questions for these.
    11. Outdated Exam Products.
    CloseSearch
    Spring Campaign! Get 25% Discount on All Exams!

    This is a ONE TIME OFFER. You will never see this Again

    Instant Discount
    Braindumps Testing Engine

    25% OFF

    Enter Your Email Address to Receive Your 25% OFF Discount Code Plus... Our Exclusive Weekly Deals

    A confirmation link will be sent to this email address to verify your login.


    * We value your privacy. We will not rent or sell your email address.
    CloseSearch
    Your 25% Discount on Your Purchase

    Save 25%. Today on all IT exams. Instant Download

    Braindumps Testing Engine

    Use the following Discount Code during the checkout and get 25% discount on all your purchases:

    BRAINDUMPS25

    Start ShoppingSearch