
Preface
Our journals are designed for critical readers to determine whether the best freshly published
papers will become essential for practice or not. As anesthesiologists work more hours, with
fewer resources and sicker patients than ever before, it is truly a challenge to maintain
currency. For many, reading on the subject of anesthesia does not take priority while juggling
a personal and professional life. Investing in print copies or gaining Internet access to journals
in our field is low on the to-do list.
Anesthesiologists love to talk to fellow anesthesiologists about cases. Even the most dour
clinicians will come to life when another anesthesiologist says, “You will never believe what
happened to me in the operating room last week.” It is readily transparent than many clinicians
are holding onto clinical paradigms that were learned in residency that are, at a minimum, now
controversial and sometimes no longer true.
There has been a veritable explosion over the last 20 years of high-quality research in
anesthesiology, pain medicine, and critical care. The merit of each journal is quantitatively
determined by its “Impact Factor”—the frequency that its articles are cited in other papers or
reports. The impact of anesthesiology and its related fields has soared by over 65 % in the past
5 years. Fully overwhelming evidence now influences the clinical care of patients in our field
and is the reason for this gain. Despite new statistical measures, project design, and editorial
approval, many clinicians are holding onto practice parameters that are outdated or irrelevant.
The process of practice change involves 3 steps. With the introduction of a new practice
parameter, the provider goes through: (1) denial, (2) understanding that there is controversy,
and (3) after more time than should be needed, acceptance.
The editors of this book made a bold attempt at creating a book that is targeted at every
clinician in the field, whether they stay current or not. We present 126 cases, broken down by
subspecialty, where the author has a “split personality.” After a case is presented, the author
forcefully represents 2 adversarial positions: a pro stance and a con stance. In each case, the
authors speak freely, having checked their academic title at the door. During a freewheeling
discussion, the case authors alternate between talking off the cuff and presenting current
evidence. The book is meant as an easy read that can be opened up at any page. Each case is
only a few pages long and can capture the attention of the reader for as long as needed. This is
not meant to be a reference book. Simply stated, the cases are meant to be entertaining and a
“fun read.”
In almost every clinical arena, concepts that we thought were written in stone are on the
road to becoming myths. Examples include the utility of cricoid pressure, the use of normal
saline, left uterine displacement, and the neurotoxicity of inhaled anesthetics in young chil-
dren. These are just the tip of the iceberg of controversial topics recently debated in our
high-impact journals. Large database analyses on an increasingly large number of topics
demand a change in practice.
Another objective of this book is to help the reader take a small step toward currency. The
informal presentation of topics is what we believe is the most accessible way to convey new
information to a large number of readers. This is how information is most frequently shared in
the “real world” both inside and outside of medicine. We believe that this book accomplishes
vii