Abstract Introduction Asymptomatic patients with moderate functional capacity do not require Coronary Artery Disease (CAD) workup in the preoperative period of non-cardiac surgeries, especially when scheduled for minor and intermediate-risk surgeries. The workup is inappropriate because it promotes over diagnosing and pointless treatments. Moreover, those patients usually undergo cardiology assessment, in addition to pre-anesthetic evaluation. Objective Investigate the role of cardiology consultation as mediator in inappropriate assessment of CAD for preoperative of non-cardiac surgeries. Method Retrospective study performed in a private anesthesia service using medical charts of asymptomatic patients with a history of controlled systemic disease and moderate functional capacity, submitted to pre-anesthetic consultation for minor and intermediate risk surgeries. Cardiology consultations were identified by the presence of a consultation report by a cardiologist. CAD workup was defined as undergoing cardiac stress tests. Results We included 390 medical charts of patients with mean age of 48.6 ± 15.4 years, 67% women and 69% intermediate risk surgeries. CAD workup was infrequent and performed in 3.9% of patients. Besides, pre-anesthetic evaluation, 93 (24%) patients had a cardiology consultation. Among those patients, 15.1% were submitted to CAD workup, compared to 0.34% of patients without cardiology assessment (p< 0.001; RR = 4.4; 95% CI: 3.5–5.6). Conclusions Inappropriate testing for CAD investigation is infrequent for asymptomatic individuals submitted to minor and intermediate risk surgeries. However, cardiology consultation increases substantially the likelihood of a patient undergoing CAD workup, suggesting that, unlike the anesthesiologist, the cardiologist is a major mediator of this kind of management.

Abstract Purpose To assess Cyclosporine A (CsA) therapy at an intraperitoneal dose of 15 mg.kg -1 in a rodent model of non-septic renal ischemia. Methods Twenty male Wistar rats were randomized to receive CsA therapy or none therapy before undergoing 30 minutes of renal ischemia followed by reperfusion. Additionally, 10 rats were randomized to undergo the same surgical procedure of the aforementioned animals with neither ischemia nor CsA therapy. Twelve hours after kidney ischemia, the left kidneys were evaluated for histological injury according to Park’s criteria. Serum creatinine (Cr), urea nitrogen (Ur) and sodium levels were obtained at different times of the experimental protocol. Results Rodents in the CsA group showed negative results (p<0.05) in serum variables (Cr: 0.41±0.05mg/dL vs . 4.17±1.25mg/dL; Ur: 40.90±3.98mg/dL vs . 187.70±22.93mg/dL) even the non CsA or control group (Cr: 0.35±0.07mg/dL vs . 3.80±1.20mg/dL; Ur: 40.10±4.70mg/dL vs . 184.50±49.80mg/dL). The negative results were also verified in histological evaluation, CsA group had 50% in the very severe grade of lesion, 10% in the severe and 40% in the moderate to severe whereas the control group had 90% in the very severe grade. Conclusion CsA was incapable of preventing the deleterious effects of ischemia-reperfusion injury in rat kidneys.