Epidural compared with non-epidural analgesia and cardiopulmonary complications after colectomy: A retrospective cohort study of 20,880 patients using a national quality database

Prospective observational study comparing the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic colectomy with or without epidural anesthesia: the Kanagawa Yokohama Colorectal Cancer Study Group (KYCC) 1806

PURPOSE

There have been no adequate comparisons of the efficacy, safety, and efficiency of analgesia after laparoscopic colorectal resection (LAC), with and without epidural anesthesia (EDA).

METHODS

This was a multicenter prospective observational study of patients undergoing LAC. The primary end point was the mean visual analog scale (VAS) score on postoperative days (PODs) 1-7. The secondary end points were the highest VAS, complication rate, days to first ambulation and fatigue, length of hospital stay, and time to commencement of surgery.

RESULTS

We compared an EDA group (Group E, n = 48) and a no-EDA group (Group O, n = 48) after matching. The mean VAS was not significantly different between the groups (28.7 vs. 30.1, p = 0.288). On assessing the secondary end points, the highest VAS was not significantly different between the groups. In fact, the VAS was lower in Group E only on POD 2. There was no difference in the incidence of complications, the time to first postoperative evacuation was shorter in Group E, and postoperative hospitalization was similar. The time to surgery was shorter in Group O.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that LAC without EDA is a feasible option, but with the early and regular use of adjunctive measures to provide more stable analgesia.

Impact of spinal or epidural anaesthesia on perioperative outcomes in adult noncardiac surgery: a narrative review of recent evidence

Spinal and epidural anaesthesia and analgesia are important anaesthetic techniques, familiar to all anaesthetists and applied to patients undergoing a range of surgical procedures. Although the immediate effects of a well-conducted neuraxial technique on nociceptive and sympathetic pathways are readily observable in clinical practice, the impact of such techniques on patient-centred perioperative outcomes remains an area of uncertainty and active research. The aim of this review is to present a narrative synthesis of contemporary clinical science on this topic from the most recent 5-year period and summarise the foundational scholarship upon which this research was based. We searched electronic databases for primary research, secondary research, opinion pieces, and guidelines reporting the relationship between neuraxial procedures and standardised perioperative outcomes over the period 2018-2023. Returned citation lists were examined seeking additional studies to contextualise our narrative synthesis of results. Articles were retrieved encompassing the following outcome domains: patient comfort, renal, sepsis and infection, postoperative cancer, cardiovascular, and pulmonary and mortality outcomes. Convincing evidence of the beneficial effect of epidural analgesia on patient comfort after major open thoracoabdominal surgery outcomes was identified. Recent evidence of benefit in the prevention of pulmonary complications and mortality was identified. Despite mechanistic plausibility and supportive observational evidence, there is less certain experimental evidence to support a role for neuraxial techniques impacting on other outcome domains. Evidence of positive impact of neuraxial techniques is best established for the domains of patient comfort, pulmonary complications, and mortality, particularly in the setting of major open thoracoabdominal surgery. Recent evidence does not strongly support a significant impact of neuraxial techniques on cancer, renal, infection, or cardiovascular outcomes after noncardiac surgery in most patient groups.

Uncomplicated epidural removal in a patient on a therapeutic heparin infusion: a case report

BACKGROUND

Unanticipated postoperative thrombotic complications can occur in complex patients who receive preoperative epidurals. Therefore, it is imperative that we consider the risks and benefits of epidural management in the setting of therapeutic anticoagulation. We present a case of epidural catheter removal on a heparin infusion, due to the extreme risk of holding anticoagulation for any duration.

CASE REPORT

A woman with hilar cholangiocarcinoma presented after uncomplicated hepatectomy, bile duct resection and hepaticojejunostomy, with a thoracic epidural for analgesia. On postoperative day 1, she developed a total portal vein thrombosis, requiring emergent open thrombectomy, transhepatic stenting and high-dose heparin infusion while the epidural was indwelling. The patient was deemed to have a profound risk of re-thrombosis if heparin were paused. Therefore, a multidisciplinary discussion between hepatobiliary surgery, critical care, neurosurgery, haematology, acute pain service and the patient's family ensued regarding epidural management. Options included catheter-directed thrombolytics to her stent while holding systemic anticoagulation, sterilely leaving the epidural catheter in place indefinitely, injecting prothrombotic agent into the epidural prior to removal, or removing the catheter without holding anticoagulation. Due to the risk of re-thrombosis in the portal vein and liver infarction, the heparin infusion was decreased to achieve the lowest therapeutic anti-Xa level, and the epidural was removed. The patient was continuously monitored in the intensive care unit without any adverse events.

CONCLUSION

A multidisciplinary discussion is paramount to weigh the risk of epidural haematoma if a catheter is removed on therapeutic anticoagulation against catastrophic thrombosis if anticoagulation is paused.

Anaesthesia in Veterinary Oncology: The Effects of Surgery, Volatile and Intravenous Anaesthetics on the Immune System and Tumour Spread

Throughout the course of oncological disease, the majority of patients require surgical, anaesthetic and analgesic intervention. However, during the perioperative period, anaesthetic agents and techniques, surgical tissue trauma, adjuvant drugs for local pain and inflammation and other non-pharmacological factors, such as blood transfusions, hydration, temperature and nutrition, may influence the prognosis of the disease. These factors significantly impact the oncologic patient's immune response, which is the primary barrier to tumour progress, promoting a window of vulnerability for its dissemination and recurrence. More research is required to ascertain which anaesthetics and techniques have immunoprotective and anti-tumour effects, which will contribute to developing novel anaesthetic strategies in veterinary medicine.

Effect of thoracic epidural anesthesia on postoperative outcome in major liver surgery: a retrospective cohort study

PURPOSE

Postoperative complications after major liver surgery are common. Thoracic epidural anesthesia may provide beneficial effects on postoperative outcome. We strove to compare postoperative outcomes in major liver surgery patients with and without thoracic epidural anesthesia.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study in a single university medical center. Patients undergoing elective major liver surgery between April 2012 and December 2016 were eligible for inclusion. We divided patients into two groups according to whether or not they had thoracic epidural anesthesia for major liver surgery. The primary outcome was postoperative hospital length of stay, i.e., from day of surgery until hospital discharge. Secondary outcomes included 30-day postoperative mortality and major postoperative complications. Additionally, we investigated the effect of thoracic epidural anesthesia on perioperative analgesia doses and the safety of thoracic epidural anesthesia.

RESULTS

Of 328 patients included in this study, 177 (54.3%) received thoracic epidural anesthesia. There were no clinically important differences in postoperative hospital length of stay (11.0 [7.00-17.0] vs. 9.00 [7.00-14.0] days, p = 0.316, primary outcome), death (0.0 vs. 2.7%, p = 0.995), or the incidence of postoperative renal failure (0.6 vs. 0.0%, p = 0.99), sepsis (0.0 vs. 1.3%, p = 0.21), or pulmonary embolism (0.6 vs. 1.4%, p = 0.59) between patients with or without thoracic epidural anesthesia. Perioperative analgesia doses - including the intraoperative sufentanil dose (0.228 [0.170-0.332] vs. 0.405 [0.315-0.565] μg·kg-1·h-1, p < 0.0001) - were lower in patients with thoracic epidural anesthesia. No major thoracic epidural anesthesia-associated infections or bleedings occurred.

CONCLUSION

This retrospective analysis suggests that thoracic epidural anesthesia does not reduce postoperative hospital length of stay in patients undergoing major liver surgery - but it may reduce perioperative analgesia doses. Thoracic epidural anesthesia was safe in this cohort of patients undergoing major liver surgery. These findings need to be confirmed in robust clinical trials.

Visual estimation of blood loss versus quantitative blood loss for maternal outcomes related to obstetrical hemorrhage

Background

This study was undertaken to evaluate if there are differences between visual estimation of blood loss (EBL) and quantitative blood loss (QBL) for maternal outcomes related to obstetrical hemorrhage.

Methods

This retrospective study compared EBL (n = 500) to QBL (n = 501) for outcomes of length of stay, readmission within 30 days of discharge, percent receiving blood transfusions, time between delivery to receiving blood transfusion, and postpartum hemoglobin level.

Results

The QBL group had a significantly lower mean length of stay than the EBL group (2.6 vs 3.2 days, P < 0.001). Multivariate linear regression analysis adjusting for relevant covariates had a similar finding of lower length of stay for QBL vs EBL (B = -0.13, SE = 0.01, P < 0.001). Readmission within 30 days, blood transfusion, time to transfusion since delivery, and postpartum hemoglobin did not significantly differ between the QBL and EBL groups.

Conclusion

We recommend that clinicians adopt QBL over EBL as standard practice since QBL is associated with lower length of stay and does not negatively impact other clinical outcomes.

The clinical impact of the systolic volume variation guided intraoperative fluid administration regimen on surgical outcomes after pancreaticoduodenectomy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Pancreaticoduodenectomy is associated with high morbidity. Many preoperative variables are risk factors for postoperative complications, but they are primarily non-modifiable. It is not clear whether an intraoperative goal-directed fluid regimen might be associated with fewer postoperative surgical complications compared to current conservative, non-goal-directed fluid practices. We hypothesize that the use of Systolic Volume Variation (SVV)-guided intraoperative fluid administration might be beneficial.

METHODS

Data from 223 patients who underwent pancreaticoduodenectomy in our institution between 2015 and 2019 were reviewed. Patients were classified into two groups based on the use of intraoperative use of SVV to guide the administration of fluids. The decision to use SVV or not was made by the attending anesthesiologist. Subjects were classified into SVV-guided intraoperative fluid therapy (SVV group) and non-SVV-guided intraoperative fluid therapy (non-SVV group). Uni and multivariate regression analyses were conducted to determine if SVV-guided fluid therapy was significantly associated with a lower incidence of postoperative surgical complications, such as Postoperative Pancreatic Fistula (POPF), Delayed Gastric Emptying (DGE), among others, after adjusting for confounders.

RESULTS

Baseline, demographic, and intraoperative characteristics were similar between SVV and non-SVV groups. In the multivariate analysis, the use of SVV guidance was significantly associated with fewer postoperative surgical complications (OR = 0.48; 95% CI 0.25-0.91; p = 0.025), even after adjusting for significant covariates, such as perioperative use of epidural, pancreatic gland parenchyma texture, and diameter of the pancreatic duct.

CONCLUSIONS

VV-guided intraoperative fluid administration might be associated with fewer postoperative surgical complications after pancreaticoduodenectomy.

Postoperative pain management in non-traumatic emergency general surgery: WSES-GAIS-SIAARTI-AAST guidelines

BACKGROUND

Non-traumatic emergency general surgery involves a heterogeneous population that may present with several underlying diseases. Timeous emergency surgical treatment should be supplemented with high-quality perioperative care, ideally performed by multidisciplinary teams trained to identify and handle complex postoperative courses. Uncontrolled or poorly controlled acute postoperative pain may result in significant complications. While pain management after elective surgery has been standardized in perioperative pathways, the traditional perioperative treatment of patients undergoing emergency surgery is often a haphazard practice. The present recommended pain management guidelines are for pain management after non-traumatic emergency surgical intervention. It is meant to provide clinicians a list of indications to prescribe the optimal analgesics even in the absence of a multidisciplinary pain team.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

An international expert panel discussed the different issues in subsequent rounds. Four international recognized scientific societies: World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery (GAIS), Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia Intensive Care (SIAARTI), and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), endorsed the project and approved the final manuscript.

CONCLUSION

Dealing with acute postoperative pain in the emergency abdominal surgery setting is complex, requires special attention, and should be multidisciplinary. Several tools are available, and their combination is mandatory whenever is possible. Analgesic approach to the various situations and conditions should be patient based and tailored according to procedure, pathology, age, response, and available expertise. A better understanding of the patho-mechanisms of postoperative pain for short- and long-term outcomes is necessary to improve prophylactic and treatment strategies.

Antitumor Anesthetic Strategy in the Perioperatory Period of the Oncological Patient: A Review

The stress response triggered by the surgical aggression and the transient immunosuppression produced by anesthetic agents stimulate the inadvertent dispersion of neoplastic cells and, paradoxically, tumor progression during the perioperative period. Anesthetic agents and techniques, in relation to metastatic development, are investigated for their impact on long-term survival. Scientific evidence indicates that inhaled anesthetics and opioids benefit immunosuppression, cell proliferation, and angiogenesis, providing the ideal microenvironment for tumor progression. The likely benefit of reducing their use, or even replacing them as much as possible with anesthetic techniques that protect patients from the metastatic process, is still being investigated. The possibility of using "immunoprotective" or "antitumor" anesthetic techniques would represent a turning point in clinical practice. Through understanding of pharmacological mechanisms of anesthetics and their effects on tumor cells, new perioperative approaches emerge with the aim of halting and controlling metastatic development. Epidural anesthesia and propofol have been shown to maintain immune activity and reduce catecholaminergic and inflammatory responses, considering the protective techniques against tumor spread. The current data generate hypotheses about the influence of anesthesia on metastatic development, although prospective trials that determinate causality are necessary to make changes in clinical practice.

Intravenous patient-controlled analgesia plus psychoeducational intervention for acute postoperative pain in patients with pulmonary nodules after thoracoscopic surgery: a retrospective cohort study

Background

The association of psychological factors with postoperative pain has been well documented. The incorporation of psychoeducational intervention into a standard analgesia protocol seems to be an attractive approach for the management of acute postoperative pain. Our study aimed to evaluate the impact of psychoeducational intervention on acute postoperative pain in pulmonary nodule (PN) patients treated with thoracoscopic surgery.

Methods

In this study, 76 PN patients treated with thoracoscopic surgery and intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA) plus psychoeducational evaluation and intervention were selected as the psychoeducational intervention group (PG). Another 76 PN patients receiving IV-PCA without psychoeducational intervention after thoracoscopic surgery, treated as the control group (CG), were identified from the hospital database and matched pairwise with PG patients according to age, sex, preoperative body mass index (BMI), opioid medications used for IV-PCA and the educational attainment of patients.

Results

The most common psychological disorders were anxiety and interpersonal sensitivity, which were recorded from 82.9% (63/76) and 63.2% (48/76) of PG patients. The numerical rating scale (NRS) pain scores of the PG patients were significantly lower than those of the CG patients at 2 and 24 h after surgery (P < 0.001). Total opioid consumption for acute postoperative pain in the PG was 52.1 mg of morphine equivalent, which was significantly lower than that (67.8 mg) in the CG (P = 0.038). PG patients had a significantly lower incidence of rescue analgesia than CG patients (28.9% vs. 44.7%, P = 0.044). Nausea/vomiting was the most common side effect of opioid medications, recorded for 3 (3.9%) PG patients and 10 (13.2%) CG patients (P = 0.042). In addition, no significant difference was observed between PG and CG patients in terms of grade 2 or higher postoperative complications (10.5% vs. 17.1%, P = 0.240).

Conclusions

Psychoeducational intervention for PN patients treated with thoracoscopic surgery resulted in reduced acute postoperative pain, less opioid consumption and fewer opioid-related side effects.

Serious Complications After Epidural Catheter Placement: Two Case Reports

Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is a standard procedure in multimodal analgesia applied in major thoracic and abdominal surgeries. Two cases are presented with serious complications related to TEA. In both cases, earlier reaction of the treating physicians to patient-reported sensory symptoms could have prevented the complicated course. The first case was a 73-year-old patient with bronchial carcinoma who underwent right lower lobe resection. In this case, dabigatran 150 mg/d (indication: permanent atrial fibrillation) had been discontinued 72 hours before surgery, and enoxaparin 80 mg (every 12 hours) had been started 11 hours after surgery. An epidural hematoma developed postoperatively. Magnetic resonance imaging (MRI) was performed only after paraplegia had developed the next day. Unfortunately, delayed hematoma evacuation could not prevent persistent paraplegia in this case, which was complicated by hospital-acquired pneumonia with sepsis and acute renal failure. The second case was a 39-year-old patient with ulcerative colitis and an initially undetected malposition of the epidural catheter. Immediately after test bolus injection, the patient reported paresthesia and overall discomfort, which however could not be safely attributed to either the test dose or the already started general anesthesia. The patient could only be extubated after stopping the epidural infusion. Accidental re-start of epidural infusion led to coma, conjugate eye deviation, and respiratory arrest, necessitating re-intubation. Computed tomography (CT) ruled out intracerebral pathology and showed a catheter position centrally in the spinal canal. Fortunately, no neurological deficits were detected after catheter removal.

Big Data in Studying Acute Pain and Regional Anesthesia

The digital transformation of healthcare is advancing, leading to an increasing availability of clinical data for research. Perioperative big data initiatives were established to monitor treatment quality and benchmark outcomes. However, big data analyses have long exceeded the status of pure quality surveillance instruments. Large retrospective studies nowadays often represent the first approach to new questions in clinical research and pave the way for more expensive and resource intensive prospective trials. As a consequence, the utilization of big data in acute pain and regional anesthesia research has considerably increased over the last decade. Multicentric clinical registries and administrative databases (e.g., healthcare claims databases) have collected millions of cases until today, on which basis several important research questions were approached. In acute pain research, big data was used to assess postoperative pain outcomes, opioid utilization, and the efficiency of multimodal pain management strategies. In regional anesthesia, adverse events and potential benefits of regional anesthesia on postoperative morbidity and mortality were evaluated. This article provides a narrative review on the growing importance of big data for research in acute postoperative pain and regional anesthesia.

Study on the prevention of infection in terminal cancer patients applying epidural analgesia by adding cefazolin to anesthetics: a randomized controlled trial

OBJECTIVE

To observe the antibacterial effect of adding cefazolin into anesthetics in patients with terminal cancer undergoing long-term epidural analgesia.

METHODS

Patients undergoing epidural analgesia with terminal cancer were randomly divided into two groups: the conventional drug group (group C) and the cefazolin group (group G). Both groups were given levobupivacaine and morphine, while cefazolin was added to group G. The mean arterial pressure (MAP), heart rate (HR), respiratory rates (R), visual analogue scale (VAS) scores, satisfaction and complications of patients in the two groups were observed. 3 ml of the used analgesic was taken for bacterial culture when replacing the new analgesic case.

RESULTS

HR, MAP, R, VAS scores, dosages of morphine, satisfaction of the analgesic and the complications were not significantly different between the two groups (P > 0.05). The overall satisfaction of patients in group G was significantly higher than that in group C (P < 0.05). One patient's anesthetics in group C were infected with colibacillus. Four patients in group C got infected in their epidural puncture sites. There was no infection in group G (P < 0.05).

CONCLUSION

Adding cefazolin to local anesthetics could effectively prevent bacterial infection and ensured the safety of epidural analgesia for patients with terminal cancer.

Pain therapy to reduce perioperative complications

The incidence rates of adverse events secondary to any operation are a well-known problem in any surgical field. One outstanding example of such adverse events is postoperative pain. Thus, the incidence of acute postoperative pain following any surgical procedure and its treatment are central issues for every surgeon. In the times of Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programs, acute pain therapy became an increasingly well investigated and accepted aspect in almost all surgical subspecialties. However, if it comes to the reduction of postoperative complications, in the actual context of postoperative pain, surgeons tend to focus on the operative process rather than on the perioperative procedures. Undoubtedly, postoperative pain became an important factor with regard to the quality of surgical care: both, the extent and the quality of the surgical procedure and the extent and the quality of the analgesic technique are decisive issues for a successful pain management. There is growing evidence that supports the role of acute pain therapy in reducing postoperative morbidity, and it has been demonstrated that high pain scores postoperatively may contribute to a complicated postoperative course. This overview comprises the current knowledge on the role of acute pain therapy with regard to the occurrence of postoperative complications. Most of the knowledge is derived from studies that primarily focus on the type and quality of postoperative pain therapy in relation to specific surgical procedures and only secondary on complications. As far as existent, data that report on the recovery period after surgery, on the rehabilitation status, on perioperative morbidity, on the development of chronic pain after surgery, and on possible solutions of the latter problem with the institution of transitional pain services will be presented.

Is there a benefit to additional neuroaxial anesthesia in open nephrectomy? A prospective NSQIP propensity score analysis

INTRODUCTION

Neuroaxial (i.e., spinal, regional, epidural) anesthesia has been shown to be associated with reduced readmission rate, decreased hospital stay, and decreased overall complication rate in orthopedic and gynecologic surgery. Our aim was to identify differences in intra- and postoperative complications, length of stay and readmission rates in open nephrectomy patients managed with neuroaxial anesthesia.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Utilizing National Surgical Quality Inpatient Program (NSQIP) database, we identified patients who have undergone an open nephrectomy between 2014 and 2017. Patients were further subdivided based on anesthesia modality. We used the propensity score-matching (PSM) method to adjust for baseline differences among patients who received general anesthesia alone and those with additional neuroaxial anesthesia. Using step-wise multivariable logistic regression, we identified preoperative and intraoperative predictors associated with 30-day procedure-related readmission, complications, and postoperative length of stay.

RESULTS

Out of 3,633 patients identified, 2346 patients met our inclusion and exclusion criteria. There was no difference in baseline characteristics after propensity score matching between general and additional neuroaxial anesthesia. Postoperative outcomes including: procedure-related readmission, rate of reoperation, operative time, all complications were similar between the groups. Adjuvant neuroaxial anesthesia group did experience a prolonged postoperative hospital stay that was statistically significant as compared to patients with general anesthesia alone [5.3 (3.5) days vs 4.8 (2.9) days, p = 0.007]. Compared to GA alone after multivariable logistic regression, neuroaxial anesthesia was not statistically significant for readmission (p = 0.909), any complication (p = 0.505), but did showed increased odds ratio of prolonged postoperative stay [aOR 1.107, 95% CI 1.042-1.176, p = 0.001] after adjusting for multiple factors.

CONCLUSION

Using 2014-2017 NSQIP database, we were able to demonstrate no additional reduction in complication or readmission rate in patients with neuroaxial anesthesia as compared to general anesthesia alone. Furthermore, patients who did receive neuroaxial anesthesia experienced a longer postoperative course.

Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) versus patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in laparoscopic colectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis

PURPOSE

A meta-analysis of RCTs was designed to provide an up-to-date comparison of thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) and patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) in laparoscopic colectomy.

METHODS

Our study was completed following the PRISMA guidelines and the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. A systematic literature screening was performed in MEDLINE and Web of Science. Fixed effects (FE) or random effects (RE) models were estimated based on the Cochran Q test result.

RESULTS

Totally, 8 studies were introduced in the present meta-analysis. Superiority of PCA in terms of length of hospital stay (LOS) (WMD 0.73, p = 0.004) and total complication rate (OR 1.57, p = 0.02) was found. TEA had a lower resting pain visual analogue scale (VAS) score at Day 1 (WMD - 2.23, p = 0.005) and Day 2 (WMD - 2.17, p = 0.01). TEA group had also a systematically lower walking VAS. Moreover, first bowel opened time (first defecation) (WMD - 0.88, p < 0.00001) was higher when PCA was applied.

CONCLUSIONS

TEA was related to a lower first bowel opened time, walking, and resting pain levels at the first postoperative days. However, the overall complication rate and LOS were higher in the epidural analgesia group. Thus, for a safe conclusion to be drawn, further randomized controlled trials (RCTs) of a higher methodological and quality level are required.