Epidural Versus Transabdominal Wall Catheters: A Comparative Study of Outcomes After Pancreatic Resection

Regional anesthesia for transplantation surgery - A White Paper Part 2: Abdominal transplantation surgery

Transplantation surgery continues to evolve and improve through advancements in transplant technique and technology. With the increased availability of ultrasound machines as well as the continued development of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols, regional anesthesia has become an essential component of providing analgesia and minimizing opioid use perioperatively. Many centers currently utilize peripheral and neuraxial blocks during transplantation surgery, but these techniques are far from standardized practices. The utilization of these procedures is often dependent on transplantation centers' historical methods and perioperative cultures. To date, no formal guidelines or recommendations exist which address the use of regional anesthesia in transplantation surgery. In response, the Society for the Advancement of Transplant Anesthesia (SATA) identified experts in both transplantation surgery and regional anesthesia to review available literature concerning these topics. The goal of this task force was to provide an overview of these publications to help guide transplantation anesthesiologists in utilizing regional anesthesia. The literature search encompassed most transplantation surgeries currently performed and the multitude of associated regional anesthetic techniques. Outcomes analyzed included analgesic effectiveness of the blocks, reduction in other analgesic modalities-particularly opioid use, improvement in patient hemodynamics, as well as associated complications. The findings summarized in this systemic review support the use of regional anesthesia for postoperative pain control after transplantation surgeries. Part 1 of the manuscript focused on regional anesthesia performed in thoracic transplantation surgeries, and part 2 in abdominal transplantations. Specifically, regional anesthesia in liver, kidney, pancreas, intestinal, and uterus transplants or applicable surgeries are discussed.

Analgesic Modalities in Patients Undergoing Open Pancreatoduodenectomy-A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

This systematic review explored the efficacy of different analgesic modalities and the impact on perioperative outcome in patients undergoing pancreatoduodenectomy.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed on PubMed, Embase, Web of Science, Scopus, and Cochrane Library Database using the PRISMA framework. The primary outcome was pain scores on postoperative day one (POD1) and postoperative day two (POD2). The secondary outcomes included length of hospital stay (LOS) and specific procedure-related complications.

RESULTS

Five randomized controlled trials and ten retrospective cohort studies were included in the systematic review. Studies compared epidural analgesia (EA), patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), continuous wound infiltration (CWI), continuous bilateral thoracic paravertebral infusion (CTPVI), intrathecal morphine (ITM), and sublingual sufentanil. The pain scores on POD1 (p < 0.001) and POD2 (p = 0.05) were higher in the PCA group compared with the EA group. Pain scores were comparable between EA and CWI plus PCA or CTPVI on POD1 and POD2. Pain scores were comparable between EA and ITM on POD1. The procedure-related complications and length of hospital stay were not significantly different according to the type of analgesia.

CONCLUSIONS

EA provided lower pain scores compared with PCA on the first postoperative day after pancreatoduodenectomy; the length of hospital stay and procedure-related complications were similar between EA and PCA. CWI and CTPVI provided similar pain relief to EA.

A comparative study on analgesic and non-analgesic outcomes of inter pleural analgesia compared to thoracic epidural analgesia in open pancreatico-duodenectomy

Backgrounds/Aims

Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is an established analgesic method in open Kausch-Whipple pancreaticoduodenectomy (KWPD). Although, it can cause hemodynamic instability and neurological complications. Inter pleural analgesia (IPA) is an alternative option. We aim to evaluate the effectiveness of IPA versus TEA after KWPD.

Methods

We retrospectively studied the efficacy of IPA against TEA in patients, operated by a single surgeon. The primary outcome was the analgesic efficacy and secondary outcomes were analgesia-related complications, inotrope use, and duration.

Results

Forty patients (TEA, 22; IPA, 18) were included. Both groups were well matched for patient characteristics, type, and duration of surgery. TEA was associated with higher analgesia-related complications (n = 8, 36.4% vs. n = 1, 5.6%; p = 0.027). TEA complications included analgesia not working (n = 4), leakage (n = 2), refractory hemodynamic instability (n = 1), and lower limb anaesthesia (n = 1). One patient in the IPA group encountered leakage. TEA was associated with longer inotrope requirement (35 vs. 18 hours; p = 0.047). There was no significant difference in intensive care unit (ITU) admission rate (81.8% vs. 77.8%; p > 0.999), median ITU stay (3 vs. 2 days, p = 0.385), or hospital stay (11 days in both groups).

Conclusions

In open KWPD, IPA is not inferior to TEA in its efficacy of pain control. IPA was associated with less analgesia-related complications and shorter inotrope requirements. However, this was a small retrospective study. Larger randomized controlled trials are needed to study the effectiveness of IPA.