Opioid-Free Anesthesia for Lung Cancer Resection: A Case-Control Study

Opioid-free anesthesia improves postoperative recovery quality of small and medium-sized surgery: a prospective, randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Opioid anesthesia (OA) is currently the predominant anesthetic method. However, its associated side effects, such as nausea and vomiting, coupled with the principle of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS), have spurred the adoption of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) in select surgical procedures. For small and medium-sized operations, ERAS is particularly important. The aim of this study was to investigate the effect of OFA, utilizing esketamine in combination with dexmedetomidine and sevoflurane, on postoperative recovery quality following small and medium-sized surgical interventions.

METHODS

A total of 120 patients who underwent various small and medium-sized operations were randomly allocated to OFA and OA groups. The OA group received sufentanyl and sevoflurane, while the OFA group received esketamine, dexmedetomidine, and sevoflurane. The primary outcome measure was the postoperative quality of recovery-40 scores (QoR-40) 24 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes included hemodynamic changes at different time intervals, the incidences of adverse events were recorded.

RESULTS

Patients in the OFA group exhibited a higher QoR-40 score of 184.0 (182.0, 186.2) compared to 182.0 (180.0, 184.0) in the OA group (P<0.001). The disparities were particularly noble in terms of Physical comfort and Emotional status. Multivariable analysis identified postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) as a significant independent factor impacting QoR-40 (β=-4.49 [-6.1, -2.87], P<0.001). Hemodynamic stability was more pronounced in the OFA than in the OA group. The incidence of PONV was substantially lower in the OFA group (one [1.6%] vs. 14 [25%], P<0.001), with a reduced need for vasoactive drugs (five [7.8%] vs. 15 [26.8%], P=0.005), and a lower incidence of respiratory depression (0 [0%] vs. six [10.7%], P=0.009).

CONCLUSIONS

OFA improves the postoperative recovery quality in small and medium-sized surgical procedures, potentially attributed to decreased incidence of PONV. Additionally, OFA facilitates the maintenance of more stable hemodynamics throughout the operation.

Safety and effectiveness of opioid-free anaesthesia in thoracoscopic surgery: a preliminary retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to observe the effect of opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) on intraoperative haemodynamic,postoperative analgesia and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in thoracoscopic surgery in order to provide more evidence for evaluating the safety and effectiveness of OFA technology.

METHODS

This was a single-centre retrospective observational study.Adult patients who underwent thoracoscopic surgery with the preoperative thoracic paravertebral block between January 2017 and June 2020 were included.A cohort of 101 thoracoscopic surgery patients who received the OFA technique were matched with 101 thoracoscopic surgery patients who received standard opioid-containing anaesthesia(SOA). Heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) were measured before anaesthesia induction, immediately after endotracheal intubation, at the beginning of surgery, and 10, 20, and 30 min after surgery began.The total amount of intraoperative infusion, frequency of vasoactive drugs use, morphine ingested via the patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) 24 h post-surgery,visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at rest and activity on the first day post-surgery, and frequency of nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery were analysed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in intraoperative HR between the two groups (F = 0.889, P = 0.347); however, there was significant difference in intraoperative MAP (F = 16.709, P < 0.001), which was lower in SOA patients than in OFA patients. The frequency of vasoactive drug use and amount of infusion was less in OFA patients (P = 0.001). The consumption of morphine used by the PCIA 24 h post-surgery was significantly lower in OFA patients (OFA, 1.8 [0, 4.8] mg vs. SOA, 3.6 [0.6, 23] mg, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in VAS scores at rest (P = 0.745) or during activity (P = 0.792) on the first day post-surgery. There was also no statistically significant difference in nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery (P = 0.651).

CONCLUSIONS

This case-control study demonstrated that compared with SOA, OFA can effectively maintain the stability of intraoperative MAP, reduce the incidence of hypotension. Although OFA reduced morphine consumption via the PCIA pump 24 h post-surgery, postoperative pain scores and nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery were similar between the groups.But this study was only a preliminary study and needed to confirm in a larger, more robust trial.

Opioid-free anaesthesia reduces postoperative nausea and vomiting after thoracoscopic lung resection: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Intraoperative opioid use has a positive relationship with postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), and opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) might reduce PONV. We investigated whether OFA compared with opioid-based anaesthesia would reduce PONV during the first 2 postoperative days among patients undergoing thoracoscopic lung resection.

METHODS

In this randomised controlled trial, 120 adult patients were randomly assigned (1:1, stratified by sex) to receive either OFA with esketamine, dexmedetomidine, and sevoflurane, or opioid-based anaesthesia with sufentanil and sevoflurane. A surgical pleth index (SPI) of 20-50 was applied for intraoperative analgesia provision. All subjects received PONV prophylaxis (dexamethasone and ondansetron) and multimodal analgesia (flurbiprofen axetil, ropivacaine wound infiltration, and patient-controlled sufentanil). The primary outcome was the occurrence of PONV during the first 48 h after surgery.

RESULTS

The median age was 53 yr and 66.7% were female. Compared with opioid-based anaesthesia, OFA significantly reduced the incidence of PONV (15% vs 31.7%; odds ratio [OR]=0.38, 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.16-0.91; number needed to treat, 6; P=0.031). Secondary and safety outcomes were comparable between groups, except that OFA led to a lower rate of vomiting (OR=0.23, 95% CI, 0.08-0.77) and a longer length of PACU stay (median difference=15.5 min, 95% CI, 10-20 min). The effects of OFA on PONV did not differ in the prespecified subgroups of sex, smoking status, and PONV risk scores.

CONCLUSIONS

In the context of PONV prophylaxis and multimodal analgesia, SPI-guided opioid-free anaesthesia halved the incidence of PONV after thoracoscopic lung resection, although it was associated with a longer stay in the PACU.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200059710).

Opioid-free anesthesia versus opioid-based anesthesia in patients undergoing cardiovascular and thoracic surgery: a meta-analysis and systematic review

BACKGROUND

Despite their extensive clinical use, opioids are characterized by several side effects. These complications, coupled with the ongoing opioid epidemic, have favored the rise of opioid-free-anesthesia (OFA). Herein, we perform the first pairwise meta-analysis of clinical outcomes for OFA vs opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in patients undergoing cardiovascular and thoracic surgery.

METHODS

We comprehensively searched medical databases to identify studies comparing OFA and OBA in patients undergoing cardiovascular or thoracic surgery. Pairwise meta-analysis was performed using the Mantel-Haenszel method. Outcomes were pooled as risk ratios (RR) or standard mean differences (SMD) and their 95% confidence intervals (95% CI).

RESULTS

Our pooled analysis included 919 patients (8 studies), of whom 488 underwent surgery with OBA and 431 with OFA. Among cardiovascular surgery patients, compared to OBA, OFA was associated with significantly reduced post-operative nausea and vomiting (RR, 0.57; P = .042), inotrope need (RR .84, P = .045), and non-invasive ventilation (RR, .54; P = .028). However, no differences were observed for 24hr pain score (SMD, -.35; P = .510) or 48hr morphine equivalent consumption (SMD, -1.09; P = .139). Among thoracic surgery patients, there was no difference between OFA and OBA for any of the explored outcomes, including post-operative nausea and vomiting (RR, 0.41; P = .025).

CONCLUSION

Through the first pooled analysis of OBA vs OFA in a cardiothoracic-exclusive cohort, we found no significant difference in any of the pooled outcomes for thoracic surgery patients. Although limited to 2 cardiovascular surgery studies, OFA was associated with significantly reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting, inotrope need, and non-invasive ventilation in these patients. With growing use of OFA in invasive operations, further studies are needed to assess their efficacy and safety in cardiothoracic patients.

Perioperative pain management in thoracic surgery: A survey of practices in Australia and New Zealand

There are few data on current trends in pain management for thoracic surgery in Australia and New Zealand. Several new regional analgesia techniques have been introduced for these operations in the past few years. Our survey aimed to assess current practice and perceptions towards various modalities of pain management for thoracic surgery among anaesthetists in Australia and New Zealand. A 22-question electronic survey was developed and distributed in 2020 with the assistance of the Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists Cardiac Thoracic Vascular and Perfusion Special Interest Group. The survey focused on four key domains-demographics, general pain management, operative technique, and postoperative approach. Of the 696 invitations, 165 complete responses were obtained, for a response rate of 24%. Most respondents reported a trend away from the historical standard of thoracic epidural analgesia, with a preference towards non-neuraxial regional analgesia techniques. If representative of anaesthetists in Australia and New Zealand more widely, this trend may result in less exposure of junior anaesthetists to the insertion and management of thoracic epidurals, potentially resulting in reduced familiarity and confidence in the technique. Furthermore, it demonstrates a notable reliance on surgically or intraoperatively placed paravertebral catheters as the primary analgesic modality, and suggests the need for future studies assessing the optimal method of catheter insertion and perioperative management. It also gives some insight into the current opinion and practice of the respondents with regard to formalised enhanced recovery after surgery pathways, acute pain services, opioid-free anaesthesia, and current medication selection.

Can Opioid-Free Anaesthesia Be Personalised? A Narrative Review

Background: A significant amount of evidence suggests that Opioid-Free Anaesthesia (OFA) may provide better outcomes for patients undergoing surgery, sparing patients who are particularly vulnerable to adverse side effects of opioids. However, to what extent personalizing OFA is feasible and beneficial has not been adequately described. Methods: We conducted a narrative literature review aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of nociception and pain and its context within the field of OFA. Physiological (including monitoring), pharmacological, procedural (type of surgery), genetical and phenotypical (including patients’ conditions) were considered. Results: We did not find any monitoring robustly associated with improved outcomes. However, we found evidence supporting particular OFA indications, such as bariatric and cancer surgery. We found that vulnerable patients may benefit more from OFA, with an interesting field of research in patients suffering from vascular disease. We found a variety of techniques and medications making it impossible to consider OFA as a single technique. Our findings suggest that a vast field of research remains unexplored. In particular, a deeper understanding of nociception with an interest in its genetic and acquired contributors would be an excellent starting point paving the way for personalised OFA. Conclusion: Recent developments in OFA may present a more holistic approach, challenging the use of opioids. Understanding better nociception, given the variety of OFA techniques, may help to maximize their potential in different contexts and potential indications.

Opioid Free Anesthesia in Thoracic Surgery: A Systematic Review and Meta Analysis

Introduction: Recent studies showed that balanced opioid-free anesthesia is feasible and desirable in several surgical settings. However, in thoracic surgery, scientific evidence is still lacking. Thus, we conducted the first systematic review and meta-analysis of opioid-free anesthesia in this field. Methods: The primary outcome was the occurrence of any complication. Secondary outcomes were the length of hospital stay, recovery room length of stay, postoperative pain at 24 and 48 h, and morphine equivalent consumption at 48 h. Results: Out of 375 potentially relevant articles, 6 studies (1 randomized controlled trial and 5 observational cohort studies) counting a total of 904 patients were included. Opioid-free anesthesia compared to opioid-based anesthesia, was associated with a lower rate of any complication (74 of 175 [42%] vs. 200 of 294 [68%]; RR = 0.76; 95% CI, 0.65−0.89; p < 0.001; I2 = 0%), lower 48 h morphine equivalent consumption (MD −14.5 [−29.17/−0.22]; p = 0.05; I2 = 95%) and lower pain at 48 h (MD −1.95 [−3.6/0.3]; p = 0.02, I = 98%). Conclusions: Opioid-free anesthesia in thoracic surgery is associated with lower postoperative complications, and less opioid demand with better postoperative analgesia at 48 h compared to opioid-based anesthesia.

Opioid-reduced anesthesia based on esketamine in gynecological day surgery: a randomized double-blind controlled study

Background

Opioid-reduced anesthesia may accelerate postoperative rehabilitation by reducing opioid-related side effects. The objective was to investigate the feasibility of opioid-reduced general anesthesia based on esketamine and to observe postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), postoperative pain, hemodynamics and other adverse reactions in gynecological day surgery compared with the traditional opioid-based anesthesia program.

Method

This study was conducted as a prospective parallel-group randomized controlled trial. A total of 141 adult women undergoing gynecological day surgery were included. Patients were randomly assigned to receive traditional opioid-based anesthesia (Group C) with alfentanil, or opioid-reduced anesthesia (a moderate-opioid group (Group MO) and low-opioid group (Group LO) with esketamine and alfentanil). For anesthesia induction, the three groups received 20, 20, 10 μg/kg alfentanil respectively and Group LO received an additional 0.2 mg/kg esketamine. For maintenance of anesthesia, the patients in Group C received 40 μg/kg/h alfentanil, and those in Group MO and Group LO received 0.5 mg/kg/h esketamine.

Results

Patients in the three groups had comparable clinical and surgical data. A total of 33.3% of patients in Group C, 18.4% of patients in Group MO and 43.2% of patients in Group LO met the primary endpoint (p = 0.033), and the incidence of nausea within 24 hours after surgery in Group MO was lower than in Group LO (p < 0.05). The extubation time, median length of stay in the hospital after surgery and visual analog scale (VAS) of postoperative pain were equivalent in the three groups. The frequencies of adverse hemodynamic events in the MO 1(0, 2) and LO 0(0, 1) groups were significantly decreased (p < 0.05). Compared with Group C, the median length of stay in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) in Group LO was increased, 60.0 (36.25, 88.75) vs. 42.5 (25, 73.75) minutes (p < 0.05).

Conclusions

Opioid-reduced anesthesia based on esketamine is feasible and provides effective analgesia for patients. Esketamine provided a positive analgesic effect and the opioid-reduced groups showed more stable hemodynamics. However, less or no use of opioids did not result in a more comfortable prognosis.

Trial registration

This study was registered at Chictr.org.cn (NO. ChiCTR2100053153); November 13, 2021.

Standard opioid-containing versus opioid-sparing anesthesia on early postoperative recovery after video-assisted thoracic surgery: A propensity-weighted analysis

PURPOSE

Opioids have several adverse effects. At present, there are no large clinical studies on the effects of opioid-sparing anesthesia on early postoperative recovery after thoracoscopic surgery. This study was to investigate the effects of opioid-sparing anesthesia on early postoperative recovery after thoracoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent video-assisted thoracic surgery from 1 January 2019 to 28 February 2021 were enrolled by reviewing the electronic medical records. Participants were divided into opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA group) and opioid-containing anesthesia (STD group) based on intraoperative opioid usage. The propensity-score analysis was to compare the early postoperative recovery of two groups. The outcome measurements included the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) during an entire hospital stay, need for rescue antiemetic medication, postoperative-pain episodes within 48 h after surgery, need for rescue analgesia 48 h postoperatively, duration of postoperative hospital stay, length of PACU stay, postoperative fever, postoperative shivering, postoperative atrial fibrillation, postoperative pulmonary infection, postoperative hypoalbuminemia, postoperative hypoxemia, intraoperative blood loss, and intraoperative urine output.

RESULTS

A total of 1,975 patients were identified. No significant difference was observed in patient characteristics between the OSA and STD groups after adjusting for propensity score-based inverse probability treatment weighting. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in the OSA group than in the STD group (14.7% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.041). The rescue antiemetic use rate was lower in the OSA group than in the STD group (7.5% vs.12.2%; p = 0.002). PACU duration was longer in the OSA group than in the STD group (70.8 ± 29.0 min vs. 67.3 ± 22.7 min; p = 0.016). The incidence of postoperative fever was higher in the STD group than that in the OSA group (11.0% vs.7.7%; p = 0.032). There were no differences between the groups in terms of other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that opioid-sparing anesthesia has a lower incidence of postoperative complications than opioid-based anesthetic techniques.

Aktuelle ERAS-Implementierung in der Thoraxchirurgie an deutschen Kliniken

Einleitung In den letzten Jahren haben sich zunehmend ERAS-Behandlungspfade in vielen chirurgischen Bereichen etabliert, da sie allgemeine Komplikationen reduzieren und die Genesung von Patienten erheblich beschleunigen können. Für die Thoraxchirurgie wurden 2019 erstmals ERAS-Guidelines von der ERAS Society in Zusammenarbeit mit der European Society of Thoracic Surgeons (ESTS) veröffentlicht. Inwieweit sich ERAS-Maßnahmen im klinischen Alltag in der Thoraxchirurgie in Deutschland etabliert haben, wurde anhand eines Online-Fragebogens evaluiert.

Material und Methoden Es wurde eine Onlineumfrage zur aktuellen ERAS-Implementierung an deutschen Kliniken durchgeführt. Zeitraum der Umfrage war vom 12.05.2021 bis zum 01.06.2021. Im Fragebogen, der 22 Fragen umfasste, wurde die aktuelle Umsetzung verschiedener perioperativer Maßnahmen (u. a. Mobilisation, Thoraxdrainagen-Management, Schmerzmanagement) als wesentliche Items des ERAS-Pathways erfragt. Anschließend wurden die Resultate zusammengefasst, beschreibend analysiert und in den Kontext der aktuellen Literatur gesetzt.

Ergebnisse Von 155 angeschriebenen leitenden Thoraxchirurgen beantworteten 32 den Fragebogen. Bei 28,1% (n = 9) der Kliniken war ein ERAS-Kernteam etabliert, eine Datenbank zur Erfassung der ERAS-Items gab es in 15,6% (n = 5). Zudem bekamen die Patienten meist kein ERAS-Tagebuch (96,9%, n = 31) ausgehändigt. Ein präoperatives Carboloading wurde von 15,6% (n = 5) durchgeführt. Eine PONV-Prophylaxe wurde bei 59,4% (n = 19) der Befragten standardmäßig durchgeführt. In der Regel wurde bei elektiven anatomischen Resektionen eine Thoraxdrainage (84,4%, n = 27) eingelegt. Bei 3% (n = 1) der Zentren wurden 2 Drainagen eingelegt, bei 12,5% (n = 4) wurde keine Drainage intraoperativ eingebracht. Meist wurden digitale Drainagesysteme verwendet (90,6%, n = 29). Der am häufigsten angewendete initiale Drainagensog war –10 cm H2O (75%, n = 24). Einen Sog von ≤ 2 cmH2O verwendeten lediglich 2 Befragte. Die Drainageentfernung erfolgte in 50% (n = 16) der Fälle am 1. oder 2. postoperativen Tag (POD), in 34,4% (n = 11) am 3. und 4. POD und bei 9,4% (n = 3) verblieb die Drainage über den 4. Tag hinaus. Bei 71,9% (n = 23) der Befragten erfolgte die erste Mobilisation postoperativ noch am OP-Tag.

Diskussion Die Implementierung der ERAS-Guidelines ist in Deutschland interindividuell noch sehr variabel. Bestimmte perioperative Prozesse werden bereits gut abgedeckt, allerdings ist eine vollständige Umsetzung von ERAS-Items noch nicht gänzlich in der klinischen Praxis angekommen. Erste Schritte in diese Richtung wurden bereits gemacht und legen die Grundlage für eine weitere zentrumsübergreifende Zusammenarbeit.

Effects of Propofol Intravenous Anesthesia on Serum NGF, S100B Protein, and Immune Function in Patients with Bladder Cancer after Resection

Objective

To explore the efficacy of intravenous propofol anesthesia on patients with bladder cancer after resection, as well as its effect on cognitive and immune function.

Methods

Patients with bladder cancer and received resection of bladder cancer at our hospital from May 1, 2019, to November 30, 2021, were retrospectively retrieved and included in this study. The included patients were summarized into group A (isoflurane) and group B (intravenous propofol). The anesthesia intervention effect, serum NGF level, serum S100B protein level, and immune function before surgery, 6 h after surgery, 1 d after surgery, and 3 d after surgery were compared between the two groups.

Results

Eighty-six patients were retrieved. The anesthesia intervention effective rate of patients in group B was significantly higher than that of patients in group A (P < 0.01). The serum NGF and S100B of patients in both groups were significantly lower on postsurgical day 1, but in the trend to returning to those before intervention level on day 3. There were also fluctuations in immune function represented by changes in CD3+, CD4+, CD8+, and CD4+/CD8+ T cells, which showed return of function by postsurgical day 3.

Conclusion

The anesthetic effect of intravenous propofol in patients with bladder cancer resection is significantly more satisfactory than isoflurane, with a transient effect on serum NGF and S100B protein levels and patients' immune function, which suggests that intravenous propofol can be widely used for general anesthesia in clinical practice.

The Effect of Opioid-Free Anesthesia on the Quality of Recovery After Gynecological Laparoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is an emerging technique that eliminates intraoperative use of opioids and is associated with lower postoperative opioid consumption and reduced adverse postoperative events. The present study investigated the effect of OFA on the quality of recovery in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopy.

Patients and Methods

Seventy-five adult patients undergoing elective gynecological laparoscopy were randomly assigned to the OFA group with dexmedetomidine and lidocaine or the remifentanil-based anesthesia (RA) group with remifentanil. Patients, surgeons, and medical staff members providing postoperative care and assessing outcomes were blinded to group allocation. The anesthesiologist performing general anesthesia could not be blinded due to the different drug administration protocols by groups. The primary outcome was the quality of recovery measured using the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain score, intraoperative and postoperative adverse events, and stress hormones levels.

Results

The patients in both groups had comparable baseline characteristics. The QoR-40 score on postoperative day 1 was significantly higher in the OFA group than in the RA group (155.9 ± 21.2 in the RA group vs 166.9 ± 17.8 in the OFA group; mean difference: −11.0, 95% confidence interval: −20.0, −2.0; p = 0.018). The visual analog scale score at 30 min after surgery was significantly lower in the OFA group than in the RA group (6.3 ± 2.3 in the RA group vs 4.1 ± 2.1 in the OFA group; p < 0.001). The incidences of nausea and shivering in the post-anesthetic care unit were also significantly lower in the OFA group (p = 0.014 and 0.025; respectively). Epinephrine levels were significantly lower in the OFA group (p = 0.002).

Conclusion

OFA significantly improved the quality of recovery in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopy.

An Opioid-Sparing Strategy for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Matched Case-Controlled Study in China

Background: Opioid-sparing anesthesia may enhance postoperative recovery by reducing opioid-related side effects. The present study was to evaluate the effect of an opioid-sparing strategy in bariatric surgery.

Methods: This study was conducted as a retrospective matched case-controlled (1:1) study. A total of 44 patients receiving either an opioid-based approach (OBA group) or an opioid-sparing strategy (OSA group) who under laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were included between May 2017 and October 2020. The primary outcome was the postoperative hospital length of stay (PLOS). Secondary outcomes were the hospital costs, operative opioid consumption, time to recovery, postoperative pain score at rest and rescue antiemetic administered in the PACU.

Results: The clinical demographic and operative data in both groups were comparable. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the PLOS (OSA vs. OBA: 6.18 ± 0.23 days vs. 6.73 ± 0.39 days, p = 0.24). Compared to the OBA group, opioid consumption in the OSA group was significantly decreased (48.79 ± 4.85 OMEs vs. 10.57 ± 0.77 OMEs, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the hospital costs, time to recovery, and rescue antiemetic administered, the incidence of intravenous opioids and vasopressor use in the PACU.

Conclusion: The opioid-sparing anesthesia for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was feasible but did not decrease the PLOS.

Recommendations of the Society of Thoracic Surgery and the Section of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery of the Spanish Society of Anesthesia, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy, for patients undergoing lung surgery included in an intensified recovery program

In recent years, multidisciplinary programs have been implemented that include different actions during the pre, intra and postoperative period, aimed at reducing perioperative stress and therefore improving the results of patients undergoing surgical interventions. Initially, these programs were developed for colorectal surgery and from there they have been extended to other surgeries. Thoracic surgery, considered highly complex, like other surgeries with a high postoperative morbidity and mortality rate, may be one of the specialties that most benefit from the implementation of these programs. This review presents the recommendations made by different specialties involved in the perioperative care of patients who require resection of a lung tumor. Meta-analyzes, systematic reviews, randomized and non-randomized controlled studies, and retrospective studies conducted in patients undergoing this type of intervention have been taken into account in preparing the recommendations presented in this guide. The GRADE scale has been used to classify the recommendations, assessing on the one hand the level of evidence published on each specific aspect and, on the other hand, the strength of the recommendation with which the authors propose its application. The recommendations considered most important for this type of surgery are those that refer to pre-habilitation, minimization of surgical aggression, excellence in the management of perioperative pain and postoperative care aimed at providing rapid postoperative rehabilitation.

Impact of Opioid-Free Anesthesia after video-assisted thoracic surgery: a propensity score study

BACKGROUND

Adequate postoperative morphine consumption and pain management after thoracic surgery are major issues in the prevention of respiratory complications. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) may decrease morphine consumption and postoperative pain. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of OFA on the consumption of morphine and pain after video or robot-assisted thoracic surgery (VATS or RATS).

METHODS

The main objective of this retrospective study with propensity score analysis (PSA) was to compare the cumulative postoperative morphine consumption at 48 hours between a group receiving dexmedetomidine, lidocaine, ketamine (OFA group), and a group receiving remifentanil plus morphine (opioid anesthesia-group (OA)). Postoperative pain at 24 and 48 hours and respiratory and hemodynamics complications were also assessed.

RESULTS

81 patients were included: 48 in the OFA group and 33 in the OA group. The cumulative postoperative morphine consumption at 48 hours was lower in the OFA group than in the OA group (28.50 [0-62.25] mg vs. 55 [34-79.50] mg, P=0.002, with PSA; OFA: -27.67 [-46;-11.50 ] mg, P=0.002). The postoperative pain score was significantly lower in the OFA group compared to the OA group at 24 hours (2 [0-4] vs. 3 [2-5], P=0.064, with PSA; OFA: -1.40 [-2.47;-0.33], P=0.0088) and 48 hours (0 [0-3] vs. 2.5 [0-5], P=0.034, with PSA; OFA:-1.87 [-3.45;-0.28], P=0.021). There were no differences between groups concerning respiratory or hemodynamic complications.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that OFA after VATS or RATS is safe and is associated with less postoperative morphine cumulative consumption and pain at 48 hours.

Recommendations of the Society of Thoracic Surgery and the Section of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Surgery of the Spanish Society of Anesthesia, Resuscitation and Pain Therapy, for patients undergoing lung surgery included in an intensified recovery program

In recent years, multidisciplinary programs have been implemented that include different actions during the pre, intra and postoperative period, aimed at reducing perioperative stress and therefore improving the results of patients undergoing surgical interventions. Initially, these programs were developed for colorectal surgery and from there they have been extended to other surgeries. Thoracic surgery, considered highly complex, like other surgeries with a high postoperative morbidity and mortality rate, may be one of the specialties that most benefit from the implementation of these programs. This review presents the recommendations made by different specialties involved in the perioperative care of patients who require resection of a lung tumor. Meta-analyses, systematic reviews, randomized and non-randomized controlled studies, and retrospective studies conducted in patients undergoing this type of intervention have been taken into account in preparing the recommendations presented in this guide. The GRADE scale has been used to classify the recommendations, assessing on the one hand the level of evidence published on each specific aspect and, on the other hand, the strength of the recommendation with which the authors propose its application. The recommendations considered most important for this type of surgery are those that refer to pre-habilitation, minimization of surgical aggression, excellence in the management of perioperative pain and postoperative care aimed at providing rapid postoperative rehabilitation.

The Year in Thoracic Anesthesia: Selected Highlights From 2020

Selected highlights in thoracic anesthesia in 2020 include updates in the preoperative assessment and prehabilitation of patients undergoing thoracic surgery; updates in one-lung ventilation (OLV) pertaining to the devices used for OLV; the use of dexmedetomidine for lung protection during OLV and protective ventilation, recommendations for the care of thoracic surgical patients with coronavirus disease 2019; a review of recent meta-analyses comparing truncal blocks with paravertebral and thoracic epidural blocks; and a review of outcomes after initiating the enhanced recovery after surgery guidelines for lung and esophageal surgery.