Early postoperative complications after intracranial surgery: comparison between total intravenous and balanced anesthesia

Efficacy of propofol-based anesthesia against risk of brain swelling during craniotomy: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

STUDY OBJECTIVE

This meta-analysis aimed to compare the risk of brain swelling during craniotomy between propofol-based and volatile-based anesthesia.

DESIGN

Meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials (RCTs).

SETTING

Operating room.

INTERVENTION

Propofol-based anesthesia.

PATIENTS

Adult patients undergoing craniotomy.

MEASUREMENTS

Databases, including EMBASE, MEDLINE, Google Scholar, and Cochrane Library, were searched from inception to April 2023. The primary outcome was the risk of brain swelling, while the secondary outcomes included the impact of anesthetic regimens on surgical and recovery outcomes, as well as the risk of hemodynamic instability.

MAIN RESULTS

Our meta-analysis of 17 RCTs showed a significantly lower risk of brain swelling (risk ratio [RR]: 0.85, p = 0.03, I2 = 21%, n = 1976) in patients receiving propofol than in those using volatile agents, without significant differences in surgical time or blood loss between the two groups. Moreover, propofol was associated with a lower intracranial pressure (ICP) (mean difference: -4.06 mmHg, p < 0.00001, I2 = 44%, n = 409) as well as a lower risk of tachycardia (RR = 0.54, p = 0.005, I2 = 0%, n = 822) and postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV) (RR = 0.59, p = 0.002, I2 = 19%, n = 1382). There were no significant differences in other recovery outcomes (e.g., extubation time), risk of bradycardia, hypertension, or hypotension between the two groups. Subgroup analysis indicated that propofol was not associated with a reduced risk of brain swelling when compared to individual volatile agents. Stratified by craniotomy indications, propofol reduced brain swelling in elective craniotomy, but not in emergency craniotomy (e.g., traumatic brain injury), when compared to volatile anesthetics.

CONCLUSIONS

By reviewing the available evidence, our results demonstrate the beneficial effects of propofol on the risk of brain swelling, ICP, PONV, and intraoperative tachycardia. In emergency craniotomy for traumatic brain injury and subarachnoid hemorrhage, brain swelling showed no significant difference between propofol and volatile agents. Further large-scale studies are warranted for verification.

Efficacy and safety of sevoflurane vs propofol in combination with remifentanil for anesthesia maintenance during craniotomy: A meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the efficacy and safety of sevoflurane-remifentanil (SR) vs propofol-remifentanil (PR) as inhalation anesthesia or total intravenous anesthesia in patients undergoing craniotomy, respectively.

METHODS

Electronic databases included PubMed, ScienceDirect, Embase, Cochrane library, CNKI, and Wanfang data were searched using suitable search items. Randomized clinical controlled trials comparing the combination of SR and PR as anesthetics for neurosurgery were included. The outcomes included wake-up time, spontaneous respiration time, extubation time, and safety.

RESULTS

Seventeen studies were included in this meta-analysis. There were no statistically significant differences in wake-up time (P = .25, standardized mean difference (SMD) = 0.29, 95% CI -0.20 to 0.77), extubation time (P = .1, SMD = 0.52, 95% CI -0.11 to 1.14) and spontaneous respiration time (P = .58, SMD = 0.43, 95% CI -1.07 to 1.93) when patients with SF and PF for anesthesia maintenance. Moreover, the changes of hemodynamic parameters are similar between the 2 groups. During anesthesia maintenance, SF could significantly increase the incidence of hypotension and brain edema than PF (P = .02, SMD = 1.68, 95% CI 1.07 to 2.62; P < .0001, SMD = 3.37, 95% CI 1.86 to 6.12), PF markedly promoted the incidence of hypertension (P = .001, SMD = 0.55, 95% CI 0.39 to 0.79). The postoperative adverse reactions were similar between the 2 groups (P > .05), but the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting proved to be higher in SF group (P < .0001, SMD = 2.12, 95% CI 1.47 to 3.07).

CONCLUSIONS

SR and PR as anesthetics in patients underwent craniotomy had similar effects, but PR was superior to SR in terms of safety of intraoperation and postoperation.

Anesthetic management of unruptured intracranial aneurysms: a qualitative systematic review

Intracranial aneurysms (IA) occur in 3-5% of the general population and may require surgical or endovascular obliteration if the patient is symptomatic or has an increased risk of rupture. These procedures carry an inherent risk of neurological complications, and the outcome can be influenced by the physiological and pharmacological effects of the administered anesthetics. Despite the critical role of anesthetic agents, however, there are no current studies to systematically assess the intraoperative anesthetic risks, benefits, and outcome effects in this population. In this systematic review of the literature, we carefully examine the existing evidence on the risks and benefits of common anesthetic agents during IA obliteration, their physiological and clinical characteristics, and effects on neurological outcome. The initial search strategy captured a total of 287 published studies. Following the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines, 28 studies were included in the final report. Our data showed that both volatile and intravenous anesthetics are commonly employed, without evidence that either is superior. Although no specific anesthetic regimens are promoted, their unique neurological, cardiovascular, and physiological properties may be critical to the outcome in vulnerable patients. In particular, patients at risk for perioperative ischemia may benefit from timely administration of anesthetic agents with neuroprotective properties and optimization of their physiological parameters. Further studies are warranted to examine if these anesthetic regimens can reduce the risk of neurological injury and improve the overall outcome in these patients.

Retrospective evaluation of labetalol as antihypertensive agent in dogs

Background

To evaluate the effect on arterial blood pressure (ABP) of labetalol infusion as treatment for perioperative non nociceptive acute hypertension in dogs. The clinical records of dogs receiving intra or postoperative labetalol infusion were retrospectively reviewed. Invasive systolic (SAP), mean (MAP) and diastolic (DAP) arterial pressure and heart rate (HR) before labetalol infusion (T0) and 15, 30, 45 and 60 min (T1, T2, T3 and T4 respectively) after infusion were retrieved. The dose rate of labetalol infusion and use of concurrently administered drugs that could have potentially affected ABP and/or HR were also recorded. ANOVA for repeated measures and Dunnett’s multiple comparison test were used to determine the effect of labetalol on ABP and HR. Differences were considered significant when p < 0.05.

Results

A total of 20 dogs met the inclusion criteria, and hypertension was documented after craniotomy (12/20), adrenalectomy (4/20) and other procedures (4/20). Five dogs received labetalol intraoperatively, 14 postoperatively, and 1 during the surgical procedure and recovery. Median infusion duration and rate were 463 (60-2120) minutes and 1.1 (0.2–3.4) mg/kg/h respectively. Median loading dose was 0.2 (0.2–0.4) mg/kg. Labetalol produced a significant decrease in SAP and DAP at all time points compared to T0 (p < 0.05), while the effect was not significant at T1 for MAP (p = 0.0519). Median maximum MAP decrease was 31 (20–90) mmHg. Heart rate did not increase significantly during treatment (p = 0.2454). Acepromazine given before or during labetalol treatment did not reduce significantly ABP (p = 0.735).

Conclusions

Labetalol produced a reliable and titratable decrease in ABP with non significant increase in HR.

Postoperative analgesia of scalp nerve block with ropivacaine in pediatric craniotomy patients: a protocol for a prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blinded trial

Background

Moderate-to-severe postoperative pain following craniotomy has a high incidence in pediatric patients. Such pain may cause agitation, intracranial hypertension, epileptic seizures, and postoperative hematoma, which affect morbidity and mortality. Although scalp nerve block (SNB) achieves satisfactory pain relief except for suboccipital mid-craniotomy in adults and ropivacaine is widely used as a long-acting peripheral nerve block agent in children, there are few studies of SNB with ropivacaine in pediatric patients undergoing craniotomy. In addition, the neurosurgery operation time is relatively long, but the duration of action of SNB is limited. It is generally believed that postoperative SNB is better than preoperative SNB for postoperative analgesia. However, considering the concept of preemptive analgesia, we believe that preoperative SNB may achieve a longer postoperative analgesia effect than we expected.

Methods

This trial is a single-institution, prospective, randomized, controlled, double-blind study. A total of 180 children aged between 1 and 12 years who are undergoing elective craniotomy will be randomly allocated in a 1:1:1 ratio to three groups: group B (preoperative ropivacaine block group), group A (postoperative ropivacaine block group), and group N (nonblocking control group). This randomization will be stratified by age in two strata (1–6 years and 7–12 years). The primary outcome is the total consumption of sufentanil within 24 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes include assessment of pain scores, total consumption of sufentanil and emergency-remedy medicine consumption at observation points, the occurrence of postoperative complications, and the length of hospitalization after surgery.

Discussion

This study is designed to explore the effect and feasibility of SNB with ropivacaine for postoperative analgesia in pediatric patients undergoing craniotomy. Further aims are to compare the effects of preoperative and postoperative SNB on postoperative analgesia in order to identify whether there is a preemptive analgesic effect and determine the better time to implement SNB in pediatric patients during craniotomy.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ChiCTR1800017386. Registered on 27 July 2018.

Perioperative Stroke

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

This review overviews perioperative stroke as it pertains to specific surgical procedures.

RECENT FINDINGS

As awareness of perioperative stroke increases, so does the opportunity to potentially improve outcomes for these patients by early stroke recognition and intervention. Perioperative stroke is defined to be any stroke that occurs within 30 days of the initial surgical procedure. The incidence of perioperative stroke varies and is dependent on the specific type of surgery performed. This chapter overviews the risks, mechanisms, and acute evaluation and management of perioperative stroke in four surgical populations: cardiac surgery, carotid endarterectomy, neurosurgery, and non-cardiac/non-carotid/non-neurological surgeries.

Narrative review of acute post-craniotomy pain. Concept and strategies for prevention and treatment of pain

The aim of this narrative review is to confirm that acute pain after craniotomy is frequent and presents with moderate to severe intensity. We also highlight the importance of not only treating post-craniotomy pain, but also of preventing it in order to reduce the incidence of chronic pain. Physicians should be aware that conventional postoperative analgesics (non-steroidal anti-inflammatory, paracetamol, cyclooxygenase inhibitors 2, opioids) are not the only options available. Performing a scalp block prior to surgical incision or after surgery, the use of intraoperative dexmedetomidine, and the perioperative administration of pregabalin are just some alternatives that are gaining ground. The management of post-craniotomy pain should be based on perioperative multimodal analgesia in the framework of an "enhaced recovery after surgery" (ERAS) approach.

Prediction Score for Postoperative Neurologic Complications after Brain Tumor Craniotomy

Editor’s Perspective

What We Already Know about This Topic

What This Article Tells Us That Is New

Background

Craniotomy for brain tumor displays significant morbidity and mortality, and no score is available to discriminate high-risk patients. Our objective was to validate a prediction score for postoperative neurosurgical complications in this setting.

Methods

Creation of a score in a learning cohort from a prospective specific database of 1,094 patients undergoing elective brain tumor craniotomy in one center from 2008 to 2012. The validation cohort was validated in a prospective multicenter independent cohort of 830 patients from 2013 to 2015 in six university hospitals in France. The primary outcome variable was postoperative neurologic complications requiring in–intensive care unit management (intracranial hypertension, intracranial bleeding, status epilepticus, respiratory failure, impaired consciousness, unexpected motor deficit). The least absolute shrinkage and selection operator method was used for potential risk factor selection with logistic regression.

Results

Severe complications occurred in 125 (11.4%) and 90 (10.8%) patients in the learning and validation cohorts, respectively. The independent risk factors for severe complications were related to the patient (Glasgow Coma Score before surgery at or below 14, history of brain tumor surgery), tumor characteristics (greatest diameter, cerebral midline shift at least 3 mm), and perioperative management (transfusion of blood products, maximum and minimal systolic arterial pressure, duration of surgery). The positive predictive value of the score at or below 3% was 12.1%, and the negative predictive value was 100% in the learning cohort. In–intensive care unit mortality was observed in eight (0.7%) and six (0.7%) patients in the learning and validation cohorts, respectively.

Conclusions

The validation of prediction scores is the first step toward on-demand intensive care unit admission. Further research is needed to improve the score’s performance before routine use.

Target-controlled Infusion Propofol Versus Sevoflurane Anaesthesia for Emergency Traumatic Brain Surgery: Comparison of the Outcomes

Background

The choice of anaesthetic techniques is important for the outcome of traumatic brain injury (TBI) emergency surgery. The objective of this study was to compare patient outcomes for target-controlled infusion (TCI) of propofol and sevoflurane anaesthesia.

Methods

A total of 110 severe TBI patients, aged 18-60, who underwent emergency brain surgery were randomised into Group T (TCI) (n = 55) and Group S (sevoflurane) (n = 55). Anaesthesia was maintained in Group T with propofol target plasma concentration of 3-6 μg/mL and in Group S with minimum alveolar concentration (MAC) of sevoflurane 1.0-1.5. Both groups received TCI remifentanil 2-8 ng/mL for analgesia. After the surgery, patients were managed in the intensive care unit and were followed up until discharge for the outcome parameters.

Results

Demographic characteristics were comparable in both groups. Differences in Glasgow Outcome Scale (GOS) score at discharge were not significant between Group T and Group S (P = 0.25): the percentages of mortality (GOS 1) [27.3% versus 16.4%], vegetative and severe disability (GOS 2-3) [29.1% versus 41.8%] and good outcome (GOS 4-5) [43.6% versus 41.8%] were comparable in both groups. There were no significant differences in other outcome parameters.

Conclusion

TCI propofol and sevoflurane anaesthesia were comparable in the outcomes of TBI patients after emergency surgery.

A Comparison of 4 Analgesic Regimens for Acute Postoperative Pain Control in Breast Augmentation Patients

PURPOSE

Patients undergoing breast augmentation are treated with multiple combinations of medications for pain control including ketorolac, liposomal bupivacaine, bupivacaine, and intravenous and oral narcotics. There is no current consensus on the optimal combination; therefore, all are used at the discretion of the surgeon.

METHODS

This was a single-center, retrospective study. The total number of patients included was 132. Comparisons were made between 4 groups: bupivacaine only (B); bupivacaine and liposomal bupivacaine (BL); bupivacaine and liposomal bupivacaine plus intraoperative ketorolac (BLKi); and bupivacaine and liposomal bupivacaine plus postoperative ketorolac (BLKp). Average pain scores immediately postoperative and before discharge were recorded and correlated to percentage of patients who received narcotic in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU). Additional end points noted were side effects including nausea and time spent in PACU postoperatively.

RESULTS

Those receiving intraoperative ketorolac had the lowest pain on discharge (P < 0.0001) and the lowest percentage of patients receiving narcotics (P = 0.009) out of all 4 groups. There was no significant difference between the 4 groups in terms of time spent in PACU, pain immediately after the procedure, or amount of antiemetic given. No bleeding complications were noted for those who did or did not receive ketorolac.

CONCLUSIONS

When given options for pain control in breast augmentation, intraoperative ketorolac should be considered, because its inclusion was significant in decreasing use of narcotics and pain upon discharge. Addition of other costly drugs such as liposomal bupivacaine may not provide additional benefit in the immediate postoperative setting for procedures with a short recovery period such as breast augmentation.

Postoperative complications after craniotomy for brain tumor surgery

INTRODUCTION

After elective craniotomy for brain tumour surgery, patients are usually admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) for monitoring. Our goal was to evaluate the incidence and timing of neurologic and non-neurologic postoperative complications after brain tumour surgery, to determine factors associated with neurologic events and to evaluate the timing and causes of ICU readmission.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

This prospective, observational and analytic study enrolled 188 patients admitted to the ICU after brain tumour surgery. All postoperative clinical events during the first 24hours were noted and classified. Readmission causes and timing were also analysed.

RESULTS

Twenty-one (11%) of the patients were kept sedated after surgery; the remaining 167 patients were studied. Thirty one percent of the patients presented at least one complication (25% with postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), 16% with neurologic complications). The occurrence of neurological complications was significantly associated with the absence of preoperative motor deficit and the presence of higher intraoperative bleeding. Seven patients (4%) were readmitted to the ICU after discharge; 43% (n=3) of them had a posterior fossa surgery.

CONCLUSION

Postoperative complications, especially PONV, are frequent after brain tumour surgery. Moreover, 16% of patients presented a neurological complication, probably justifying the ICU postoperative stay for early detection. The absence of preoperative motor deficit and intraoperative bleeding seems to predict postoperative neurologic complications. Finally, patients may present complications after ICU discharge, especially patients with fossa posterior surgery, suggesting that ICU hospitalization may be longer in this type of surgery.

Intravenous versus inhalational techniques for rapid emergence from anaesthesia in patients undergoing brain tumour surgery

BACKGROUND

Brain tumour surgery usually is carried out with the patient under general anaesthesia. Over past years, both intravenous and inhalational anaesthetic agents have been used, but the superiority of one agent over the other is a topic of ongoing debate. Early and rapid emergence from anaesthesia is desirable for most neurosurgical patients. With the availability of newer intravenous and inhalational anaesthetic agents, all of which have inherent advantages and disadvantages, we remain uncertain as to which technique may result in more rapid early recovery from anaesthesia.

OBJECTIVES

To assess the effects of intravenous versus inhalational techniques for rapid emergence from anaesthesia in patients undergoing brain tumour surgery.

SEARCH METHODS

We searched the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL; 2014, Issue 6) in The Cochrane Library, MEDLINE via Ovid SP (1966 to June 2014) and Embase via Ovid SP (1980 to June 2014). We also searched specific websites, such as www.indmed.nic.in, www.cochrane-sadcct.org and www.Clinicaltrials.gov (October 2014). We reran the searches for all databases in March 2016, and when we update the review, we will deal with the two studies of interest found through this search that are awaiting classification.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared the use of intravenous anaesthetic agents such as propofol and thiopentone with inhalational anaesthetic agents such as isoflurane and sevoflurane for maintenance of general anaesthesia during brain tumour surgery. Primary outcomes were emergence from anaesthesia (assessed by time to follow verbal commands, in minutes) and adverse events during emergence, such as haemodynamic changes, agitation, desaturation, muscle weakness, nausea and vomiting, shivering and pain. Secondary outcomes were time to eye opening, recovery from anaesthesia using the Aldrete or Modified Aldrete score (i.e. time to attain score ≥ 9, in minutes), opioid consumption, brain relaxation (as assessed by the surgeon on a 4- or 5-point scale) and complications of anaesthetic techniques, such as intraoperative haemodynamic instability in terms of hypotension or hypertension (mmHg), increased or decreased heart rate (beats/min) and brain swelling.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standardized methods in conducting the systematic review, as described by the Cochrane Handbook for Systematic Reviews of Interventions. Two review authors independently extracted details of trial methods and outcome data from reports of all trials considered eligible for inclusion. We performed all analyses on an intention-to-treat basis. We used a fixed-effect model when we found no evidence of significant heterogeneity between studies, and a random-effects model when heterogeneity was likely. For assessments of the overall quality of evidence for each outcome that included pooled data from RCTs only, we downgraded the evidence from 'high quality' by one level for serious (or by two levels for very serious) study limitations (risk of bias), indirectness of evidence, serious inconsistency, imprecision of effect or potential publication bias.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 15 RCTs with 1833 participants. We determined that none of the RCTs were of high methodological quality. For our primary outcomes, pooled results from two trials suggest that time to emergence from anaesthesia, that is, time needed to follow verbal commands, was longer with isoflurane than with propofol (mean difference (MD) -3.29 minutes, 95% confidence interval (CI) -5.41 to -1.18, low-quality evidence), and time to emergence from anaesthesia was not different with sevoflurane compared with propofol (MD 0.28 minutes slower with sevoflurane, 95% CI -0.56 to 1.12, four studies, low-quality evidence). Pooled analyses for adverse events suggest lower risk of nausea and vomiting with propofol than with sevoflurane (risk ratio (RR) 0.68, 95% CI 0.51 to 0.91, low-quality evidence) or isoflurane (RR 0.45, 95% CI 0.26 to 0.78) and greater risk of haemodynamic changes with propofol than with sevoflurane (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.07 to 3.17), but no differences in the risk of shivering or pain. Pooled analyses for brain relaxation suggest lower risk of tense brain with propofol than with isoflurane (RR 0.88, 95% CI 0.67 to 1.17, low-quality evidence), but no difference when propofol is compared with sevoflurane.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

The finding of our review is that the intravenous technique is comparable with the inhalational technique of using sevoflurane to provide early emergence from anaesthesia. Adverse events with both techniques are also comparable. However, we derived evidence of low quality from a limited number of studies. Use of isoflurane delays emergence from anaesthesia. These results should be interpreted with caution. Randomized controlled trials based on uniform and standard methods are needed. Researchers should follow proper methods of randomization and blinding, and trials should be adequately powered.

No Routine Postoperative Head CT following Elective Craniotomy--A Paradigm Shift?

Introduction

Patient management following elective cranial surgery often includes routine postoperative computed tomography (CT). We analyzed whether a regime of early extubation and close neurological monitoring without routine CT is safe, and compared the rate of postoperative emergency neurosurgical intervention with published data.

Methods

Four hundred ninety-two patients were prospectively analyzed; 360 had supra- and 132 had infratentorial lesions. Extubation within one hour after skin closure was aimed for in all cases. CT was performed within 48 hours only in cases of unexpected neurological findings.

Results

Four-hundred sixty-nine of the 492 patients (95.3%) were extubated within one hour, 20 (4.1%) within 3 hours, and three (0.6%) within 3 to 10 hours. Emergency CT within 48 hours was performed for 43/492 (8.7%) cases. Rate of recraniotomy within 48 hours for patients with postoperative hemorrhage was 0.8% (n = 4), and 0.8% (n = 4) required placement of an external ventricular drain (EVD). Of 469 patients extubated within one hour, 3 required recraniotomy and 2 required EVD placements. Of 23 patients with delayed extubation, 1 recraniotomy and 2 EVDs were required. Failure to extubate within one hour was associated with a significantly higher risk of surgical intervention within 48 hours (rate 13.0%, p = 0.004, odds ratio 13.9, 95% confidence interval [3.11–62.37]).

Discussion

Early extubation combined with close neurological monitoring is safe and omits the need for routine postoperative CT. Patients not extubated within one hour do need early CT, since they had a significantly increased risk of requiring emergency neurosurgical intervention.

Trial Registration

ClinicalTrials.gov NCT01987648

Esmolol reduces anesthetic requirements thereby facilitating early extubation; a prospective controlled study in patients undergoing intracranial surgery

BACKGROUND

Adequate cerebral perfusion pressure with quick and smooth emergence from anesthesia is a major concern of the neuroanesthesiologist. Anesthesia techniques that minimize anesthetic requirements and their effects may be beneficial. Esmolol, a short acting hyperselective β-adrenergic blocker is effective in blunting adrenergic response to several perioperative stimuli and so it might interfere in the effect of the anesthetic drugs on the brain. This study was designed to investigate the effect of esmolol on the consumption of propofol and sevoflurane in patients undergoing craniotomy.

METHOD

Forty-two patients that underwent craniotomy for aneurysm clipping or tumour dissection were randomly divided in two groups (four subgroups). Anesthesia was induced with propofol, fentanyl and a single dose of cis-atracurium, followed by continuous infusion of remifentanil and either propofol or sevoflurane. Patients in the esmolol group received 500 mcg/kg of esmolol bolus 10 min before induction of anesthesia, followed by additional 200 mcg/kg/min of esmolol. Monitoring of the depth of anesthesia was also performed using the Bispectral Index-BIS and cardiac output. The inspired concentration of sevoflurane and the infusion rate of propofol were adjusted in order to maintain a BIS value between 40-50. Intraoperative emergence was detected by the elevation of BIS value, HR or MAP.

RESULTS

The initial and the intraoperative doses of propofol and sevoflurane were 18-50 mcg/kg/min and 0.2-0.5 MAC respectively in the esmolol group, whereas in the control group they where 100-150 mcg/kg/ and 0.9-2.0 MAC respectively (p = 0.000 for both groups). All procedures were anesthesiologically uneventful with no episodes of intraoperative emerge.

CONCLUSIONS

Esmolol is effective not only in attenuating intraoperative hemodynamic changes related to sympathetic overdrive but also in minimizing significant propofol and sevoflurane requirements without compromising the hemodynamic status. ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT02455440 . Registered 26 May 2015.

Effects of General-epidural Anaesthesia on Haemodynamics in Patients with Myasthenia Gravis

OBJECTIVE

The current study aims to explore the effects of general-epidural anaesthesia (GEA) on the perioperative haemodynamics in patients with myasthenia gravis (MG), as well as their extubation time.

METHODS

A total of 42 MG patients (Ossermann I-II b types) receiving elective total thymectomy were randomized into GEA (n = 20) and general anaesthesia alone (GA; n = 22) groups. Changes in their mean arterial pressure (MAP) and heart rate (HR) were recorded before anesthesia and at the time of intubation, skin incision, sternotomy and extubation. Dosages of general anaesthetics during time unit and the time of extubation and complete recovery from the ending of the operation were also recorded.

RESULTS

After anaesthesia, both groups displayed increased MAPs and HRs, with those in the GA group significantly higher than those in the GEA group (p < 0.05). The total consumption of general anaesthetics in the GA group was markedly higher than that in the GEA group (p < 0.01).

CONCLUSION

The GEA group had shorter postoperative extubation and recovery time than the GA group (p < 0.01). General-epidural anaesthesia stabilizes perioperative haemodynamics, reduces the consumption of general anaesthetics and shortens extubation time. It is a feasible and ideal anaesthetic method at present.

Comparison of propofol and volatile agents for maintenance of anesthesia during elective craniotomy procedures: systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Both propofol and volatile anesthetics are commonly used for maintenance of anesthesia in patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures. The effects of these two classes of drugs on cerebral hemodynamics have been compared in many clinical trials The objectives of this review were to evaluate the cerebral hemodynamic effects, operative conditions, recovery profiles, postoperative complications, and neurological outcomes of propofol-based vs volatile-based anesthesia for craniotomy.

METHODS

MEDLINE®, EMBASE™, Cochrane, and other relevant databases were searched for randomized controlled trials that compared propofol-maintained anesthesia with volatile-maintained anesthesia in adult patients undergoing elective craniotomy. The primary outcome measure was the intraoperative brain relaxation score. Secondary outcome measures included intraoperative cerebral hemodynamics (intracranial pressure [ICP], cerebral perfusion pressure [CPP]), cardiovascular changes, recovery profiles, postoperative complications, and clinical outcomes (neurological morbidity, mortality, quality of life). A meta-analysis was conducted using a random effects model to compare the outcomes of the two anesthetic techniques.

RESULTS

Fourteen studies (1,819 patients) met inclusion criteria and were analyzed. Brain relaxation scores were similar between the two groups after dural opening; however, ICP was lower (weighted mean difference of -5.2 mmHg; 95% confidence interval -6.81 to -3.6) and CPP was higher (weighted mean difference of 16.3 mmHg; 95% confidence interval 12.2 to 20.46) in patients receiving propofol-maintained anesthesia. Postoperative complications and recovery profiles were similar between the two groups, except for postoperative nausea and vomiting being less frequent with propofol-maintained anesthesia. There were inadequate data to perform a meta-analysis on clinical outcome.

CONCLUSION

Propofol-maintained and volatile-maintained anesthesia were associated with similar brain relaxation scores, although mean ICP values were lower and CPP values higher with propofol-maintained anesthesia. There are inadequate data to compare clinically significant outcomes such as neurological morbidity or mortality.

Intracranial hemorrhage requiring surgery in neurosurgical patients given ketorolac: a case-control study within a cohort (2001-2010)

BACKGROUND

Ketorolac tromethamine (ketorolac) is a nonsedating drug with potent analgesic and moderate anti-inflammatory activity, which does not increase the sedation level. The safety of ketorolac with respect to risk of bleeding has been demonstrated in large numbers of patients undergoing general surgery, yet comparable safety data for neurosurgical patients are lacking. We studied the risk of symptomatic bleeding requiring surgery in patients undergoing elective neurosurgical procedures who received ketorolac as analgesic therapy.

METHODS

We established a cohort of patients who had elective intracranial procedures from January 2001 to August 2010 (excluding patients with urgent surgery, coagulopathy, history of anticoagulant or nonsteroidal, anti-inflammatory drug therapy) and verified the occurrence of postcraniotomy intracranial hemorrhage (ICH; detected by computed tomography and requiring surgery) in patients who received or did not receive ketorolac. Then, to control for potential confounders, we conducted a "nested" case-control study within the cohort: cases were defined as patients with ICH; controls were patients without ICH matched in a 2:1 ratio.

RESULTS

The cohort included 4086 craniotomy patients (mean age, 52.4±14.3 years, 2124 male, 52%). Of the 1571 patients who received ketorolac (mean dosage, 50±15 mg/d), 8 (0.5%) suffered ICH; of the 2515 patients who did not receive ketorolac, 35 (1.3%) had ICH (relative risk, 0.37; 95% confidence interval, 0.17-0.79; P=0.007). In the nested case-control study, the adjusted odds ratio for ketorolac administration between the 2 groups was 1.09 (95% confidence interval, 0.35-3.44; P=0.88).

CONCLUSION

Although the adjusted estimate for risk of symptomatic bleeding requiring surgery and ketorolac use is very close to the null effect, it may be not reproducible, and the width of the confidence interval is not conclusive evidence of the safety of ketorolac after elective neurosurgical procedures.

New reconstructive technologies after decompressive craniectomy in traumatic brain injury: the role of three-dimensional titanium mesh

Functional and aesthetic reconstruction after wide decompressive craniectomy directly correlates with subsequent quality of life. Advancements in the development of biomaterials have now made three-dimensional (3-D) titanium mesh a new option for the repair of skull defects after craniectomy. The purpose of this study was to review aesthetic and surgical outcomes and complications of patients who had skull defects repaired with 3-D titanium mesh. The records of 40 adult patients (31 unilateral craniectomies and 9 bilateral craniectomies) who underwent a computer-assisted designed titanium mesh implant at a university hospital from January 2008 to January 2010 were retrospectively reviewed. Aesthetic outcomes, cranial nerve V and VII function, and complications (hardware extrusions, meningitis, osteomyelitis, brain abscess, and pneumocephalus) were evaluated. The craniofacial symmetry, implant stability, and functional outcomes were excellent for all patients. No patients had trigeminal or facial dysfunction. All had excellent cosmetic results as measured by post-reduction radiographs and personal and family perceptions of the forehead contour. Two patients had delayed wound healing and subsequent subclinical wound infections, which resolved after treatment with antibiotics for 2 weeks. Craniofacial skeletal reconstruction with 3-D titanium mesh results in excellent forehead contour and cosmesis, and subsequently a better quality of life with few complications. Titanium mesh reconstruction offers a favorable alternative to other graft materials in the repair of large skull defects.