Intra-operative oxygen delivery in infusion volume-optimized patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an enhanced recovery programme: the effect of different analgesic modalities

Goal-directed Fluid Therapy Does Not Reduce Primary Postoperative Ileus after Elective Laparoscopic Colorectal Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Inadequate perioperative fluid therapy impairs gastrointestinal function. Studies primarily evaluating the impact of goal-directed fluid therapy on primary postoperative ileus are missing. The objective of this study was to determine whether goal-directed fluid therapy reduces the incidence of primary postoperative ileus after laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program.

METHODS

Randomized patient and assessor-blind controlled trial conducted in adult patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Patients were assigned randomly to receive intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy (goal-directed fluid therapy group) or fluid therapy based on traditional principles (control group). Primary postoperative ileus was the primary outcome.

RESULTS

One hundred twenty-eight patients were included and analyzed (goal-directed fluid therapy group: n = 64; control group: n = 64). The incidence of primary postoperative ileus was 22% in the goal-directed fluid therapy and 22% in the control group (relative risk, 1; 95% CI, 0.5 to 1.9; P = 1.00). Intraoperatively, patients in the goal-directed fluid therapy group received less intravenous fluids (mainly less crystalloids) but a greater volume of colloids. The increase of stroke volume and cardiac output was more pronounced and sustained in the goal-directed fluid therapy group. Length of hospital stay, 30-day postoperative morbidity, and mortality were not different.

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy compared with fluid therapy based on traditional principles does not reduce primary postoperative ileus in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery in the context of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program. Its previously demonstrated benefits might have been offset by advancements in perioperative care.

Intraoperative modifiable risk factors of colorectal anastomotic leakage: Why surgeons and anesthesiologists should act together

BACKGROUND

Colorectal anastomotic leakage (CAL) is a major surgical complication in intestinal surgery. Despite many optimizations in patient care, the incidence of CAL is stable (3-19%) [1]. Previous research mainly focused on determining patient and surgery related risk factors. Intraoperative non-surgery related risk factors for anastomotic healing also contribute to surgical outcome. This review offers an overview of potential modifiable risk factors that may play a role during the operation.

METHODS

Two independent literature searches were performed using EMBASE, Pubmed and Cochrane databases. Both clinical and experimental studies published in English from 1985 to August 2015 were included. The main outcome measure was the risk of anastomotic leakage and other postoperative complications during colorectal surgery. Determined risk factors of CAL were stated as strong evidence (level I and II high quality studies), and potential risk factors as either moderate evidence (experimental studies level III), or weak evidence (level IV or V studies).

RESULTS

The final analysis included 117 articles. Independent factors of CAL are diabetes mellitus, hyperglycemia and a high HbA1c, anemia, blood loss, blood transfusions, prolonged operating time, intraoperative events and contamination and a lack of antibiotics. Unequivocal are data on blood pressure, the use of inotropes/vasopressors, oxygen suppletion, type of analgesia and goal directed fluid therapy. No studies could be found identifying the impact of body core temperature or mean arterial pressure on CAL. Subjective factors such as the surgeons' own assessment of local perfusion and visibility of the operating field have not been the subject of relevant studies for occurrence in patients with CAL.

CONCLUSION

Both surgery related and non-surgery related risk factors that can be modified must be identified to improve colorectal care. Surgeons and anesthesiologists should cooperate on these items in their continuous effort to reduce the number of CAL. A registration study determining individual intraoperative risk factors of CAL is currently performed as a multicenter cohort study in the Netherlands.

Recent improvements in the management of esophageal anastomotic leak after surgery for cancer

Anastomotic leakage following total gastrectomy or esophagectomy is a significant complication that considerably increases postoperative mortality. The location of the anastomosis together with the anatomy of the esophagus explains the severity of this complication. Surgical knowledge should include general and specific predictive factors of leakage to avoid any technical-related cause of leakage. Clinical presentations may vary from minimally symptomatic to life-threatening situations. Investigations should be undertaken as soon as the diagnosis is suspected because delay greatly worsens the prognosis. CT scans with oral contrast and low insufflation early endoscopy are the preferred diagnostic tools and can also aid in therapeutic procedures. Communication and multidisciplinary teamwork are the cornerstones of treatment. When the leak occurs early with acute and important sepsis, the recommendation is surgical treatment. On the contrary, if the leak is late, non-symptomatic or minimally symptomatic, conservative management with intensive surveillance could be proposed. When the situation is in between these two extremes, endoscopic treatment is often proposed. Based on a review of the literature and experience from high volume centers, in this educational review, we present the incidence, predictive factors, clinical presentations, diagnostic tools, management, and therapeutic algorithms for anastomotic leaks following elective esophagectomy and total gastrectomy for cancer.

Fluid management in abdominal surgery: what, when, and when not to administer

The entire team (including anesthesiologists, surgeons, and intensive care physicians) must work together (before, during, and after abdominal surgery) to determine the optimal amount (quantity) and type (quality) of fluid necessary in the perioperative period. The authors present an overview of the basic principles that underlie fluid management, including evidence-based recommendations (where tenable) and a rational approach for when and what to administer.

Pathophysiology of major surgery and the role of enhanced recovery pathways and the anesthesiologist to improve outcomes

Enhanced recovery pathways have been increasingly adopted into surgical specialties with the aim of reducing the stress response and improving the metabolic response to surgical insult. Enhanced recovery pathways encompass a large range of perioperative elements that together aim to restore a patient's gut function, mobility, function and well-being to preoperative levels as soon as feasible after major surgery. There is increasing evidence that rapid recovery and return to normal function reduces complications. This may not just have a benefit by reducing morbidity and mortality but also have an effect on long-term survival. There also may be additional benefits for patients with cancer.

Monitoring needs and goal-directed fluid therapy within an enhanced recovery program

Patients having major abdominal surgery need perioperative fluid supplementation; however, enhanced recovery principles mitigate against many of the factors that traditionally led to relative hypovolemia in the perioperative period. An estimate of fluid requirements for abdominal surgery can be made but individualization of fluid prescription requires consideration of clinical signs and hemodynamic variables. The literature supports goal-directed fluid therapy. Application of this evidence to justify stroke volume optimization in the setting of major surgery within an enhanced recovery program is controversial. This article places the evidence in context, reviews controversies, and suggests implications for current practice and future research.

Effect of thoracic epidural anaesthesia on splanchnic blood flow

BACKGROUND

Thoracic epidural anaesthesia (TEA) is used widely in colorectal surgery. However, there is increasing concern that epidurals are associated with postoperative hypotension, mediating a potential reduction in splanchnic flow. The aim was to review the literature on the effects of TEA on splanchnic blood flow.

METHODS

PubMed and Cochrane databases were searched. Search terms used were: English language, 'thoracic epidural splanchnic flow', 'thoracic epidural gut blood flow', 'thoracic epidural intestinal blood flow' and 'thoracic epidural colonic blood flow'. Abstracts were reviewed by two independent researchers and irrelevant studies excluded. The full text of the remaining articles was then retrieved.

RESULTS

Twenty-two abstracts were reviewed and three excluded. Nineteen papers were reviewed in full and seven irrelevant articles excluded. Five human studies investigated the effects of TEA on splanchnic flow. Two studies measured splanchnic flow directly and found an epidural-mediated fall in flow, unresponsive to intravenous fluids and requiring vasopressors or inotropes to restore baseline flow. The remaining three studies had inconsistent findings and haemodynamic stability was maintained. The seven animal studies identified were heterogeneous in both methodology and findings. Three suggested a protective role for thoracic epidurals in septic shock and pancreatitis.

CONCLUSION

These findings are inconsistent; however, the two studies that investigated the effects of vasoconstrictors on splanchnic blood flow directly both found a significant epidural-mediated reduction in splanchnic blood flow that was unresponsive to fluid therapy.

Guidelines for perioperative care in elective colonic surgery: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) Society recommendations

BACKGROUND

This review aims to present a consensus for optimal perioperative care in colonic surgery and to provide graded recommendations for items for an evidenced-based enhanced perioperative protocol.

METHODS

Studies were selected with particular attention paid to meta-analyses, randomised controlled trials and large prospective cohorts. For each item of the perioperative treatment pathway, available English-language literature was examined, reviewed and graded. A consensus recommendation was reached after critical appraisal of the literature by the group.

RESULTS

For most of the protocol items, recommendations are based on good-quality trials or meta-analyses of good-quality trials (quality of evidence and recommendations according to the GRADE system).

CONCLUSIONS

Based on the evidence available for each item of the multimodal perioperative-care pathway, the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society, International Association for Surgical Metabolism and Nutrition (IASMEN) and European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (ESPEN) present a comprehensive evidence-based consensus review of perioperative care for colonic surgery.