Acute renal failure following laparoscopic cholecystectomy

Comparison of the Effects of Laparoscopic and Open Surgery on Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury in Patients with Colorectal Cancer: Propensity Score Analysis

Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious complication that increases patient morbidity and mortality. However, few studies have evaluated the effect of laparoscopic surgery on postoperative AKI. This study compared the incidence of postoperative AKI between laparoscopic and open surgery in patients with colorectal cancer. This study retrospectively analyzed 3637 patients who underwent colorectal cancer surgery between June 2008 and February 2012. The patients were classified into laparoscopic (n = 987) and open (n = 2650) surgery groups. We performed multivariable regression analysis to assess the risk factors for AKI and propensity score matching analysis to compare the incidence of AKI between the two groups. We also assessed postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) admission, complications, hospital stay, and 1-year mortality. We observed no significant differences in the incidence of postoperative AKI between the two groups before (8.8% vs. 9.1%, p = 0.406) and after (8.8% vs. 7.7%, p = 0.406) matching. Laparoscopic surgery was not associated with AKI even after adjusting for intraoperative variables (adjusted odds ratio (OR): 1.17, 95% confidence interval (CI): 0.84-1.62, p = 0.355). Body mass index, diabetes mellitus, hypertension, and albumin were risk factors for AKI. ICU admission (0.6% vs. 2.5%, p = 0.001), complications (0.2% vs. 1.5%, p = 0.002), hospital stay (6.89 days vs. 8.61 days, p < 0.001), and 1-year mortality (0.1% vs. 0.9%, p = 0.021) were significantly better in the laparoscopic than in the open group. The incidence of postoperative AKI did not differ significantly between laparoscopic and open surgery. However, considering its better surgical outcomes, laparoscopic surgery may be recommended for patients with colorectal cancer.

The effects of prolonged CO2 insufflation on kidney function in a rat pneumoperitoneum model

INTRODUCTION

Pneumoperitoneum (PP) is known to cause ischemia in kidneys and other intra-abdominal organs because of decreased splanchnic blood flow.

AIM

We aimed to determine the degree of renal injury that occurs due to a PP and prolonged PP. We measured renal injury biomarkers and made a histopathological evaluation to estimate the degree of injury and assessed the correlation of biomarkers with histopathological findings.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Twenty-one female Sprague Dawley rats were separated randomly into three groups. Group 1 was the control group and was given anesthesia for 3 h. In group 2, a PP was administered under anesthesia for 1 h. A pneumoperitoneum was administered under anesthesia to animals in group 3 for 3 h.

RESULTS

Pathological analysis showed a significant statistical difference between the 3 groups. In particular, neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) and cystatin C (Cys C) levels at the 24^th h and preoperative mean urea levels showed a significant difference between the groups. The 24^th-hour NGAL level in group 3 was significantly higher than that of group 1. The preoperative Cys C level was higher in group 1 than in either group 2 or 3. Cys C was decreased significantly in group 1 and increased significantly in both groups 2 and 3.

CONCLUSIONS

The increase in NGAL and Cys C levels directly correlated with the duration of PP and intra-abdominal pressure, and they are therefore good biomarkers in diagnosing acute renal injury in the early phase. Serum creatinine level is not a good biomarker in the early phase of renal injury.

What is the evidence for the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum? A systematic review

Background

Laparoscopic surgery has several advantages when compared to open surgery, including faster postoperative recovery and lower pain scores. However, for laparoscopy, a pneumoperitoneum is required to create workspace between the abdominal wall and intraabdominal organs. Increased intraabdominal pressure may also have negative implications on cardiovascular, pulmonary, and intraabdominal organ functionings. To overcome these negative consequences, several trials have been performed comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

Methods

A systematic review of all randomized controlled clinical trials and observational studies comparing low- versus standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum.

Results and conclusions

Quality assessment showed that the overall quality of evidence was moderate to low. Postoperative pain scores were reduced by the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. With appropriate perioperative measures, the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum does not seem to have clinical advantages as compared to standard pressure on cardiac and pulmonary function. Although there are indications that low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is associated with less liver and kidney injury when compared to standard-pressure pneumoperitoneum, this does not seem to have clinical implications for healthy individuals. The influence of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum on adhesion formation, anastomosis healing, tumor metastasis, intraocular and intracerebral pressure, and thromboembolic complications remains uncertain, as no human clinical trials have been performed. The influence of pressure on surgical conditions and safety has not been established to date. In conclusion, the most important benefit of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum is lower postoperative pain scores, supported by a moderate quality of evidence. However, the quality of surgical conditions and safety of the use of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum need to be established, as are the values and preferences of physicians and patients regarding the potential benefits and risks. Therefore, the recommendation to use low-pressure pneumoperitoneum during laparoscopy is weak, and more studies are required.