Optimal Perioperative Pain Management in Esophageal Surgery: An Evaluation of Paravertebral Analgesia

Evaluating analgesia strategies in patients who have undergone oesophagectomy-a systematic review and network meta-analysis of randomised clinical trials

Optimal pain control following esophagectomy remains a topic of contention. The aim was to perform a systematic review and network meta-analysis (NMA) of randomized clinical trials (RCTs) evaluating the analgesia strategies post-esophagectomy. A NMA was performed according to Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA)-NMA guidelines. Statistical analysis was performed using Shiny and R. Fourteen RCTs which included 565 patients and assessed nine analgesia techniques were included. Relative to systemic opioids, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) significantly reduced static pain scores at 24 hours post-operatively (mean difference (MD): -13.73, 95% Confidence Interval (CI): -27.01-0.45) (n = 424, 12 RCTs). Intrapleural analgesia (IPA) demonstrated the best efficacy for static (MD: -36.2, 95% CI: -61.44-10.96) (n = 569, 15 RCTs) and dynamic (MD: -42.90, 95% CI: -68.42-17.38) (n = 444, 11 RCTs) pain scores at 48 hours. TEA also significantly reduced static (MD: -13.05, 95% CI: -22.74-3.36) and dynamic (MD: -18.08, 95% CI: -31.70-4.40) pain scores at 48 hours post-operatively, as well as reducing opioid consumption at 24 hours (MD: -33.20, 95% CI: -60.57-5.83) and 48 hours (MD: -42.66, 95% CI: -59.45-25.88). Moreover, TEA significantly shortened intensive care unit (ICU) stays (MD: -5.00, 95% CI: -6.82-3.18) and time to extubation (MD: -4.40, 95% CI: -5.91-2.89) while increased post-operative forced vital capacity (MD: 9.89, 95% CI: 0.91-18.87) and forced expiratory volume (MD: 13.87, 95% CI: 0.87-26.87). TEA provides optimal pain control and improved post-operative respiratory function in patients post-esophagectomy, reducing ICU stays, one of the benchmarks of improved post-operative recovery. IPA demonstrates promising results for potential implementation in the future following esophagectomy.

Local anesthetic dosing and toxicity of adult truncal catheters: a narrative review of published practice

BACKGROUND/IMPORTANCE

Anesthesiologists frequently use truncal catheters for postoperative pain control but with limited characterization of dosing and toxicity.

OBJECTIVE

We reviewed the published literature to characterize local anesthetic dosing and toxicity of paravertebral and transversus abdominis plane catheters in adults.

EVIDENCE REVIEW

We searched the literature for bupivacaine or ropivacaine infusions in the paravertebral or transversus abdominis space in humans dosed for 24 hours. We evaluated bolus dosing, infusion dosing and cumulative 24-hour dosing in adults. We also identified cases of local anesthetic systemic toxicity and toxic blood levels.

FINDINGS

Following screening, we extracted data from 121 and 108 papers for ropivacaine and bupivacaine respectively with a total of 6802 patients. For ropivacaine and bupivacaine, respectively, bolus dose was 1.4 mg/kg (95% CI 0.4 to 3.0, n=2978) and 1.0 mg/kg (95% CI 0.18 to 2.1, n=2724); infusion dose was 0.26 mg/kg/hour (95% CI 0.06 to 0.63, n=3579) and 0.2 mg/kg/hour (95% CI 0.06 to 0.5, n=3199); 24-hour dose was 7.75 mg/kg (95% CI 2.1 to 15.7, n=3579) and 6.0 mg/kg (95% CI 2.1 to 13.6, n=3223). Twenty-four hour doses exceeded the package insert recommended upper limit in 28% (range: 17%-40% based on maximum and minimum patient weights) of ropivacaine infusions and 51% (range: 45%-71%) of bupivacaine infusions. Toxicity occurred in 30 patients and was associated with high 24-hour dose, bilateral catheters, cardiac surgery, cytochrome P-450 inhibitors and hypoalbuminemia.

CONCLUSION

Practitioners frequently administer ropivacaine and bupivacaine above the package insert limits, at doses associated with toxicity. Patient safety would benefit from more specific recommendations to limit excessive dose and risk of toxicity.

Systematic review of quality of life after esophagectomy and total gastrectomy in patients with gastro-esophageal junction cancer

The optimal management of cancer of the gastro-esophageal junction (GEJ) is an area of contention. GEJ tumors are typically resected via total gastrectomy or esophagectomy. Despite many studies aiming to determine the superiority of either procedure based on surgical or oncological outcomes, the evidence is equivocal. Data focusing specifically on quality of life (QoL), however, is limited. This systematic review was performed to determine if there is any difference in patient's QoL after total gastrectomy or esophagectomy. A systematic search of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane libraries was conducted for literature published between 1986 and 2023. Studies that used the internationally validated questionnaires EORTC QLQ-C30 and EORTC-QLQ-OG25, to compare QoL after esophagectomy to gastrectomy for the management of GEJ cancer were included. Five studies involving 575 patients undergoing either esophagectomy (n = 365) or total gastrectomy (n = 210) for GEJ tumors were included. QoL was predominantly assessed at 6, 12 and 24 months postoperatively. Although individual studies demonstrated significant differences in certain domains, these differences were not consistently demonstrated in more than one study. There is no evidence to suggest any significant differences in QoL after total gastrectomy compared to esophagectomy for management of gastro-esophageal junction cancer.

Proportion of early extubation and short-term outcomes after esophagectomy: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

The proportion of early extubation after esophagectomy varies among hospitals; however, the impact on clinical outcomes is unclear. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate associations between the proportion of early extubation in hospitals and short-term outcomes after esophagectomy. Because there is no consensus regarding the optimal timing for extubation, the authors considered that hospitals' early extubation proportion reflects the hospital-level extubation strategy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

Data of patients who underwent oncologic esophagectomy (July 2010-March 2019) were extracted from a Japanese nationwide inpatient database. The proportion of patients who underwent early extubation (extubation on the day of surgery) at each hospital was assessed and grouped by quartiles: very low- (<11%), low- (11-37%), medium- (38-83%), and high-proportion (≥84%) hospitals. The primary outcome was respiratory complications; secondary outcomes included reintubation, anastomotic leakage, other major complications, and hospitalization costs. Multivariable regression analyses were performed, adjusting for patient demographics, cancer treatments, and hospital characteristics. A restricted cubic spline analysis was also performed for the primary outcome.

RESULTS

Among 37 983 eligible patients across 545 hospitals, early extubation was performed in 17 931 (47%) patients. Early extubation proportions ranged from 0-100% across hospitals. Respiratory complications occurred in 10 270 patients (27%). Multivariable regression analyses showed that high- and medium-proportion hospitals were significantly associated with decreased respiratory complications [odds ratio, 0.46 (95% CI, 0.36-0.58) and 0.43 (0.31-0.60), respectively], reintubation, and hospitalization costs when compared with very low-proportion hospitals. The risk of anastomotic leakage and other major complications did not differ among groups. The restricted cubic spline analysis demonstrated a significant inverse dose-dependent association between the early extubation proportion and the risk of respiratory complications.

CONCLUSION

A higher proportion of early extubation in a hospital was associated with a lower occurrence of respiratory complications, highlighting a potential benefit of early extubation after esophagectomy.

Analgesia in esophagectomy: a narrative review

Background and Objective

Optimal pain management for esophagectomy facilitates prevention of postoperative complications such as pneumonia, but also chronic pain. Historically, multimodal intravenous analgesia was employed. In the last decades, regional anesthesia including epidural and paravertebral analgesia is frequently used. In this narrative review, we provide a comprehensive overview of the available evidence for the different analgesia regimens for esophagectomy.

Methods

A search was conducted in the PubMed/MEDLINE database in November 2022. Only reports in English or Dutch were included. Editorials or articles lacking full text were excluded. A review of different analgesia regimens after esophagectomy is provided.

Key Content and Findings

Epidural analgesia (EA) was suggested to reduce postoperative pneumonia and prevent chronic postsurgical pain (CPSP) as compared to opioid-based systemic analgesia and was considered the gold standard of pain management for esophagectomy. In the last decades, the side-effects of EA became more evident. Next to mild or moderate side-effects such as hypotension and urinary retention, several reports emphasized the incidence of serious neurologic complications to be much higher than estimated before. In addition, minimally invasive surgery fostered that other regional analgesia (RA) techniques are potential alternatives for EA. Paravertebral catheter placement can be performed under videoscope view during the thoracic phase of esophagectomy, making it a safe and easily placed block. Evidence on the effectiveness of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) is limited in this context.

Conclusions

Several analgesia regimens after esophagectomy are described. EA is most common, however paravertebral analgesia is a good alternative. Other techniques are also gaining ground but randomized clinical trials are lacking. Future studies should focus on the efficacy of paravertebral and erector spinae blocks for postoperative pain management for esophagectomy.

Oesophagectomy or Total Gastrectomy for the Management of Siewert II Gastroesophageal Junction Cancer: a Systematic Review and Meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

There is no consensus on the ideal surgical management of patients with Siewert type II gastroesophageal junctional (GEJ) cancers. Due to its anatomical location, total gastrectomy and oesophagectomy are widely used methods of resection. The aim of this study was to determine the optimal surgical treatment of these patients.

METHOD

A systematic search of PubMed, Medline and Cochrane libraries was conducted for literature published between 2000 and 2022. Studies directly comparing oesophagectomy to gastrectomy for Siewert type II tumours were included. Outcome measures included rates of anastomotic leak, 30-day mortality, R0 resection and 5-year survival. Statistical analysis was performed using Review Manager 5.4.

RESULTS

Eleven studies involving 18,585 patients undergoing either oesophagectomy (n = 8618) or total gastrectomy (n = 9967) for Siewert type II GEJ cancer were included. There were no significant differences between the rates of anastomotic leak (OR 0.91, CI 0.59-1.40, p = 0.66) and R0 resection (OR 1.51, CI 0.93-2.42, p = 0.09). Patients undergoing total gastrectomy had a lower 30-day mortality (OR 0.66, CI 0.45-0.95, p = 0.03) and a greater 5-year overall survival (OR 1.49, CI 1.34-1.67, p < 0.001) compared to patients undergoing oesophagectomy. These differences were not statistically significant after excluding two large studies, which accounted for the majority of the total population in the analysis.

CONCLUSION

These results suggest that total gastrectomy results in lower 30-day mortality and improved overall survival in patients with Siewert type II GEJ cancer. However, interpretation of these results may be biased by the effect of two large studies.