Continuous wound infiltration versus epidural analgesia for midline abdominal incisions - a randomized-controlled pilot trial (Painless-Pilot trial; DRKS Number: DRKS00008023)

OUP accepted manuscript

Background

Wearable devices have been proposed as a novel method for monitoring patients after surgery to track recovery, identify complications early, and improve surgical safety. Previous studies have used a heterogeneous range of devices, methods, and analyses. This review aimed to examine current methods and wearable devices used for monitoring after abdominal surgery and identify knowledge gaps requiring further investigation.

Methods

A scoping review was conducted given the heterogeneous nature of the evidence. MEDLINE, EMBASE, and Scopus databases were systematically searched. Studies of wearable devices for monitoring of adult patients within 30 days after abdominal surgery were eligible for inclusion.

Results

A total of 78 articles from 65 study cohorts, with 5153 patients were included. Thirty-one different wearable devices were used to measure vital signs, physiological measurements, or physical activity. The duration of postoperative wearable device use ranged from 15 h to 3 months after surgery. Studies mostly focused on physical activity metrics (71.8 per cent). Continuous vital sign measurement and physical activity tracking both showed promise for detecting postoperative complications earlier than usual care, but conclusions were limited by poor device precision, adherence, occurrence of false alarms, data transmission problems, and retrospective data analysis. Devices were generally well accepted by patients, with high levels of acceptance, comfort, and safety.

Conclusion

Wearable technology has not yet realized its potential to improve postoperative monitoring. Further work is needed to overcome technical limitations, improve precision, and reduce false alarms. Prospective assessment of efficacy, using an intention-to-treat approach should be the focus of further studies.

Comparison of analgesic modalities for patients undergoing midline laparotomy: a systematic review and network meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Midline laparotomy is associated with severe pain. Epidural analgesia has been the established standard, but multiple alternative regional anesthesia modalities are now available. We aimed to compare continuous and single-shot regional anesthesia techniques in this systematic review and network meta-analysis.

METHODS

We included randomized controlled trials on adults who were scheduled for laparotomy with solely a midline incision under general anesthesia and received neuraxial or regional anesthesia for pain. Network meta-analysis was performed with a frequentist method, and continuous and dichotomous outcomes were presented as mean differences and odds ratios, respectively, with 95% confidence intervals. The quality of evidence was rated with the  grading of recommendations, assessment, development, and evaluation system.

RESULTS

Overall, 36 trials with 2,056 patients were included. None of the trials assessed erector spinae plane or quadratus lumborum block, and rectus sheath blocks and transversus abdominis plane blocks were combined into abdominal wall blocks (AWB). For the co-primary outcome of pain score at rest at 24 hr, with a minimal clinically important difference (MCID) of 1, epidural was clinically superior to control and single-shot AWB; epidural was statistically but not clinically superior to continuous wound infiltration (WI); and no statistical or clinical difference was found between control and single-shot AWB. For the co-primary outcome of cumulative morphine consumption at 24 hr, with a MCID of 10 mg, epidural and continuous AWB were clinically superior to control; epidural was clinically superior to continuous WI, single-shot AWB, single-shot WI, and spinal; and continuous AWB was clinically superior to single-shot AWB. The quality of evidence was low in view of serious limitations and imprecision. Other results of importance included: single-shot AWB did not provide clinically relevant analgesic benefit beyond two hr; continuous WI was clinically superior to single-shot WI by 8-12 hr; and clinical equivalence was found between epidural, continuous AWB, and continuous WI for the pain score at rest, and epidural and continuous WI for the cumulative morphine consumption at 48 hr.

CONCLUSIONS

Single-shot AWB were only clinically effective for analgesia in the early postoperative period. Continuous regional anesthesia modalities increased the duration of analgesia relative to their single-shot counterparts. Epidural analgesia remained clinically superior to alternative continuous regional anesthesia techniques for the first 24 hr, but reached equivalence, at least with respect to static pain, with continuous AWB and WI by 48 hr.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

PROSPERO (CRD42021238916); registered 25 February 2021.

Evaluation of robotic versus open partial pancreatoduodenectomy-study protocol for a randomised controlled pilot trial (EUROPA, DRKS00020407)

Background

Partial pancreatoduodenectomy (PD) is the indicated surgical procedure for a wide range of benign and malignant diseases of the pancreatic head and distal bile duct and offers the only potential cure for pancreatic head cancer. The current gold standard, open PD (OPD) performed via laparotomy, is associated with morbidity in around 40% of cases, even at specialised centres. Robotic PD (RPD) might offer a viable alternative to OPD and has been shown to be feasible. Encouraging perioperative results have been reported for RPD in a number of small, non-randomised studies. However, since those studies showed a considerable risk of bias, a thorough comparison of RPD with OPD is warranted.

Methods

The EUROPA (EvalUation of RObotic partial PAncreatoduodenectomy) trial is designed as a randomised controlled unblinded exploratory surgical trial with two parallel study groups. A total of 80 patients scheduled for elective PD will be randomised after giving written informed consent. Patients with borderline or non-resectable carcinoma of the pancreatic head as defined by the National Comprehensive Cancer Network guidelines, distant metastases or an American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score > III will be excluded. The experimental intervention, RPD, will be compared with the control intervention, OPD. An intraoperative dropout of approximately eight patients per group is expected because they may receive another type of surgical procedure than planned. Overall, 64 patients need to be analysed. The primary endpoint of the trial is overall postoperative morbidity within 90 days after index operation, measured using the Comprehensive Complication Index (CCI). The secondary endpoints include the feasibility of recruitment and assessment of clinical, oncological and safety parameters and quality of life and cost-effectiveness.

Discussion

The EUROPA trial is the first randomised controlled trial comparing RPD with OPD. Differences in postoperative morbidity will be evaluated to design a future multicentre confirmatory efficacy trial.

Trial registration

German Clinical Trial Register DRKS00020407. Registered on 9 March 2020

Continuous wound infusion with ropivacaine alone provides adequate analgesia following laparotomy

BACKGROUND

Although continuous wound infusion (CWI) with local anaesthetic has been used as an adjunct for pain relief following laparotomy, its use as the main modality has not been studied. This approach negates side effects related to intravenous opioid administration, therefore promoting enhanced recovery from surgery. We conducted this study to investigate the feasibility and efficacy of CWI following laparotomy.

METHODS

Consecutive patients who underwent laparotomy from June 2016 to December 2019 were analysed. All patients were given CWI with only oral supplementation. Pain was assessed based on the numeric rating scale (NRS).

RESULTS

One hundred and three patients were analysed. Mean age was 61.1 (standard deviation 16.7). 47.6% of patients were operated for intestinal obstruction. Large bowel resection was the most common operation performed (49.5%). 69.9% of patients underwent emergency surgery, whilst 51.5% of patients had surgery for cancer. On postoperative day 0, NRS was 3.2 (standard deviation (sd) 2.6) which decreased to 1.5 (sd 1.9) on day 3, and 1.1 (sd 1.8) on day 5. Mean time to flatus was 2.3 (sd 1.4) days, whilst mean time to first bowel movement was 3.1 (sd 1.7) days. Patients were able to commence ambulation by 2.5 (sd 1.8) days. Patients could tolerate a normal diet on day 3.9 (sd 3.3), and IV drip was removed on day 3.5 (sd 3.0). Mean length of stay was 9.1 (sd 6.9) days. Only two patients suffered from respiratory depression (1.9%) whilst five patients suffered from hypotension (4.9%). No patients had pruritus. 23.3% of patients had nausea or vomiting. Only one patient had a catheter-related complication which was easily addressed.

CONCLUSION

CWI provides adequate pain relief as the principle modality of analgesia after surgery, without opioid side effects.