Low Intra-Abdominal Pressure with Complete Neuromuscular Blockage Reduces Post-Operative Complications in Major Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery: A before-after Study

Improving Patient Outcomes in Abdominal Surgery

Post-operative acute kidney injury (PO-AKI) is a frequent complication described in 15% of non-cardiac surgeries, 30% of cardiac surgeries, and 52% of patients requiring intensive post-operative care [...].

Deep neuromuscular blockade in adults undergoing an abdominal laparoscopic procedure

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic surgery is the preferred option for many procedures. To properly perform laparoscopic surgery, it is essential that sudden movements and abdominal contractions in patients are prevented, as it limits the surgeon's view. There has been a growing interest in the potential beneficial effect of deep neuromuscular blockade (NMB) in laparoscopic surgery. Deep NMB improves the surgical field by preventing abdominal contractions, and it is thought to decrease postoperative pain. However, it is uncertain if deep NMB improves intraoperative safety and thereby improves clinical outcomes.

OBJECTIVES

To evaluate the benefits and harms of deep neuromuscular blockade versus no, shallow, or moderate neuromuscular blockade during laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures in adults.

SEARCH METHODS

We used standard, extensive Cochrane search methods. The latest search date was 31 July 2023.

SELECTION CRITERIA

We included randomised clinical trials (irrespective of language, blinding, or publication status) in adults undergoing laparoscopic intra- or transperitoneal procedures comparing deep NMB to moderate, shallow, or no NMB. We excluded trials that did not report any of the primary or secondary outcomes of our review.

DATA COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS

We used standard Cochrane methods. Our primary outcomes were 1. all-cause mortality, 2. health-related quality of life, and 3. proportion of participants with serious adverse events. Our secondary outcomes were 4. proportion of participants with non-serious adverse events, 5. readmissions within three months, 6. short-term pain scores, 7. measurements of postoperative recovery, and 8. operating time. We used GRADE to assess the certainty of evidence for each outcome.

MAIN RESULTS

We included 42 randomised clinical trials with 3898 participants. Most trials included participants undergoing intraperitoneal oncological resection surgery. We present the Peto fixed-effect model for most dichotomous outcomes as only sparse events were reported. Comparison 1: deep versus moderate NMB Thirty-eight trials compared deep versus moderate NMB. Deep NMB may have no effect on mortality, but the evidence is very uncertain (Peto odds ratio (OR) 7.22, 95% confidence interval (CI) 0.45 to 115.43; 12 trials, 1390 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life up to four days postoperative (mean difference (MD) 4.53 favouring deep NMB on the Quality of Recovery-40 score, 95% CI 0.96 to 8.09; 5 trials, 440 participants; moderate-certainty evidence; mean difference lower than the mean clinically important difference of 10 points). The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB on intraoperatively serious adverse events (deep NMB 38/1150 versus moderate NMB 38/1076; Peto OR 0.95, 95% CI 0.59 to 1.52; 21 trials, 2231 participants; very low-certainty evidence), short-term serious adverse events (up to 60 days) (deep NMB 37/912 versus moderate NMB 42/852; Peto OR 0.90, 95% CI 0.56 to 1.42; 16 trials, 1764 participants; very low-certainty evidence), and short-term non-serious adverse events (Peto OR 0.94, 95% CI 0.65 to 1.35; 11 trials, 1232 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Deep NMB likely does not alter the duration of surgery (MD -0.51 minutes, 95% CI -3.35 to 2.32; 34 trials, 3143 participants; moderate-certainty evidence). The evidence is uncertain if deep NMB alters the length of hospital stay (MD -0.22 days, 95% CI -0.49 to 0.06; 19 trials, 2084 participants; low-certainty evidence) or pain scores one hour after surgery (MD -0.31 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -0.59 to -0.03; 22 trials, 1823 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point) and 24 hours after surgery (MD -0.60 points on the numeric rating scale, 95% CI -1.05 to -0.15; 16 trials, 1404 participants; very low-certainty evidence; mean clinically important difference 1 point). Comparison 2: deep versus shallow NMB Three trials compared deep versus shallow NMB. The trials did not report on mortality and health-related quality of life. The evidence is very uncertain about the effect of deep NMB compared to shallow NMB on the proportion of serious adverse events (RR 1.66, 95% CI 0.50 to 5.57; 2 trials, 158 participants; very low-certainty evidence). Comparison 3: deep versus no NMB One trial compared deep versus no NMB. There was no mortality in this trial, and health-related quality of life was not reported. The proportion of serious adverse events was 0/25 in the deep NMB group and 1/25 in the no NMB group.

AUTHORS' CONCLUSIONS

There was insufficient evidence to draw conclusions about the effects of deep NMB compared to moderate NMB on all-cause mortality and serious adverse events. Deep NMB likely results in little to no difference in health-related quality of life and duration of surgery compared to moderate NMB, and it may have no effect on the length of hospital stay. Due to the very low-certainty evidence, we do not know what the effect is of deep NMB on non-serious adverse events, pain scores, or readmission rates. Randomised clinical trials with adequate reporting of all adverse events would reduce the current uncertainties. Due to the low number of identified trials and the very low certainty of evidence, we do not know what the effect of deep NMB on serious adverse events is compared to shallow NMB and no NMB. We found no trials evaluating mortality and health-related quality of life.

Analgesic Strategies for Urologic Videolaparoscopic or Robotic Surgery in the Context of an Enhanced Recovery after Surgery Protocol: A Prospective Study Comparing Erector Spinae Plane Block versus Transversus Abdominis Plane Block

Regional anesthesia in postoperative pain management has developed in recent years, especially with the advent of fascial plane blocks. This study aims to compare the ultrasound-guided bilateral erector spinae plane block (ESPB) versus the ultrasound-guided bilateral transversus abdominis plane block (TAPB) on postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic or robotic urologic surgery. This was a prospective observational study; 97 patients (ESPB-group) received bilateral ultrasound-guided ESPB with 20 mL of ropivacaine 0.375% plus 0.5 mcg/kg of dexmedetomidine in each side at the level of T7-T9 and 93 patients (TAPB-group) received bilateral ultrasound-guided TAPB with 20 mL ropivacaine 0.375% or 0.25%. The primary outcome was the postoperative numeric rating scale (NRS) pain score, which was significantly lower in the ESPB group on postoperative days 0, 1, 2, and 3 (p < 0.001) and, consequently, the number of patients requiring postoperative supplemental analgesic rescue therapies was significantly lower (p < 0.001). Concerning the secondary outcomes, consumption of ropivacaine was significantly lower in the group (p < 0.001) and the total amount of analgesic rescue doses was significantly lower in the ESPB-group than the TAPB-group in postoperative days from 2 to 4 (1 vs. 3, p > 0.001). Incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was higher in the TAPB group and no block-related complications were observed. Our data indicate that ESPB provides postoperative pain control at least as good as TAPB plus morphine, with less local anesthetic needed.

Perioperative Intravenous Amino Acid Infusion in Major Urologic Surgery

Post-operative acute kidney injury (PO-AKI) is a serious complication that may occur after major abdominal surgery. The administration of intravenous perioperative amino acids (AAs) has been proven to increase kidney function and has some beneficial effects to prevent PO-AKI. The aim of this study was to establish if the perioperative infusion of AAs may reduce the incidence of PO-AKI in patients undergoing major urological minimally invasive surgery. From a total of 331 patients, the first 169 received perioperative crystalloid fluids and the following 162 received perioperative AA infusions. PO-AKIs were much higher in the crystalloid group compared to the AA group (34 vs. 17, p = 0.022) due to a lower incidence of KDIGO I and II in the AA group (14 vs. 30 p = 0.016). The AA group patients who developed a PO-AKI presented more risk factors compared to those who did not (2 (2-4) vs. 1 (1-2), p = 0.031) with a cut-off of 3 risk factors in the ROC curve (p = 0.007, sensitivity 47%, specificity 83%). The hospital length of stay was higher in the crystalloid group (p < 0.05) with a consequent saving in hospital costs. Perioperative AA infusion may help reduce the incidence of PO-AKI after major urological minimally invasive surgery.

Perioperative Renal Ultrasonography of Arterio-to-Venous Coupling Predicts Postoperative Complications after Major Laparoscopic Urologic Surgery

Point-of-care ultrasonography (POCUS) with concomitant venous and arterial Doppler assessment enables clinicians to assess organ-specific blood supply. To date, no studies have investigated the usefulness of including a comprehensive perioperative POCUS assessment of patients undergoing major laparoscopic surgery. The primary aim of the present study was to evaluate whether the combined venous and arterial renal flow evaluation, measured at different time points of perioperative period, may represent a clinically useful non-invasive method to predict postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) after major laparoscopic urologic surgery. The secondary outcome was represented by the development of any postoperative complication at day 7. We included 173 patients, subsequently divided for analysis depending on whether they did (n = 55) or did not (n = 118) develop postoperative AKI or any complications within the first 7 days. The main results of the present study were that: (1) the combination of arterial hypoperfusion and moderate-to-severe venous congestion inferred by POCUS were associated with worst outcomes (respectively, HR: 2.993, 95% CI: 1.522-5.884 and HR: 8.124, 95% CI: 3.542-18, p < 0.001); (2) high intra-operative abdominal pressure represents the only independent determinant of postoperative severe venous congestion (OR: 1.354, 95% CI: 1.017-1.804, p = 0.038); (3) the overall number of complications relies on the balance between arterial inflow and venous outflow in order to ensure the adequacy of peripheral perfusion; and (4) the overall reliability of splanchnic perfusion assessment by Doppler is high with a strong inter-rater reliability (ICC: 0.844, 95% CI: 0.792-0.844). The concomitant assessment of arterial and venous Doppler patterns predicts postoperative complications after major laparoscopic urologic surgery and may be considered a useful ultrasonographic biomarker to stratify vulnerable patients at risk for development of postoperative complications.

The Postoperative Effect of Sugammadex versus Acetylcholinesterase Inhibitors in Colorectal Surgery: An Updated Meta-Analysis

BACKGROUND

the aim of this meta-analysis was to evaluate the postoperative effects of neuromuscular blockade reversal with sugammadex compared with acetylcholinesterase inhibitors in colorectal surgery.

METHODS

A systematic literature search was performed for studies comparing the postoperative course of patients receiving neuromuscular blockade reversal with either sugammadex or acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (control) after colorectal surgery. Data from eligible studies were extracted, qualitatively assessed, and included in a meta-analysis. Odds ratios and standardized mean differences with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were calculated.

RESULTS

Five studies with a total of 1969 patients were included (sugammadex n = 1137, control n = 832). Sugammadex reversal resulted in a significantly faster return of defecation or flatus after surgery compared to acetylcholinesterase inhibitors (SMD 13.01, 95% CI 6.55-19.46, p = < 0.0001). There were no significant differences between the two groups in other clinical outcomes such as surgical morbidity and length of hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

The present data support the beneficial impact of sugammadex on gastrointestinal motility after colorectal surgery. However, the effect of sugammadex on the prevention of surgical complications and a prolonged hospital stay is diminishing. Larger randomized controlled trials with standardized study protocols are needed to validate the results presented here.