The American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status (ASA-PS) Risk Group Classification Can Be Used to Anticipate Functional Recovery Outcomes after the Surgical Treatment of Female Urinary Incontinence with Transobturator Suburethral Tape

The significance of G8 and other geriatric assessments in urologic cancer management: A comprehensive review

In urologic oncology, which often involves older patients, it is important to consider how to manage their care appropriately. Geriatric assessment (GA) is a method that can address the specific needs of older cancer patients. The GA encompasses various assessment domains, but these domains exhibit variations across the literature. Some of the common items include functional ability, nutrition, comorbidities, cognitive ability, psychosocial disorders, polypharmacy, social and financial support, falls/imbalance, and vision/hearing. Despite the diversity of domains, there is limited consensus on reliable measurement methods. This review discusses the role of GA in managing urologic cancer in unique scenarios, such as those necessitating temporary or permanent urinary catheters or stomas due to urinary diversion. A comprehensive GA is time and human-resource-intensive in real-world clinical practice. Hence, simpler tools such as the Geriatric-8 (G8), capable of identifying high-risk patients requiring a detailed GA, are also under investigation in various contexts. Therefore, we conducted a systematic literature review on the G8. Our findings indicate that patients with low G8 scores encounter difficulties with stoma self-care after urinary diversion and have higher risks of urinary tract infections and ileus after radical cystectomy. The utilization of G8 as a screening tool for urologic cancer patients may facilitate the delivery of appropriate and personalized treatment and care.

Optimizing Perioperative Fluid Management in Complex Abdominal Wall Reconstruction to Prevent Postoperative Acute Kidney Injury

BACKGROUND

Acute kidney injury (AKI) is a serious postoperative complication of abdominal wall reconstruction that can significantly impact outcomes of these patients. This study examines AKI following abdominal wall hernia repair to determine incidence and risk factors and outline potential mitigation strategies.

METHODS

Using a single institution IRB-approved prospective database, patients undergoing complex abdominal wall reconstruction from 2013 to 2021 were identified. Patients with AKI were compared to controls and preoperative and intraoperative characteristics were evaluated. Multivariate analysis was utilized to identify factors associated with development of AKI.

RESULTS

297 patients were reviewed, 21.2 % (n = 63 patients) had AKI. Patients with AKI had a greater decrease in postoperative GFR to preoperative GFR (40.5% vs 18.3%, p <0.0001). Factors associated with AKI included ASA score >2 (odds ratio (OR) = 2.10, [1.50; 5.12], p = 0.02), HTN (OR = 2.05, [1.05; 4.0], p = 0.04), higher baseline Cr (OR = 5.98, [2.56; 13.98], p <0.0001), and diabetes (OR = 0.135, [0.0275; 0.666], p = 0.01). Operative time was longer in patients who developed AKI [average 400 min (range: 278-510 min) vs 310 min (range: 260-374 min), p = 0.04] and was an independent predictor of developing AKI (OR = 319.59, [137.25; 744.65], p <0.0001).

DISCUSSION

Preoperative identification of patients with medical comorbidities undergoing elective complex abdominal wall reconstruction continues to be imperative to improve outcomes. This study demonstrates that perioperative management for high risk patients requires flexibility, including potential adjustments to enhanced recovery after surgery protocols in order to adequately address the risks for AKI.