Prospective comparison of three methods for detecting peri-operative neurocognitive disorders in older adults undergoing cardiac and non-cardiac surgery.

Postoperative neurocognitive disorders occur frequently in older adult patients. Neuropsychological assessment is the gold standard for diagnosis, but the resources required for routine use are significant. Instead, it is common for simplified and unvalidated tests to be used for trials and in clinical practice. We undertook a single-centre prospective observational study in elective surgical patients aged ≥ 65 years recruited between September 2019 and January 2021. Patients underwent neuropsychological assessment, the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status and Montreal Cognitive Assessment before surgery. Tests were repeated at approximately four to eight postoperative weeks. We included 105 patients and 28 (27%) were lost to follow-up. Pre-operative Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status and cognitive domain scores were very weakly to moderately correlated (r = 0.09-0.41). Pre-operative Montreal Cognitive Assessment and cognitive domain scores were very weakly to weakly correlated (r = 0.17-0.37) Postoperative Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status and cognitive domain scores were very weakly to weakly correlated (r = 0.09-0.36). Postoperative Montreal Cognitive Assessment score and cognitive domain scores were very weakly to weakly correlated (r = 0.07-0.36). Overall, there was limited agreement between tests. We conclude that the Modified Telephone Interview for Cognitive Status and Montreal Cognitive Assessment should not be used in isolation to diagnose postoperative neurocognitive disorders. There seems to be little to no pre-operative, postoperative or pre- to postoperative correlation between these tests and the neuropsychological assessment in older adults without pre-operative cognitive impairment.

Effects of surgery and general anaesthesia on sleep-wake timing: CLOCKS observational study.

Surgery and general anaesthesia have the potential to disturb the body's circadian timing system, which may affect postoperative outcomes. Animal studies suggest that anaesthesia could induce diurnal phase shifts, but clinical research is scarce. We hypothesised that surgery and general anaesthesia would result in peri-operative changes in diurnal sleep-wake patterns in patients. In this single-centre prospective cohort study, we recruited patients aged ≥18 years scheduled for elective surgery receiving ≥30 min of general anaesthesia. The Munich Chronotype Questionnaire and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index were used to determine baseline chronotype, sleep characteristics and sleep quality. Peri-operative sleeping patterns were logged. Ninety-four patients with a mean (SD) age of 52 (17) years were included; 56 (60%) were female. The midpoint of sleep (SD) three nights before surgery was 03.33 (55 min) and showed a phase advance of 40 minutes to 02.53 (67 min) the night after surgery (p < 0.001). This correlated with the midpoint of sleep three nights before surgery and was not associated with age, sex, duration of general anaesthesia or intra-operative dexamethasone use. Peri-operatively, patients had lower subjective sleep quality and worse sleep efficiency. Disruption started from one night before surgery and did not normalise until 6 days after surgery. We conclude that there is a peri-operative phase advance in midpoint of sleep, confirming our hypothesis that surgery and general anaesthesia disturb the circadian timing system. Patients had decreased subjective sleep quality, worse sleep efficiency and increased daytime fatigue.

Paravertebral catheter versus EPidural analgesia in Minimally invasive Esophageal resectioN: a randomized controlled multicenter trial (PEPMEN trial).

BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural analgesia is the standard postoperative pain management strategy in esophageal cancer surgery. However, paravertebral block analgesia may achieve comparable pain control while inducing less side effects, which may be beneficial for postoperative recovery. This study primarily aims to compare the postoperative quality of recovery between paravertebral catheter versus thoracic epidural analgesia in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy. METHODS: This study represents a randomized controlled superiority trial. A total of 192 patients will be randomized in 4 Dutch high-volume centers for esophageal cancer surgery. Patients are eligible for inclusion if they are at least 18 years old, able to provide written informed consent and complete questionnaires in Dutch, scheduled to undergo minimally invasive esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy and an intrathoracic anastomosis, and have no contra-indications to either epidural or paravertebral analgesia. The primary outcome is the quality of postoperative recovery, as measured by the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire on the morning of postoperative day 3. Secondary outcomes include the QoR-40 questionnaire score Area Under the Curve on postoperative days 1-3, the integrated pain and systemic opioid score and patient satisfaction and pain experience according to the International Pain Outcomes (IPO) questionnaire, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, the groups will be compared regarding the need for additional rescue medication on postoperative days 0-3, technical failure of the pain treatment, duration of anesthesia, duration of surgery, total postoperative fluid administration day 0-3, postoperative vasopressor and inotrope use, length of urinary catheter use, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, chronic pain at six months after surgery, and other adverse effects. DISCUSSION: In this study, it is hypothesized that paravertebral analgesia achieves comparable pain control while causing less side-effects such as hypotension when compared to epidural analgesia, leading to shorter postoperative length of stay on a monitored ward and superior quality of recovery. If this hypothesis is confirmed, the results of this study can be used to update the relevant guidelines on postoperative pain management for patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry, NL8037. Registered 19 September 2019.

Safety of epidural drugs: a narrative review.

INTRODUCTION: Epidural analgesia is a popular approach to postoperative and labor pain. Neurotoxicity and drug-specific systemic side effects can occur after epidural administration. As an increasing number of epidural drugs are studied and clinically applied, drug efficacy and safety evaluation are crucial. AREAS COVERED: In this narrative review, the authors provide a thorough overview on the safety of the most widely used epidural drugs, focusing on potential neurotoxicity, side effects, and complications in the adult, non-pregnant population. A combined text and MeSH heading search strategy was used to identify relevant publications. EXPERT OPINION: The search for the ideal epidural medication has resulted in a surplus of drug combinations with extensive heterogeneity amongst studies, while the value of investigating these is not always evident. Epidural drugs pose a potential threat of neurotoxicity and other side effects. Consequently, we should pursue safe epidural drug administration to patients and refrain from drugs with minimal proven benefit. Also, studies should compare epidural with systemic application. Because why use a drug epidurally, which can be safely used systemically? Future research should focus on providing solid evidence regarding efficacy of epidural analgesia compared to new and already existing modalities and optimizing presently used medicinal regimens.

Effects of early and late diabetic neuropathy on sciatic nerve block duration and neurotoxicity in Zucker diabetic fatty rats.

BACKGROUND: The neuropathy of type II diabetes mellitus (DM) is increasing in prevalence worldwide. We aimed to test the hypothesis that in a rodent model of type II DM, neuropathy would lead to increased neurotoxicity and block duration after lidocaine-induced sciatic nerve block when compared with control animals. METHODS: Experiments were carried out in Zucker diabetic fatty rats aged 10 weeks (early diabetic) or 18 weeks (late diabetic, with or without insulin 3 units per day), and age-matched healthy controls. Left sciatic nerve block was performed using 0.2 ml lidocaine 2%. Nerve conduction velocity (NCV) and F-wave latency were used to quantify nerve function before, and 1 week after nerve block, after which sciatic nerves were used for neurohistopathology. RESULTS: Early diabetic animals did not show increased signs of nerve dysfunction after nerve block. In late diabetic animals without insulin vs control animals, NCV was 34.8 (5.0) vs 41.1 (4.1) ms s(-1) (P<0.01), and F-wave latency was 7.7 (0.5) vs 7.0 (0.2) ms (P<0.01), respectively. Motor nerve block duration was prolonged in late diabetic animals, but neurotoxicity was not. Late diabetic animals receiving insulin showed intermediate results. CONCLUSIONS: In a rodent type II DM model, nerves have increased sensitivity for short-acting local anaesthetics without adjuvants in vivo, as evidenced by prolonged block duration. This sensitivity appears to increase with the progression of neuropathy. Our results do not support the hypothesis that neuropathy due to type II DM increases the risk of nerve injury after nerve block.