Does deep neuromuscular blockade provide improved outcomes in low pressure laparoscopic colorectal surgery? A single blinded randomized pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Low intra-abdominal pressure during laparoscopic colorectal surgery may improve outcomes and reduce hospital stay, in addition to Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols. There is concern that low pressure reduces laparoscopic vision and may increase surgical complications. Deep neuromuscular blockade may abrogate any reduction in vision of low-pressure pneumoperitoneum. However, antagonism of deep neuromuscular blockade at completion of surgery necessitates the use of sugammadex, which is prohibitively expensive, if there are no surgical benefits and warrants further study. METHODS: A single institution, single blinded randomized controlled pilot study was performed comparing deep to moderate neuromuscular blockade in major laparoscopic colorectal surgery. RESULTS: Thirty-eight patients were randomized to deep or moderate neuromuscular blockade. There were no statistically significant differences between groups, when comparing key patient demographics, or surgeon satisfaction with view, which required increased pressure or further relaxation demands. The deep blockade group had increased QoR15 scores and a decrease in pain, C-Reactive Protein (CRP) measurements and operating times, although were non-significant. The moderate group had slightly higher incidents of Medical Emergency Team (MET) calls and more severe complications, although were non-significant. CONCLUSIONS: Low intra-abdominal pressure in laparoscopic colorectal surgery is feasible and allows adequate surgical visualization, regardless of the degree of neuromuscular blockade. Potential benefits of deep neuromuscular blockade may include improved pain and quality of recovery and a possible reduction of complications; however a larger cohort is required to confirm this. Future ERAS protocols may consider deep neuromuscular blockade with low intra-abdominal pressure to further benefit patients.

Effects of an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery programme on emergency surgical patients.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) programmes have been used in elective surgery since the 1990s to optimize peri-operative care, reducing post-operative complications, length of stay and overall costs. Following the local introduction of an ERAS programme for colorectal elective patients, it was suggested an increase in the use of ERAS-type principles in emergency patients may have occurred. The aims of this study were to determine whether management changes could be demonstrated and if there was a difference in outcomes. METHOD: A retrospective cohort study comparing emergency patients undergoing major abdominal surgery October 2008 to May 2010 (pre-ERAS) and January 2011 to December 2012 (post-ERAS) was performed. Details collected included admission and operative details, post-operative management and outcomes. RESULTS: A total of 370 patients were studied. Baseline variables were comparable. Post-ERAS, intra-operative (P < 0.001) and post-operative 48 h totals (P < 0.001) of intravenous fluids were significantly reduced. Significantly fewer patients in the post-ERAS group had a catheter (P < 0.001), drain (P = 0.001) and patient controlled analgesia (P = 0.01) for more than two days. Major complications (P = 0.002) and individual minor complications such as urinary tract infections (P = 0.02), urinary retention (P = 0.001) and chest infections (P = 0.001) were all significantly reduced in the post-ERAS period. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates a significant change in management towards ERAS principles in emergency patients following the introduction of such a programme in elective patients. The lack of increased complications in the second period suggests the use of ERAS principles is not harmful. The wider application of ERAS principles could improve outcomes in emergency surgery and deserves further study.

Nausea, vomiting and return of bowel function after colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Although patterns of return of bowel function (ROBF) following colorectal surgery with enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) programmes have been well delineated, regular morphine use is uncommon. This study describes the patterns of post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and ROBF in this context. METHOD: Patients undergoing elective major colorectal surgery on an ERAS programme over 1 year were included. Patient details, intra-operative course, post-operative management, outcomes and complications were collected retrospectively from clinical records. Statistical analysis was performed using Stata version 12. RESULTS: A total of 136/142 (96%) patients received morphine for post-operative analgesia. Most (112/142, 79%) experienced either no vomiting (87/142, 61%) or small amounts (25/142, 18%). On average, patients without an ileostomy passed flatus and opened their bowels after 2.4 and 4.3 days, those with an ileostomy taking 1.5 and 2.1 days. Vomiting was not related to ROBF (P = 0.370) or overall complications; wound complications (odds ratio (OR) = 8.1, 95% confidence interval (CI): 2.0-32.5), electrolyte abnormalities (OR = 2.9, 95% CI: 1.2-7.1) and length of stay (hazard ratio = 1.3, 95% CI: 1.2-1.5) were related. CONCLUSION: Most patients do not experience PONV in this context. ROBF is predictable without prolonged delays. This information could be used to allow confident early discharge and identify patients whose deviation from normal may indicate complications.

Socio-economic disadvantage and demographics as factors in stage of colorectal cancer presentation and survival.

BACKGROUND: Colorectal cancer (CRC) is common, and early diagnosis improves outcome. Overseas studies have suggested that low socio-economic status (SES) is related to advanced cancer stage at presentation and reduced survival. The situation in Australia is unclear. This study examines the effect of demographic and SES on CRC stage at presentation and survival in a single tertiary centre. METHODS: Patients undergoing surgical resection for CRC (1 January 2005 to 31 December 2010) were identified, and socio-demographic and histopathological information obtained. Four socio-economic indices using 2006 Australian Census data were assigned by residential postcode. Factors contributing to tumour (T) and American Joint Committee on Cancer (AJCC) stage at presentation and survival were assessed. RESULTS: Five hundred and fifty-seven patients were included. Results did not support a relationship between SES and either advanced stage at presentation or survival. Only one index (economic resources) was related to a more advanced T stage at presentation (P = 0.011); none were related to AJCC stage or survival. No significant relationship was found between an individual's country of birth, language spoken, private insurance or employment status and presenting with a later T or AJCC stage. Age, AJCC and T stage at diagnosis and emergency presentation significantly affected survival on multivariate analysis. CONCLUSION: SES and most demographic factors did not appear to significantly influence CRC stage at presentation and outcome. A focus on obtaining equivalent access to health care both nationally and internationally could prove beneficial in improving outcomes for CRC.

Perioperative hypothermia in patients undergoing major colorectal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative hypothermia occurs frequently and can have serious health-related and financial consequences. Despite multiple warming methods available, perioperative hypothermia remains prevalent. To be effective, preventative measures must be timely and target patients most at risk. The aim of this retrospective review was to document the incidence and patterns of hypothermia in patients undergoing major colorectal surgery. METHODS: Hospital records were used to obtain demographic and clinical information on 255 patients undergoing major colorectal surgery over one year. Temperatures were recorded from five perioperative time-points and correlated with potential contributing factors. RESULTS: Most patients (74%) experienced mild hypothermia, which was most common intraoperatively. Elective patients experienced the greatest drop in temperature between admission and commencement of surgery while emergency patients experienced a similar drop intraoperatively. The most significant determinant of intraoperative hypothermia was core temperature at the start of surgery (P < 0.01). Factors increasing hypothermia at the start of surgery were an elective presentation, an arrival temperature below 36.5°C (P < 0.01) and an age greater than 70 years (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: Mild hypothermia in patients undergoing major colorectal surgery is common, despite preventative measures. Core temperatures prior to commencement of the operation should be optimized with both active and passive warming measures, particularly for older patients and those arriving with lower core temperatures. Elective patients should also have their temperatures monitored as closely, if not more closely, than emergency patients. Preventing early declining trends in core temperature may positively influence later perioperative temperatures and improve outcomes.