The effect of an intraoperative patient-specific, surgery-specific haemodynamic algorithm in improving textbook outcomes for hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery: a multicentre retrospective study.

Background: The concept of a "textbook outcome" is emerging as a metric for ideal surgical outcomes. We aimed to evaluate the impact of an advanced haemodynamic monitoring (AHDM) algorithm on achieving a textbook outcome in patients undergoing hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery. Methods: This retrospective, multicentre observational study was conducted across private and public teaching sectors in Victoria, Australia. We studied patients managed by a patient-specific, surgery-specific haemodynamic algorithm or via usual care. The primary outcome was the effect of using a patient-specific, surgery-specific AHDM algorithm for achieving a textbook outcome, with adjustment using propensity score matching. The textbook outcome criteria were defined according to the International Expert Delphi Consensus on Defining Textbook Outcome in Liver Surgery and Nationwide Analysis of a Novel Quality Measure in Pancreatic Surgery. Results: Of the 780 weighted cases, 477 (61.2%, 95% CI: 57.7%-64.6%) achieved the textbook outcome. Patients in the AHDM group had a higher rate of textbook outcomes [n = 259 (67.8%)] than those in the Usual care group [n = 218 (54.8%); p < 0.001, estimated odds ratio (95% CI) 1.74 (1.30-2.33)]. The AHDM group had a lower rate of surgery-specific complications, severe complications, and a shorter hospital length of stay (LOS) [OR 2.34 (95% CI: 1.30-4.21), 1.79 (95% CI: 1.12-2.85), and 1.83 (95% CI: 1.35-2.46), respectively]. There was no significant difference between the groups for hospital readmission and mortality. Conclusions: AHDM use was associated with improved outcomes, supporting its integration in hepatobiliary-pancreatic surgery. Prospective trials are warranted to further evaluate the impact of this AHDM algorithm on achieving a textbook impact on long-term outcomes.

Venovenous bypass in adult liver transplant recipients: A single-center observational case series.

BACKGROUND: Very little information is currently available on the use and outcomes of venovenous bypass (VVB) in liver transplantation (LT) in adults in Australia. In this study, we explored the indications, intraoperative course, and postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent VVB in a high-volume LT unit. METHODS: The study was a single-center, retrospective observational case series of adult patients who underwent VVB during LT at Austin Health in Melbourne, Australia between March 2008 and March 2022. Information on baseline preoperative status and intraoperative variables, including specific VVB characteristics as well as postoperative and VVB-related complications was collected. The lengths of intensive care unit and hospital stays as well as intraoperative and in-hospital mortality were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 900 LTs performed at this center during the aforementioned 14-year period, 27 (3%) included a VVB procedure. VVB was performed electively in 16 of these 27 patients (59.3%) and as a rescue technique to control massive bleeding in the other 11 (40.1%). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of those who underwent VVB procedures was 48 (39-55) years; the median age was 56 (47-62) years in the non-VVB group (p<0.0001). The median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores were similar between the two patient groups. Complete blood data was available for 622 non-VVB patients. Twenty-six VVB (96.3%) and 603 non-VVB (96.9%) patients required intraoperative blood transfusions. The median (IQR) number of units of packed red blood cells transfused was 7 (4.8-12.5) units in the VVB group compared to 3.0 units (1.0-6.0) in the non-VVB group (p<0.0001). Inpatient mortality was 18.5% and 1.1% for the VVB and non-VVB groups, respectively (p<0.0001). There were no significant differences in length of hospital stay or incidence of acute kidney injury, primary graft dysfunction, or long-term graft failure between the two groups. Patients in the VVB group experienced a higher rate of postoperative non-anastomotic biliary stricture compared to patients in the non-VVB group (33% and 7.9%, respectively; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: VVB continues to play a vital role in LT. This case series highlights the heightened risk of major complications linked to VVB. However, the global transition to selective use of VVB underscores the urgent need for collaborative multi-center studies designed to address outstanding questions and parameters related to the safe implementation of this procedure.

Renal medullary oxygenation during laparoscopic vs open surgery: the impact of blood pressure management-a pilot randomized controlled trial.

The impact of blood pressure targets and surgical approach (laparoscopic or open) on continuous urinary oxygenation (PuO2), a validated surrogate of renal medullary PO2, during general surgery, is unclear. We aimed to assess the effects of different blood pressure targets and surgical procedures on PuO2. We randomized patients receiving either laparoscopic or open surgery into two mean arterial pressure (MAP) target groups: usual MAP or a high MAP. We measured PuO2 in real-time and analyzed it according to the type of surgery and blood pressure target. The study was retrospectively registered on the 5th of July 2023 (ACTRN12623000726651). We included 43 participants who underwent either laparoscopic (n = 20) or open surgery (n = 23). We found that PuO2 significantly decreased during both laparoscopic and open surgery under a usual blood pressure target (- 51% and - 49%, respectively). However, there was a sharper fall with laparoscopic surgery resulting in a higher PuO2 with open surgery (mean difference: 11 ± 1 mmHg higher; p < 0.001). Targeting a higher MAP resulted in a higher PuO2 over time during laparoscopic surgery (mean difference: 7 ± 1 mmHg, p < 0.001). In contrast, targeting a usual MAP resulted in a higher PuO2 during open surgery (mean difference: 7 ± 1 mmHg, p < 0.001). Surgical approach and intraoperative blood pressure targets significantly impact urinary oxygenation. Further studies with larger sample sizes are needed to confirm these findings and understand their potential clinical implications.Registration number: ACTRN12623000726651; Date of registration: 05/07/2023 (retrospectively registered).

The transit of oral premedication beyond the stomach in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a retrospective observational multicentre study.

BACKGROUND: Antiemetic and analgesic oral premedications are frequently prescribed preoperatively to enhance recovery after laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. However, it is unknown whether these medications transit beyond the stomach or if they remain in the sleeve resection specimen, thereby negating their pharmacological effects. METHODS: A retrospective cohort study was performed on patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and receiving oral premedication (slow-release tapentadol and netupitant/palonosetron) as part of enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery program. Patients were stratified into the Transit group (premedication absent in the resection specimen) and Failure-to-Transit group (premedication present in the resection specimen). Age, sex, body mass index, and presence of diabetes were compared amongst the groups. The premedication lead time (time between premedications' administration and gastric specimen resection), and the premedication presence or absence in the specimen was evaluated. RESULTS: One hundred consecutive patients were included in the analysis. Ninety-nine patients (99%) were morbidly obese, and 17 patients (17%) had Type 2 diabetes mellitus. One hundred patients (100%) received tapentadol and 89 patients (89%) received netupitant/palonosetron. One or more tablets were discovered in the resected specimens of 38 patients (38%). No statistically significant differences were observed between the groups regarding age, sex, diabetes, or body mass index. The median (Q1‒Q3) premedication lead time was 80 min (57.8‒140.0) in the Failure-to-Transit group and 119.5 min (85.0‒171.3) in the Transit group; P = 0.006. The lead time required to expect complete absorption in 80% of patients was 232 min (95%CI:180‒310). CONCLUSIONS: Preoperative oral analgesia and antiemetics did not transit beyond the stomach in 38% of patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy. When given orally in combination, tapentadol and netupitant/palonosetron should be administered at least 4 h before surgery to ensure transition beyond the stomach. Future enhanced recovery after bariatric surgery guidelines may benefit from the standardization of premedication lead times to facilitate increased absorption. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Australian and New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry; number ACTRN12623000187640; retrospective registered on 22/02/2023.