Research priorities in regional anaesthesia: an international Delphi study.

BACKGROUND: Regional anaesthesia use is growing worldwide, and there is an increasing emphasis on research in regional anaesthesia to improve patient outcomes. However, priorities for future study remain unclear. We therefore conducted an international research prioritisation exercise, setting the agenda for future investigators and funding bodies. METHODS: We invited members of specialist regional anaesthesia societies from six continents to propose research questions that they felt were unanswered. These were consolidated into representative indicative questions, and a literature review was undertaken to determine if any indicative questions were already answered by published work. Unanswered indicative questions entered a three-round modified Delphi process, whereby 29 experts in regional anaesthesia (representing all participating specialist societies) rated each indicative question for inclusion on a final high priority shortlist. If ≥75% of participants rated an indicative question as 'definitely' include in any round, it was accepted. Indicative questions rated as 'definitely' or 'probably' by <50% of participants in any round were excluded. Retained indicative questions were further ranked based on the rating score in the final Delphi round. The final research priorities were ratified by the Delphi expert group. RESULTS: There were 1318 responses from 516 people in the initial survey, from which 71 indicative questions were formed, of which 68 entered the modified Delphi process. Eleven 'highest priority' research questions were short listed, covering themes of pain management; training and assessment; clinical practice and efficacy; technology and equipment. CONCLUSIONS: We prioritised unanswered research questions in regional anaesthesia. These will inform a coordinated global research strategy for regional anaesthesia and direct investigators to address high-priority areas.

Does Patient Blood Management Affect Outcomes in Metastatic Spine Tumour Surgery? A Review of Current Concepts.

STUDY DESIGN: Narrative review. OBJECTIVE: The spine is the most common site of metastases, associated with decreased quality of life. Increase in metastatic spine tumour surgery (MSTS) has caused us to focus on the management of blood, as blood loss is a significant morbidity in these patients. However, blood transfusion is also not without its own risks, and hence this led to blood conservation strategies and implementation of a concept of patient blood management (PBM) in clinical practise focusing on these patients. METHODS: A narrative review was conducted and all studies that were related to blood management in metastatic spine disease as well as PBM surrounding this condition were included. RESULTS: A total of 64 studies were included in this review. We discussed a new concept of patient blood management in patients undergoing MSTS, with stratification to pre-operative and intra-operative factors, as well as anaesthesia and surgical considerations. The studies show that PBM and reduction in blood transfusion allows for reduced readmission rates, lower risks associated with blood transfusion, and lower morbidity for patients undergoing MSTS. CONCLUSION: Through this review, we highlight various pre-operative and intra-operative methods in the surgical and anaesthesia domains that can help with PBM. It is an important concept with the significant amount of blood loss expected from MSTS. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Not applicable.

A systematic review and meta-analysis on the effect of goal-directed fluid therapy on postoperative outcomes in renal transplantation surgeries.

Introduction: This systematic review and meta-analysis investigated the impact of intraoperative goal-directed therapy (GDT) compared with conventional fluid therapy on postoperative outcomes in renal transplantation recipients, addressing this gap in current literature. Method: A systematic search of patients aged ≥18 years who have undergone single-organ primary renal transplantations up to June 2022 in PubMed, Embase, Scopus and CINAHL Plus was performed. Primary outcome examined was postoperative renal function. Secondary outcomes assessed were mean arterial pressure at graft reperfusion, intraoperative fluid volume and other postoperative complications. Heterogeneity was tested using I² test. The study protocol was registered on PROSPERO. Results: A total of 2459 studies were identified. Seven eligible studies on 607 patients were included. Subgroup assessments revealed potential renal protective benefits of GDT, with patients receiving cadaveric grafts showing lower serum creatinine on postoperative days 1 and 3, and patients monitored with arterial waveform analysis devices experiencing lower incidences of postoperative haemodialysis. Overall analysis found GDT resulted in lower incidence of tissue oedema (risk ratio [RR] 0.34, 95% CI 0.15-0.78, P=0.01) and respiratory complications (RR 0.39, 95% CI 0.17-0.90, P=0.03). However, quality of data was deemed low given inclusion of non-randomised studies, presence of heterogeneities and inconsistencies in defining outcomes measures. Conclusion: While no definitive conclusions can be ascertained given current limitations, this review highlights potential benefits of using GDT in renal transplantation recipients. It prompts the need for further standardised studies to address limitations discussed in this review.