Does preoperative administration of hypotensive agents affect the quality of the surgical field during endoscopic sinus surgery? A triple-blind randomized controlled trial.

PURPOSE: Endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS) is a surgical procedure widely used in the treatment of various sinonasal conditions. Excessive bleeding during ESS leads to potentially major complications. The primary aim of this trial was to explore any different effects of bisoprolol and nifedipine on the intraoperative surgical field. In addition, the correlations regarding surgical field state, total blood loss (TBL), mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR) were also examined. METHODS: A prospective, triple-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled trial was conducted, including 72 patients between 18 and 65 years of age who underwent ESS. As an indicator of the worst state of the intraoperative surgical field, the Boezaart scale score was used, as evaluated by two surgeons. Appropriate statistical analysis was conducted to explore score comparisons across groups and correlations between vital signs, bleeding, and the operative field state. RESULTS: No statistically significant difference was found among different intervention groups regarding the worst state of the surgical field (p = 0.367 > 0.05). The Boezaart scale score was positively correlated with TBL (rxy = 0.619, p = 0.000 < 0.001) and MAP (rxy = 0.259, p = 0.028 < 0.05). Furthermore, MAP was positively correlated with HR (rs = 0.254, p = 0.32 < 0.05). CONCLUSION: Our study demonstrates that preoperative administration of bisoprolol and nifedipine does not affect the worst state of the operative field. However, vital signs seem to either directly or indirectly affect bleeding and operative field state, and agents affecting them are worth exploring further.

Association between use of enhanced recovery after surgery protocols and postoperative complications in colorectal surgery in Europe: The EuroPOWER international observational study.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: Assess the relationship between the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS®) pathway and routine care and 30-day postoperative outcomes. DESIGN: Prospective cohort study. SETTING: European centers (185 hospitals) across 21 countries. PATIENTS: A total of 2841 adult patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery. Each hospital had a 1-month recruitment period between October 2019 and September 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Routine perioperative care. MEASUREMENTS: Twenty-four components of the ERAS pathway were assessed in all patients regardless of whether they were treated in a formal ERAS pathway. A multivariable and multilevel logistic regression model was used to adjust for baseline risk factors, ERAS elements and country-based differences. RESULTS: A total of 1835 patients (65%) received perioperative care at a self-declared ERAS center, 474 (16.7%) developed moderate-to-severe postoperative complications, and 63 patients died (2.2%). There was no difference in the primary outcome between patients who were or were not treated in self-declared ERAS centers (17.1% vs. 16%; OR 1.00; 95%CI, 0.79-1.27; P = 0.986). Hospital stay was shorter among patients treated in self-declared ERAS centers (6 [5-9] vs. 8 [6-10] days; OR 0.82; 95%CI, 0.78-0.87; P < 0.001). Median adherence to 24 ERAS elements was 57% [48%-65%]. Adherence to ERAS-pathway quartiles (≥65% vs. <48%) suggested that patients with the highest adherence rates experienced a lower risk of moderate-to-severe complications (15.9% vs. 17.8%; OR 0.71; 95%CI, 0.53-0.96; P = 0.027), lower risk of death (0.3% vs. 2.9%; OR 0.10; 95%CI, 0.02-0.42; P = 0.002) and shorter hospital stay (6 [4-8] vs. 7 [5-10] days; OR 0.74; 95%CI, 0.69-0.79; P < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: Treatment in a self-declared ERAS center does not improve outcome after colorectal surgery. Increased adherence to the ERAS pathway is associated with a significant reduction in overall postoperative complications, lower risk of moderate-to-severe complications, shorter length of hospital stay and lower 30-day mortality.