Delphi Initiative for Early-Onset Colorectal Cancer (DIRECt) International Management Guidelines.

BACKGROUND & AIMS: Patients with early-onset colorectal cancer (eoCRC) are managed according to guidelines that are not age-specific. A multidisciplinary international group (DIRECt), composed of 69 experts, was convened to develop the first evidence-based consensus recommendations for eoCRC. METHODS: After reviewing the published literature, a Delphi methodology was used to draft and respond to clinically relevant questions. Each statement underwent 3 rounds of voting and reached a consensus level of agreement of ≥80%. RESULTS: The DIRECt group produced 31 statements in 7 areas of interest: diagnosis, risk factors, genetics, pathology-oncology, endoscopy, therapy, and supportive care. There was strong consensus that all individuals younger than 50 should undergo CRC risk stratification and prompt symptom assessment. All newly diagnosed eoCRC patients should receive germline genetic testing, ideally before surgery. On the basis of current evidence, endoscopic, surgical, and oncologic treatment of eoCRC should not differ from later-onset CRC, except for individuals with pathogenic or likely pathogenic germline variants. The evidence on chemotherapy is not sufficient to recommend changes to established therapeutic protocols. Fertility preservation and sexual health are important to address in eoCRC survivors. The DIRECt group highlighted areas with knowledge gaps that should be prioritized in future research efforts, including age at first screening for the general population, use of fecal immunochemical tests, chemotherapy, endoscopic therapy, and post-treatment surveillance for eoCRC patients. CONCLUSIONS: The DIRECt group produced the first consensus recommendations on eoCRC. All statements should be considered together with the accompanying comments and literature reviews. We highlighted areas where research should be prioritized. These guidelines represent a useful tool for clinicians caring for patients with eoCRC.

Acute Pain Service: A 10-Year Experience.

BACKGROUND: Pain management after surgery is crucial to decrease perioperative morbidity and mortality. Acute pain services (APS) are multidisciplinary teams that represent a modern strategy to address pain inside hospitals. The APS defines and applies pain treatment protocols specific for each surgery. To evaluate the performance of the APS at our institute, we performed a large retrospective cohort study focusing on complications of epidural analgesia and IV opiates. METHODS: Data from the 10 years of activity of the APS were collected. Pain was assessed using the VAS at rest (VASr) and during movement (VASm) at each daily visit; the presence of side effects and complications was also assessed. RESULTS: A total of 17,913 adult patients were followed by APS during the study period. Epidural analgesia was used in 7,776 cases (43%), while 9,239 (52%) patients used IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). A combination of the 2 was used in 87 patients (0.5%). A total of 456 perineural catheters (2.6%) were placed, while 442 patients(2.5%) used other analgesic techniques. We recorded 163 dural punctures during catheter placement, with no epidural hematoma, epidural abscess, or meningitis, and no permanent modification in sensitive or motor functions. CONCLUSIONS: In our large case series, APS was confirmed safe and effective in treating postoperative pain, using both epidural analgesia and IV PCA with morphine.

Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet System (SSTS) for the management of postoperative pain after major abdominal and gynecological surgery within an ERAS protocol: an observational study.

BACKGROUND: The Sufentanil Sublingual Tablet System (SSTS) is a new, pre-programmed, noninvasive, handheld system for patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) which may allow a faster postoperative recovery compared with standard PCA. The efficacy of SSTS in controlling pain after open abdominal surgery has already been documented. However, to our knowledge SSTS has never been investigated in patients undergoing major surgery within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol. METHODS: This observational, retrospective analysis included consecutive patients undergoing elective major abdominal and gynecological surgery. All patients received the SSTS device once they were fully awake and had a good control of pain at the end of the surgery. We analyzed changes in pain intensity according to the numerical rating scale (NRS) throughout the treatment as well as its duration, the number of administrations, and possible related adverse events. Patients were also interviewed to assess their quality of sleep and overall satisfaction with the SSTS device. RESULTS: The study included 308 patients. Compared to the first SSTS administration, pain intensity decreased from a median NRS of 6 to 0 at day 3, for an overall reduction of 79%. Results were already statistically significant at postoperative day 1 (p<0.01). Adverse reactions were observed in 62 patients, with nausea being the most frequent (12%), and in 93% of patients SSTS was discontinued because it was considered no longer necessary. Patient satisfaction was high, with 89% of them judging the device as "easy" or "very easy" to use. CONCLUSIONS: Although the retrospective and observational nature of the study as well as the absence of a comparative group limits the strength of evidence, our results consider SSTS an effective and safe tool for the management of postoperative pain after major abdominal and gynecological surgery within an ERAS protocol.

Temperature control and recovery of bowel function after laparoscopic or laparotomic colorectal surgery in patients receiving combined epidural/general anesthesia and postoperative epidural analgesia.

UNLABELLED: We compared the effects of a laparoscopic (n = 23) versus laparotomic (n = 21) technique for major abdominal surgery on temperature control in 44 patients undergoing colorectal surgery during a combined epidural/general anesthesia. A thoracic epidural block up to T4 was induced with 6-10 mL of 0.75% ropivacaine; general anesthesia was induced with thiopental, fentanyl, and atracurium IV and maintained with isoflurane. Core temperature was measured with a bladder probe and recorded every 15 min after the induction. In both groups, core temperature decreased to 35.2 degrees C (range, 34 degrees C-36 degrees C) at the end of surgery. After surgery, normothermia returned after 75 min (60-120 min) in the Laparoscopy group and 60 min (45-180 min) in the Laparotomy group (P = 0.56). No differences in postanesthesia care unit discharge time were reported between the two groups. The degree of pain during coughing was smaller after laparoscopy than laparotomy from the 24th to the 72nd observation times (P < 0.01). Morphine consumption was 22 mg (2-65 mg) in the Laparotomy group and 5 mg (0-45 mg) in the Laparoscopy group (P = 0.02). The time to first flatus was shorter after laparoscopy (24 h [16-72 h]) than laparotomy (72 h [26-96 h]) (P = 0.0005), and the first intake of clear liquid occurred after 48 h (24-72 h) in the Laparoscopy group and after 96 h (90-96 h) in the Laparotomy group (P = 0.0005). Although laparoscopic surgery provides positive effects on the degree of postoperative pain and recovery of bowel function, the reduction in heat loss produced by minimizing bowel exposure with laparoscopic surgery does not compensate for the anesthesia-related effects on temperature control, and active patient warming must also be used with laparoscopic techniques. IMPLICATIONS: This prospective, randomized, controlled study demonstrates that laparoscopic colorectal surgery results in less postoperative pain and earlier recovery of bowel function than conventional laparotomy but does not reduce the risk for perioperative hypothermia. Accordingly, active warming must be provided to patients also during laparoscopic procedures.