Longitudinal perioperative patient-reported outcomes in open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy.

BACKGROUND: There are few prospective studies in the gynecologic surgical literature that compared patient-reported outcomes between open and minimally invasive hysterectomies within enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to compare prospectively collected perioperative patient-reported symptom burden and interference measures in open compared with minimally invasive hysterectomy cohorts within enhanced recovery after surgery pathways. STUDY DESIGN: We compared patient-reported symptom burden and functional interference in 646 patients who underwent a hysterectomy (254 underwent open surgery and 392 underwent minimally invasive surgery) for benign and malignant indications under enhanced recovery after surgery protocols. Outcomes were prospectively measured using the validated MD Anderson Symptom Inventory, which was administered perioperatively up to 8 weeks after surgery. Cohorts were compared using Fisher exact and chi-squared tests, adjusted longitudinal generalized linear mixed modeling, and Kaplan Meier curves to model return to no or mild symptoms. RESULTS: The open cohort had significantly worse preoperative physical functional interference (P=.001). At the time of hospital discharge postoperatively, the open cohort reported significantly higher mean symptom severity scores and more moderate or severe scores for overall (P<.001) and abdominal pain (P<.001), fatigue (P=.001), lack of appetite (P<.001), bloating (P=.041), and constipation (P<.001) when compared with the minimally invasive cohort. The open cohort also had significantly higher interference in physical functioning (score 5.0 vs 2.7; P<.001) than the minimally invasive cohort at the time of discharge with no differences in affective interference between the 2 groups. In mixed modeling analysis of the first 7 postoperative days, both cohorts reported improved symptom burden and functional interference over time with generally slower recovery in the open cohort. From 1 to 8 postoperative weeks, the open cohort had worse mean scores for all evaluated symptoms and interference measures except for pain with urination, although scores indicated mild symptomatic burden and interference in both cohorts. The time to return to no or mild symptoms was significantly longer in the open cohort for overall pain (14 vs 4 days; P<.001), fatigue (8 vs 4 days; P<.001), disturbed sleep (2 vs 2 days; P<.001), and appetite (1.5 vs 1 days; P<.001) but was significantly longer in the minimally invasive cohort for abdominal pain (42 vs 28 days; P<.001) and bloating (42 vs 8 days; P<.001). The median time to return to no or mild functional interference was longer in the open than in the minimally invasive hysterectomy cohort for physical functioning (36 vs 32 days; P<.001) with no difference in compositive affective functioning (5 vs 5 days; P=.07) between the groups. CONCLUSION: Open hysterectomy was associated with increased symptom burden in the immediate postoperative period and longer time to return to no or mild symptom burden and interference with physical functioning. However, all patient-reported measures improved within days to weeks of both open and minimally invasive surgery and differences were not always clinically significant.

Incidence of acute kidney injury after noncardiac surgery in patients receiving intraoperative dexmedetomidine: a retrospective study.

Background: Postoperative acute kidney injury (AKI) is a common complication and is associated with increased hospital length of stay and 30 day all-cause mortality. Unfortunately, we have neither a defined strategy to prevent AKI nor an effective treatment. In vitro, animal, and human studies have suggested that dexmedetomidine may have a renoprotective effect. We conducted a retrospective cohort study to evaluate if intraoperative dexmedetomidine was associated with a reduced incidence of AKI. Methods: We collected data from 6625 patients who underwent major non-cardiothoracic cancer surgery. Before and after propensity score matching, we compared the incidence of postoperative AKI in patients who received intraoperative dexmedetomidine and those who did not. AKI was defined according to the Kidney Disease Improving Global Outcomes (creatinine alone values) criteria and calculated for postoperative Days 1, 2, and 3. Results: Twenty per cent (n=1301) of the patients received dexmedetomidine. The mean [standard deviation] administered dose was 78 [49.4] mcg. Patients treated with dexmedetomidine were matched to those who did not receive the drug. Patients receiving dexmedetomidine had a longer anaesthesia duration than the non-dexmedetomidine group. The incidence of AKI was not significantly different between the groups (dexmedetomidine 8% vs no dexmedetomidine 7%; P=0.333). The 30 day rates of infection, cardiovascular complications, or reoperation attributable to bleeding were higher in patients treated with dexmedetomidine. The 30 day mortality rate was not statistically different between the groups. Conclusions: The administration of dexmedetomidine during major non-cardiothoracic cancer surgery is not associated with a reduction in AKI within 72 h after surgery.

Rate of venous thromboembolism on an enhanced recovery program after gynecologic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Venous thromboembolism is a life-threatening complication of surgery. An Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program is a multimodal care pathway that facilitates faster recovery from surgery. The rate of venous thromboembolism after gynecologic surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery program is unknown. OBJECTIVE: This study aimed to evaluate the rate of venous thromboembolism within 30 days of gynecologic surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway performed at a cancer center. STUDY DESIGN: Data were collected prospectively on Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway gynecologic patients undergoing open surgery (November 3, 2014, to March 31, 2021) and minimally invasive surgery (February 1, 2017, to March 31, 2021). Care was delivered at a tertiary cancer care center located in a large urban area. Patients undergoing emergency surgery or multispecialty surgeries were excluded. Patients undergoing open surgery were to receive heparin prophylaxis before surgery, sequential compression devices during surgery and admission, and low-molecular-weight heparin prophylaxis during admission. If diagnosed with malignancy, patients were to receive extended venous thromboembolism prophylaxis for 28 days after surgery. For minimally invasive surgery, patients received only sequential compression devices during surgery and no heparin prophylaxis before or after surgery. Venous thromboembolism events were included if detected on imaging obtained for symptoms or other indications. Descriptive statistics and bivariate statistical analyses were performed. RESULTS: Of 3329 patients, 1519 (45.6%) underwent laparotomy, 1452 (43.6%) underwent laparoscopy, and 358 (10.8%) underwent robotic surgery. The incidence rates of venous thromboembolism were 0.6% (n=21; 95% confidence interval, 0.4%-0.9%) overall, 1.1% (n=16, 95% confidence interval, 0.6%-1.7%) in the open approach, and 0.3% (n=5; 95% confidence interval, 0.3%-0.6%) in the minimally invasive approach (P=.02). The incidence rates of venous thromboembolism among the 1999 patients with malignancy were 0.9% (n=18; 95% confidence interval, 0.5%-1.4%) overall, 1.4% (n=15; 95% confidence interval, 0.7%-2.2%) in the open approach, and 0.3% (n=3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1%-0.9%) in the minimally invasive approach. The incidence rates of venous thromboembolism among the 1165 patients with benign disease were 0.3% (n=3; 95% confidence interval, 0.1%-0.7%) overall, 0.3% (n=1; 95% confidence interval, 0.0%-1.7%) in the open approach, and 0.2% (n=2; 95% confidence interval, 0.0%-0.9%) in the minimally invasive approach. CONCLUSION: The rate of venous thromboembolism among patients undergoing laparotomy and minimally invasive surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway was ≤1%. This study established a benchmark for the rate of venous thromboembolism after gynecologic surgery on an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery pathway performed at a cancer center.

Opioid-sparing anesthesia and patient-reported outcomes after open gynecologic surgery: a historical cohort study.

PURPOSE: Dexmedetomidine and ketamine may be administered intraoperatively as continuous infusions to provide opioid-sparing anesthesia. Recent evidence has yielded controversial results regarding the impact of opioid-free anesthesia on postoperative complications, and there is a gap in knowledge regarding patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This study aimed to determine the impact of opioid-sparing anesthesia and opioid-based anesthesia on PROs among gynecologic patients within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. METHODS: We formed a single-center historical cohort from patients enrolled in another study who underwent open gynecologic surgery on an ERAS program from November 2014 to December 2020 (n = 2,095). We identified two cohorts based on the type of balanced anesthesia administered: 1) opioid-sparing anesthesia defined as the continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine and ketamine (adjuvants) during surgery or 2) opioid-based anesthesia (no adjuvants). We measured the quality of postoperative recovery using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), a 29-item validated tool that was administered preoperatively, daily while admitted, and weekly after discharge until week 6. The primary outcome was interference with walking. We matched both cohorts and used a multilevel linear mixed-effect model to evaluate the effect of opioid-sparing anesthesia on the primary outcome. RESULTS: In total, 498 patients were eligible (159 in the opioid-sparing anesthesia cohort and 339 in the opioid-based anesthesia cohort), of whom 149 matched pairs were included in the final analysis. Longitudinal assessment showed no significant or clinically important difference in interference with walking (P = 0.99), general activity (P = 0.99), or other PROs between cohorts. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] intraoperative opioid administration (expressed as morphine milligram equivalents [MME]) among matched patients in the opioid-sparing anesthesia cohort was 30 [25-55] mg vs 58 [8-70] mg in the opioid-based anesthesia cohort (P < 0.01). Patients in the opioid-sparing anesthesia cohort had a lower opioid consumption in the postanesthesia care unit than those in the opioid-based anesthesia cohort (MME, 3 [0-10] mg vs 5 [0-15] mg; P < 0.01), but there was no significant difference between cohorts in total postoperative opioid consumption (MME, 23 [0-94] mg vs 35 [13-95] mg P = 0.053). CONCLUSIONS: In this single-center historical cohort study, opioid-sparing anesthesia had no significant or clinically important effects on interference with walking or other PROs in patients undergoing gynecologic surgery compared with opioid-based anesthesia. Opioid-sparing anesthesia was associated with less short-term opioid consumption than opioid-based anesthesia.

RéSUMé: OBJECTIF: La dexmédétomidine et la kétamine peuvent être administrées en peropératoire sous forme de perfusions continues pour fournir une anesthésie avec épargne opioïde. Des données probantes récentes ont présenté des résultats controversés concernant l'impact d'une anesthésie sans opioïdes sur les complications postopératoires, et il existe une lacune dans les connaissances concernant les issues rapportées par les patients (IRP). Cette étude visait à déterminer l'impact d'une anesthésie avec épargne opioïde et d'une anesthésie à base d'opioïdes sur les IRP chez les patientes de chirurgie gynécologique dans le cadre d'un programme de Récupération rapide après la chirurgie (ERAS ­ Enhanced Recovery After Surgery). MéTHODE: Nous avons formé une cohorte historique monocentrique composée de patientes inscrites à une autre étude qui ont bénéficié d'une chirurgie gynécologique avec laparotomie dans le cadre d'un programme d'ERAS entre novembre 2014 et décembre 2020 (n = 2095). Nous avons identifié deux cohortes en fonction du type d'anesthésie équilibrée administrée : 1) anesthésie avec épargne opioïde, définie comme une perfusion continue de dexmédétomidine et de kétamine (adjuvants) pendant la chirurgie, ou 2) anesthésie à base d'opioïdes (sans adjuvants). Nous avons mesuré la qualité de la récupération postopératoire à l'aide de l'inventaire des symptômes MDASI, un outil validé comportant 29 éléments qui a été administré avant l'opération, quotidiennement pendant l'admission et chaque semaine après le congé jusqu'à la semaine 6. Le critère d'évaluation principal était l'interférence avec la marche. Nous avons apparié les deux cohortes et utilisé un modèle linéaire à effets mixtes à plusieurs niveaux pour évaluer l'effet de l'anesthésie avec épargne opioïde sur le critère d'évaluation principal. RéSULTATS: Au total, 498 patientes étaient éligibles (159 dans la cohorte d'anesthésie avec épargne opioïde et 339 dans la cohorte d'anesthésie à base d'opioïdes), dont 149 paires appariées ont été incluses dans l'analyse finale. L'évaluation longitudinale n'a révélé aucune différence significative ou cliniquement importante dans l'interférence avec la marche (P = 0,99), l'activité générale (P = 0,99), ou d'autres IRP entre les deux cohortes. L'administration médiane d'opioïdes peropératoires [écart interquartile (ÉIQ)] (exprimée en équivalents de morphine en milligrammes [EMM]) chez les patientes appariées de la cohorte d'anesthésie avec épargne opioïde était de 30 [25-55] mg vs 58 [8­70] mg dans la cohorte d'anesthésie à base d'opioïdes (P < 0,01). Les patientes de la cohorte d'anesthésie avec épargne opioïde avaient une consommation d'opioïdes plus faible en salle de réveil que celles de la cohorte d'anesthésie à base d'opioïdes (EMM, 3 [0-10] mg vs 5 [0­15] mg; P < 0,01), mais il n'y avait pas de différence significative entre les cohortes dans la consommation totale d'opioïdes postopératoires (EMM, 23 [0-94] mg vs 35 [13­95] mg; P = 0,053). CONCLUSION: Dans cette étude de cohorte historique monocentrique, l'anesthésie avec épargne opioïde n'a eu aucun effet significatif ou cliniquement important sur l'interférence avec la marche ou d'autres IRP chez les patientes bénéficiant d'une chirurgie gynécologique par rapport à l'anesthésie à base d'opioïdes. L'anesthésie avec épargne opioïde était associée à une consommation d'opioïdes moindre à court terme que l'anesthésie à base d'opioïdes.

Updates in Enhanced Recovery Pathways for Gynecologic Surgery.

Gynecologic surgery encompasses over a quarter of inpatient surgical procedures for US women, and current projections estimate an increase of the US female population by nearly 50% in 2050. Over the last decade, US hospitals have embraced enhanced recovery pathways in many specialties. They have increasingly been used in multiple institutions worldwide, becoming the standard of care for patient optimization. According to the last updated enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) guideline published in 2019, there are several new considerations behind each practice in ERAS protocols. This article discusses the most updated evidence regarding ERAS programs for gynecologic surgery.

Intraoperative Dexmedetomidine and Ketamine Infusions in an Enhanced Recovery After Thoracic Surgery Program: A Propensity Score Matched Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of intraoperative dexmedetomidine and ketamine on postoperative pain and opioid consumption within an ERAS program in thoracic pulmonary oncologic surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective, propensity-score matched analysis SETTING: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) program. PARTICIPANTS: Patients undergoing thoracic pulmonary oncologic surgery between March 2016 and April 2020. INTERVENTIONS: Continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine and ketamine. MEASUREMENTS & MAIN RESULTS: The authors initially analyzed data of 1,630 patients undergoing thoracic pulmonary oncologic surgery within their ERAS program. In total, 117 matched pairs were included in this analysis. Patients in the intraoperative dexmedetomidine + ketamine group were more likely to be opioid-free (76.6% vs 60.9%, P<0.01). Raw analysis showed lower pain scores at PACU admission (2.8±2.0 vs 3.4±2.0, P=0.03) and less opioid consumption at PACU admission (5 MED [0-10] vs 7.5 MED [0-15], P=0.03) in the dexmedetomidine + ketamine group; however, these differences were not present after adjusting for multiplicity. There were no significant differences in the length of PACU stay (1.9 hours [1.5-2.8] vs 2.0 hours [1.4-2.9], P=0.48) or hospital stay (three days [two-five] vs three days [two-five], P=0.08). Both groups had similar rates of pulmonary complications (5.9% vs 9.4%, P=0.326), ileus (0.9% vs 0.9%, P=1.00), and 30-day readmission (2.6% vs 4.3%, P=0.722). CONCLUSIONS: There were no differences in postoperative pain scores and opioid consumption throughout their hospital stay between patients receiving concomitant dexmedetomidine and ketamine infusions versus patients who did not receive these infusions during thoracic surgery.

Effect of preoperative intravenous vs oral acetaminophen on postoperative opioid consumption in an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program in patients undergoing open gynecologic oncology surgery.

OBJECTIVE: Both intravenous (IV) and oral acetaminophen provide effective opioid-sparing analgesia after surgery when used as part of a multimodal preemptive pain management strategy. The purpose of this study was to compare postoperative opioid consumption in patients undergoing open gynecologic oncology surgery who received preoperative IV vs oral acetaminophen within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. METHODS: Retrospective data were collected on consecutive patients undergoing open gynecologic oncology surgery from May 1, 2016 to February 28, 2018 in patients receiving either 1 g IV or oral acetaminophen preoperatively. Patients were given a preoperative multimodal analgesia regimen including acetaminophen, celecoxib, pregabalin and tramadol. The primary outcomes were morphine equivalent daily doses (MEDD) on postoperative days (POD) 0 and 1. Secondary outcomes included highest patient-reported pain score in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) and intraoperative MEDD. Regression models adjusted by matched pairs were fit to estimate the average treatment effect of IV vs oral acetaminophen on MEDD. RESULTS: Of 353 patients, 178 (50.4%) received IV acetaminophen and 175 (49.6%) received oral acetaminophen. When balancing across the matched samples, there was no difference in postoperative MEDD for POD 0 between the IV and oral acetaminophen groups (Beta = -1.11; 95% CI: -4.83 to 2.60; p = 0.56). On POD 1, there was no difference between the IV and oral groups (Beta = 2.24; 95% CI: -2.76 to 7.25; p = 0.38). CONCLUSIONS: There was no difference in postoperative opioid consumption between patients receiving preoperative IV or oral acetaminophen within an ERAS program for patients undergoing open gynecologic oncology surgery.

Impact of implementation of an enhanced recovery program in gynecologic surgery on healthcare costs.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced recovery programs have been associated with improved outcomes after gynecologic surgery. There are limited data on the effect of enhanced recovery programs on healthcare costs or healthcare service use. OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to evaluate differences in hospital charges for women who undergo surgery for a suspected gynecologic cancer that is managed in an enhanced recovery program as compared with conventional perioperative care. STUDY DESIGN: We performed a retrospective cohort study of women who underwent open abdominal surgery for a suspected gynecologic cancer before and after the implementation of an enhanced recovery after surgery program. Consecutive patients from May to October 2014 and from November 2014 to November 2015 comprised the conventional perioperative care (before enhanced recovery after surgery) and enhanced recovery after surgery cohorts, respectively. Patients were excluded if they underwent surgery with a multidisciplinary surgical team or minimally invasive surgery. All technical and professional charges were ascertained for all healthcare services from the day of surgery until postoperative day 30. Charges for adjuvant treatment were excluded. Charges were classified according to the type of clinical service provided. The primary outcome was the difference in total hospital charges between the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery and the enhanced recovery after surgery groups. Secondary outcomes were between group differences in hospital charges within clinical service categories. RESULTS: A total of 271 patients were included in the analysis (58 patients in the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery and 213 patients in the enhanced recovery after surgery cohort). A total of 70,177 technical charges and 6775 professional charges were identified and classified. The median hospital charge for a patient decreased 15.6% in the enhanced recovery after surgery group compared with the pre-enhanced recovery after surgery group (95% confidence interval, 5-24.5%; P=.008). Patients in the enhanced recovery after surgery group also had lower charges for laboratory services (20% lower; 95% confidence interval, 0--39%; P=.04), pharmacy services (30% lower; 95% confidence interval, 14--41%; P<.001), room and board (25% lower; 95% confidence interval, 20--47%; P=.005), and material goods (64% lower; 95% confidence interval, 44--81%; P<.001). No differences in charges were observed for perioperative services, diagnostic procedures, emergency department care, transfusion-related services, interventional radiology procedures, physical/occupational therapy, outpatient care, or other services. CONCLUSION: Hospital charges and healthcare service use were lower for enhanced recovery patients compared with patients who received conventional perioperative care after open surgery for a suspected gynecologic cancer. Enhanced recovery programs may be considered to be high value in healthcare because they provide improved outcomes while lowering resource use.

Effect of reversal of deep neuromuscular block with sugammadex or moderate block by neostigmine on shoulder pain in elderly patients undergoing robotic prostatectomy.

BACKGROUND: For some laparoscopic procedures, deep neuromuscular block has been shown to facilitate lower insufflation pressures and lower patient pain scores, and enhance postoperative recovery. We investigated the impact of deep neuromuscular block and its reversal on postoperative shoulder pain and outcomes after robotic prostate surgery. METHODS: Elderly men undergoing robotic prostatectomy were randomised to deep neuromuscular block (target post-tetanic twitch of 1-2 at the facial nerve) with sugammadex reversal or moderate neuromuscular block (target 1-2 train-of-four ratio) with neostigmine reversal. The primary endpoint was postoperative shoulder pain. The secondary endpoints included intraoperative insufflation pressure, surgical rating score, incidence of residual neuromuscular block, and postoperative recovery. RESULTS: A total of 50 subjects for each treatment arm were included in the analysis. The degree of neuromuscular block had no effect on the incidence of shoulder pain (deep block group 12% vs moderate block group 10%; P=1.0) or average insufflation pressure (median [inter-quartile range]) (13.3 [12.5-13.6] mm Hg vs 13.3 [11.7-14] mm Hg, P=0.86). After surgery, the deep block group had a higher normalised train-of-four ratio (0.98 [0.79-1.11] vs 0.85 [0.74-1.00]; P=0.008). The presence of postoperative shoulder pain was associated with higher BMI (31.8 [28-33.9] kg m-2vs 28 [24.8-31.1] kg m-2; P=0.036) and longer insufflation time (186 [156-257] min vs 154 [126-198] min; P=0.028). CONCLUSIONS: The use of deep neuromuscular block during surgery does not decrease postoperative shoulder pain or enhance recovery after robotic prostatectomy. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT03210376.

Patient characteristics and opioid use prior to discharge after open gynecologic surgery in an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program.

OBJECTIVE: To identify clinical and demographic characteristics associated with the absence of opioid usage on the day before discharge among patients undergoing open gynecologic surgery within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program. METHODS: This was a single institution retrospective cohort study including all patients who underwent elective open gynecologic surgery as part of an ERAS program between November 1, 2014 and September 30, 2018 and who were discharged between post-operative day 2 and 7. Patients were excluded if they reported pre-existing chronic opioid use or underwent total pelvic exenteration. Descriptive statistics were used and multivariable logistic regression was used to identify factors associated with the absence of opioid usage on the day before discharge, after adjustment for relevant covariates. RESULTS: A total of 971 were included with a median length of stay of 3 days, and of these 526 (54.2%) used opioids on day before discharge and 445 (45.8%) did not. Absence of opioid use on the day before discharge was associated with age (P < .001), race (P = .04), Charlson Co-morbidity Index (P < .001), marital status (P = .004), and smoking status (P = .002) by univariate analysis. In a multivariable model, older age (adjusted OR 1.04; 95% CI 1.02-1.06; P < .001), current smoker status (adjusted OR 0.42; 95% CI 0.20-0.81; P = .01), and white or Caucasian race (adjusted OR 0.59; 95% CI 0.38-0.91; P = .02) were significantly associated with the absence of opioid use on the day prior to discharge. CONCLUSIONS: Nearly half of patients undergoing open gynecologic surgery within an established ERAS program did not consume any opioids on day before discharge. Safe, evidence-based reductions in post-operative opioid prescribing may be feasible for a subset of gynecologic surgery patients.

Determining the Safety and Efficacy of Enhanced Recovery Protocols in Major Oncologic Surgery: An Institutional NSQIP Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced-recovery (ER) protocols are increasingly being utilized in surgical practice. Outside of colorectal surgery, however, their feasibility, safety, and efficacy in major oncologic surgery have not been proven. This study compared patient outcomes before and after multispecialty implementation of ER protocols at a large, comprehensive cancer center. METHODS: Surgical cases performed from 2011 to 2016 and captured by an institutional NSQIP database were reviewed. Following exclusion of outpatient and emergent surgeries, 2747 cases were included in the analyses. Cases were stratified by presence or absence of ER compliance, defined by preoperative patient education and electronic medical record order set-driven opioid-sparing analgesia, goal-directed fluid therapy, and early postoperative diet advancement and ambulation. RESULTS: Approximately half of patients were treated on ER protocols (46%) and the remaining on traditional postoperative (TP) protocols (54%). Treatment on an ER protocol was associated with decreased overall complication rates (20% vs. 33%, p < 0.0001), severe complication rates (7.4% vs. 10%, p = 0.010), and median hospital length of stay (4 vs. 5 days, p < 0.0001). There was no change in readmission rates (ER vs. TP, 8.6% vs. 9.0%, p = 0.701). Subanalyses of high magnitude cases and specialty-specific outcomes consistently demonstrated improved outcomes with ER protocol adherence, including decreased opioid use. CONCLUSIONS: This assessment of a large-scale ER implementation in multispecialty major oncologic surgery indicates its feasibility, safety, and efficacy. Future efforts should be directed toward defining the long-term oncologic benefits of these protocols.

Myasthenia Gravis and Thymoma Surgery: A Clinical Update for the Cardiothoracic Anesthesiologist.

Myasthenia gravis (MG) is a rare neuromuscular disorder characterized by skeletal muscle weakness. Patients with MG who have thymoma and thymic hyperplasia have indications for thymectomy. The perioperative care of patients with MG scheduled for thymus resection should be focused on optimizing their neuromuscular function, identifying factors related to postoperative mechanical ventilation, and avoiding of triggers associated with myasthenic or cholinergic crisis. Minimally invasive surgical techniques, use of regional analgesia, and avoidance or judicious administration of neuromuscular blocking drugs (NMBs) is recommended during the perioperative period. If NMBs are used, sugammadex appears to be the drug of choice to restore adequately the neuromuscular transmission. In patients with postoperative myasthenic crisis, plasma exchange or intravenous immune globulin and mechanical support is recommended.

Systolic anterior motion of the mitral valve-the mechanism of postural hypotension following left intrapericardial pneumonectomy.

Systolic anterior motion (SAM) is defined as displacement of the distal portion of the anterior leaflet of the mitral valve toward the left ventricular outflow tract obstruction. SAM can occur in patients without hypertrophic cardiomyopathy (HOCM) and is a well-recognized cause for unexplained sudden hypotension in perioperative settings. We present a case of persistent orthostatic hypotension caused by SAM following left intrapericardial pneumonectomy and mediastinal lymph node dissection for squamous cell carcinoma of the lung invading intrapericardial portion of the inferior pulmonary vein. Diagnosis of SAM was possible with the use of transesophageal echocardiography (TEE).

Metastatic Testicular Cancer to Left Atrium via the Left Inferior Pulmonary Vein: A Case Report.

Testicular cancer is one of the most common cancers diagnosed in young men. Frequent sites of metastasis include the retroperitoneum, lungs, liver, brain, and bone. Intra-cardiac metastasis has also been described. An 18-year-old boy with a history of mixed testicular germ cell tumor presented to our institution for surgical resection of his metastatic disease. Intraoperative transesophageal echocardiography during his surgery confirmed a tumor thrombus into the left atrium coming from the left pulmonary vein. We report a case of metastatic testicular cancer with rare tumor extension from the left inferior pulmonary vein into the left atrium. Perioperative transesophageal echocardiography was necessary to aid intraoperative diagnosis and confirmation of the intracardiac tumor, providing data to guide surgical strategy.