RESUMO
BACKGROUND: Perioperative thoracic epidural analgesia (EDA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) are common forms of analgesia after pancreatic surgery. Current guidelines recommend EDA over PCIA, and evidence suggests that EDA may improve long-term survival after surgery, especially in cancer patients. The aim of this study was to determine whether perioperative EDA is associated with an improved patient prognosis compared to PCIA in pancreatic surgery. METHODS: The PAKMAN trial was an adaptive, pragmatic, international, multicenter, randomized controlled superiority trial conducted from June 2015 to October 2017. Three to five years after index surgery a long-term follow-up was performed from October 2020 to April 2021. RESULTS: For long-term follow-up of survival, 109 patients with EDA were compared to 111 patients with PCIA after partial pancreatoduodenectomy (PD). Long-term follow-up of quality of life (QoL) and pain assessment was available for 40 patients with EDA and 45 patients with PCIA (questionnaire response rate: 94%). Survival analysis revealed that EDA, when compared to PCIA, was not associated with improved overall survival (OS, HR, 1.176, 95% HR-CI, 0.809-1.710, P = .397, n = 220). Likewise, recurrence-free survival did not differ between groups (HR, 1.116, 95% HR-CI, 0.817-1.664, P = .397, n = 220). OS subgroup analysis including only patients with malignancies showed no significant difference between EDA and PCIA (HR, 1.369, 95% HR-CI, 0.932-2.011, P = .109, n = 179). Similar long-term effects on QoL and pain severity were observed in both groups (EDA: n = 40, PCIA: n = 45). CONCLUSIONS: Results from this long-term follow-up of the PAKMAN randomized controlled trial do not support favoring EDA over PCIA in pancreatic surgery. Until further evidence is available, EDA and PCIA should be considered similar regarding long-term survival.
RESUMO
BACKGROUND: The obstructive sleep apnea syndrome (OSAS) is characterized by intermittent cerebral hypoxia which can cause cognitive alterations. Likewise, hypoxia induced neurocognitive deficits are detectable after general anesthesia using volatile anesthetics. The objective of this study was to evaluate the association between a moderate to high risk patients of OSAS and postoperative cognitive dysfunction after volatile anesthesia. METHODS: In this single center prospective, observational study between May 2013 and September 2013, 46 patients aged 55 to 80 years with an estimated hospital stay of at least 3 days undergoing surgery were enrolled. Patients were screened using the STOP-BANG test with score of 3 or higher indicating moderate to high risk of OSAS. The cognitive function was assessed using a neuropsychological assessment battery, including the DemTect test for cognitive impairment among other tests e.g. SKT memory, the day before surgery and within 2 days after extubation. RESULTS: Twenty-three of the 46 analyzed patients were identified with a moderate to high risk of OSAS. When comparing post- to preoperative phase a significant better performance for the SKT was found for both groups (p < 0.001). While the moderate to high risk group scores increased postoperative in the DemTect test, they decreased in the low risk group (p < 0.003). When comparing the changes between groups, the moderate to high risk patients showed significant better test result for DemTect testing after anaesthesia. This effect remained robust when adjusting for potential confounding variables using a two-factor ANOVA. CONCLUSION: Compared to low risk, a moderate to high risk of OSAS based on the STOP-BANG score was associated with improved postoperative cognitive function measured by the DemTect test. TRIAL REGISTRATION: The study was approved by the local Ethics committee (Ethikkommission der Medizinischen Fakultät der Friedrich-Alexander-Universität Erlangen-Nürnberg, Erlangen, Germany) (reference number: 87_12 B ) on 19.04.2012.
Assuntos
Período de Recuperação da Anestesia , Anestésicos Inalatórios/farmacologia , Cognição/efeitos dos fármacos , Complicações Pós-Operatórias/fisiopatologia , Sevoflurano/farmacologia , Apneia Obstrutiva do Sono/fisiopatologia , Idoso , Idoso de 80 Anos ou mais , Feminino , Alemanha , Humanos , Tempo de Internação/estatística & dados numéricos , Masculino , Pessoa de Meia-Idade , Testes Neuropsicológicos/estatística & dados numéricos , Gravidade do Paciente , Estudos Prospectivos , Risco , TempoRESUMO
Importance: Morbidity is still high in pancreatic surgery, driven mainly by gastrointestinal complications such as pancreatic fistula. Perioperative thoracic epidural analgesia (EDA) and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) are frequently used for pain control after pancreatic surgery. Evidence from a post hoc analysis suggests that PCIA is associated with fewer gastrointestinal complications. Objective: To determine whether postoperative PCIA decreases the occurrence of gastrointestinal complications after pancreatic surgery compared with EDA. Design, Setting, and Participants: In this adaptive, pragmatic, international, multicenter, superiority randomized clinical trial conducted from June 30, 2015, to October 1, 2017, 371 patients at 9 European pancreatic surgery centers who were scheduled for elective pancreatoduodenectomy were randomized to receive PCIA (n = 185) or EDA (n = 186); 248 patients (124 in each group) were analyzed. Data were analyzed from February 22 to April 25, 2019, using modified intention to treat and per protocol. Interventions: Patients in the PCIA group received general anesthesia and postoperative PCIA with intravenous opioids with the help of a patient-controlled analgesia device. In the EDA group, patients received general anesthesia and intraoperative and postoperative EDA. Main Outcomes and Measures: The primary end point was a composite of pancreatic fistula, bile leakage, delayed gastric emptying, gastrointestinal bleeding, or postoperative ileus within 30 days after surgery. Secondary end points included 30-day mortality, other complications, postoperative pain levels, intraoperative or postoperative use of vasopressor therapy, and fluid substitution. Results: Among the 248 patients analyzed (147 men; mean [SD] age, 64.9 [10.7] years), the primary composite end point did not differ between the PCIA group (61 [49.2%]) and EDA group (57 [46.0%]) (odds ratio, 1.17; 95% CI, 0.71-1.95 P = .54). Neither individual components of the primary end point nor 30-day mortality, postoperative pain levels, or intraoperative and postoperative substitution of fluids differed significantly between groups. Patients receiving EDA gained more weight by postoperative day 4 than patients receiving PCIA (mean [SD], 4.6 [3.8] vs 3.4 [3.6] kg; P = .03) and received more vasopressors (46 [37.1%] vs 31 [25.0%]; P = .04). Failure of EDA occurred in 23 patients (18.5%). Conclusions and Relevance: This study found that the choice between PCIA and EDA for pain control after pancreatic surgery should not be based on concerns regarding gastrointestinal complications because the 2 procedures are comparable with regard to effectiveness and safety. However, EDA was associated with several shortcomings. Trial Registration: German Clinical Trials Register: DRKS00007784.