External tracheal manipulation for bronchial blocker placement in children undergoing thoracic surgery requiring one lung ventilation: A case report.

Limited options exist for pediatric one lung ventilation (OLV). Compared to adults, pediatric OLV can be more challenging due to physiological/anatomical differences, various pathologies, and size limitations of lung isolation devices. Fiberoptic bronchoscopy can be harder due to the restricted tube sizes through which bronchial blockers (BB) and scopes can appropriately fit, while providing adequate oxygenation and ventilation. Recent literature is sparse concerning facilitation of BB placement in children. A 2-, 8-, and 10-year-old presented for thoracic surgeries requiring OLV. External tracheal manipulation (ETM) facilitated BB placement in each case and can potentially offer unique advantages in pediatric OLV.

Perioperative beta-blocker use and survival in lung cancer patients.

STUDY OBJECTIVE: To assess the effect of perioperative beta blockers on recurrence and overall survival after non-small cell lung cancer surgery. DESIGN: Retrospective study. SETTING: Academic medical center. MEASUREMENTS: The medical records of patients with stage 1, 2, and 3a non-small cell lung cancer were divided into three different groups: those patients who never received beta blockers perioperatively, those receiving nonselective beta blockers within 60 days of surgery, and those taking selective beta blockers within 60 days of surgery. Recurrence-free survival and overall survival were the main clinical endpoints. Univariate log-rank tests and multivariate Cox proportional hazards models were used to assess the effects of selective beta blockers, nonselective beta blockers, or no beta blockers on recurrence-free survival and overall survival. MAIN RESULTS: The analysis included records of 435 patients. Univariate analyses showed that the use of both selective and nonselective beta blockers was associated with decreased recurrence-free survival (P = 0.014) and overall survival (P = 0.009). However, these findings were not sustained after adjusting for possible confounding variables in the multivariate analysis. The hazard ratios for recurrence-free survival (selective beta blockers vs no beta blocker use were: 1.304; 95% confidence intervals [CI] 0.973 - 1.747; P = 0.075; for nonselective beta blockers vs no beta blockers: 0.989; 95% CI 0.639 - 1.532; P = 0.962. The hazard ratios for overall survival were: selective beta blocker use vs no beta blockers: 1.335; 95% CI 0.966 - 1.846; P = 0.080; nonselective beta blocker use vs no beta blocker use: 1.108; 95% CI 0.678 - 1.812; P = 0.682. CONCLUSION: Administration of beta blockers during the perioperative period did not improve recurrence-free or overall survival in patients undergoing resection of non-small cell lung cancer.

A possible association between aprotinin and improved survival after radical surgery for mesothelioma.

BACKGROUND: Aprotinin has been used to decrease blood loss with complicated cardiac surgery but has not been investigated in extrapleural pneumonectomy, an operation that does not use cardiopulmonary bypass. In this prospective, randomized, placebo-controlled, double-blind trial, the authors investigated whether aprotinin decreased blood loss in patients who underwent this operation. METHODS: After appropriate statistical design and institutional review board approval, eligible patients who were scheduled for extrapleural pneumonectomy were randomized to receive either aprotinin or placebo during the operation. Blood loss and survival data were obtained from electronic medical records and surgical databases. RESULTS: Of 20 patients who were enrolled, 16 patients met criteria for blood loss analysis. Four patients were excluded from the blood loss analysis: Three patients were inoperable because of tumor spread and underwent limited surgery, and 1 patient died intraoperatively because of acute, massive hemorrhage. The mean blood loss was 769 mL with aprotinin versus 1832 mL with placebo (P = .05; Wilcoxon test). All 20 patients were included in survival analyses. All 9 patients who received placebo died. In contrast, 7 of 11 patients who received aprotinin remained alive at the time of the current report. Kaplan-Meier survival curves differed significantly between the 2 groups (P = .0004). A Bayesian multivariate survival analysis of 18 patients who had complete data available on 8 prognostic variables indicated a posterior probability of .99 that aprotinin was beneficial. CONCLUSIONS: Aprotinin decreased blood loss. After accounting for covariate effects, there was a significant comparative benefit with aprotinin in postoperative survival. This finding was unexpected and could not be considered conclusive because of the small size of the current study. A confirmatory study may be warranted.