Validity of the I­FEED classification in assessing postoperative gastrointestinal impairment in patients undergoing elective lumbar spinal surgery with general anesthesia: a prospective observational study.

BACKGROUND: The I-FEED classification, scored 0-8, was reported to accurately describe the clinical manifestations of gastrointestinal impairment after colorectal surgery. Therefore, it is interesting to determine whether the I-FEED scoring system is also applicable to patients undergoing lumbar spine surgery. METHODS: Adult patients undergoing elective lumbar spine surgery were enrolled, and the I-FEED score was measured for 4 days after surgery. The I-FEED scoring system incorporates five elements: intake (score: 0, 1, 3), feeling nauseated (score: 0, 1, 3), emesis (score: 0, 1, 3), results of physical exam (score: 0, 1, 3), and duration of symptoms (score: 0, 1, 2). Daily I-FEED scores were summed, and the highest overall score is used to categorize patients into one of three categories: normal (0-2 points), postoperative gastrointestinal intolerance (POGI; 3-5 points), and postoperative gastrointestinal dysfunction (POGD; 6 + points). The construct validity hypothesis testing determines whether the I-FEED category is consistent with objective clinical findings relevant to gastrointestinal impairment, namely, the longer length of hospital stay (LOS), higher inhospital medical cost, more postoperative gastrointestinal medical treatment, and more postoperative non-gastrointestinal complications. RESULTS: A total of 156 patients were enrolled, and 25.0% of patients were categorized as normal, 49.4% POGI, and 25.6% POGD. Patients with higher I-FEED scores agreed with the four validity hypotheses. Patients with POGD had a significantly longer length of hospital stay (1 day longer median stay; p = 0.049) and more inhospital medical costs (approximately 500 Taiwanese dollars; p = 0.037), and more patients with POGD required rectal laxatives (10.3% vs. 32.5% vs. 32.5%; p = 0.026). In addition, more patients with POGD had non-gastrointestinal complications (5.1% vs. 11.7% vs. 30.0%; p = 0.034). CONCLUSION: This study contributes preliminary validity evidence for the I-FEED score as a measure for postoperative gastrointestinal impairment after elective lumbar spine surgery.

Immunocyte profiling changes in patients received epidural versus intravenous analgesia after pancreatectomy: A randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative immunosuppressants, such as surgical stress and opioid use may downregulate anti-cancer immunocytes for patients undergoing pancreatectomy. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) may attenuate these negative effects and provide better anti-cancer immunocyte profile change than intravenous analgesia using opioid. METHODS: We randomly assigned 108 adult patients undergoing pancreatectomy to receive one of two 72-h postoperative analgesia protocols: one was TEA, and the other was intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IV-PCA). The perioperative proportional changes of immunocytes relevant to anticancer immunity-namely natural killer (NK) cells, cytotoxic T cells, helper T cells, mature dendritic cells, and regulatory T (Treg) cells were determined at 1 day before surgery, at the end of surgery and on postoperative day 1,4 and 7 using flow cytometry. In addition, the progression-free survival and overall survival between the two groups were compared. RESULTS: After surgery, the proportions of NK cells and cytotoxic T cells were significantly decreased; the proportion of B cells and mature dendritic cells and Treg cells were significantly increased. However, the proportions of helper T cells exhibited no significant change. These results were comparable between the two groups. Furthermore, there were no significant differences in progression-free survival (52.75 [39.96] and 57.48 [43.66] months for patients in the TEA and IV-PCA groups, respectively; p = 0.5600) and overall survival (62.71 [35.48] and 75.11 [33.10] months for patients in the TEA and IV-PCA groups, respectively; p = 0.0644). CONCLUSIONS: TEA was neither associated with favorable anticancer immunity nor favorable oncological outcomes for patients undergoing pancreatectomy.

Incidence and Risk Factors for Intraoperative Seizures During Elective Craniotomy.

BACKGROUND: Perioperative seizures may affect 1% to 50% of patients undergoing craniotomy and adversely impact outcomes. However, data on intraoperative seizures are limited. This retrospective case-control study investigated the incidence and risk factors for intraoperative seizures during elective supratentorial craniotomy involving evoked potential monitoring. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Patients aged 18 years or above undergoing elective supratentorial craniotomy with evoked potential monitoring who experienced intraoperative seizures at our institution between December 2008 and March 2014 were compared with a control group generated using a random number generator. Six controls were used for each case from among the patients who underwent elective supratentorial craniotomy during the same calendar year. Multivariate analysis was conducted using logistic regression to identify the risk factors for intraoperative seizures. RESULTS: Among the 1916 patients who met the inclusion criteria, 45 (2.3%) had intraoperative seizures. The majority of seizures occurred during burr-hole placement or craniotomy, before lesion manipulation. Timing of seizures relative to motor evoked potential runs and stimulus intensity was variable. Significant risk factors for intraoperative seizures were seizure history (odds ratio [OR], 2.18; 95% confidence interval [CI], 1.07-4.46; P=0.03), diagnosis of brain tumor (OR, 2.41; 95% CI, 1.16-4.19; P=0.02), and temporal craniotomy (OR, 5.18; 95% CI, 2.03-13.25; P=0.001). Intraoperative prophylactic use of phenytoin/fosphenytoin and levetiracetam was protective against seizure (phenytoin/fosphenytoin: OR, 0.12; 95% CI, 0.04-0.35; P<0.001 and levetiracetam: OR, 0.40; 95% CI, 0.17-0.94; P=0.04). Phenytoin/fosphenytoin was more protective than levetiracetam (OR, 0.31; 95% CI, 0.10-0.99; P=0.048). CONCLUSIONS: The overall incidence of intraoperative seizures was 2.3%. Independent risk factors for intraoperative seizures were seizure history, diagnosis of intracranial tumor, and temporal craniotomy. Intraoperative prophylactic anticonvulsant use was protective.

Anesthetic consideration for nonintubated VATS.

In the recent decade, nonintubated-intubated video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS) has been extensively performed and evaluated. The indicated surgical procedures and suitable patient groups are steadily increasing. Perioperative anesthetic management presents itself as a fresh issue for the iatrogenic open pneumothorax, which is intended for unilateral lung collapse to create a steady surgical field, and the ensuing physiologic derangement involving ventilatory and hemodynamic perspectives. With appropriate monitoring, meticulous employment of regional anesthesia, sedation, vagal block, and ventilatory support, nonintubated VATS is proved to be a safe alternative to the conventional intubated general anesthesia.

Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) following video-assisted thoracoscopic lobectomy: comparison of epidural PCA and intravenous PCA.

OBJECTIVES: To compare the efficacy and side effects of epidural patient-controlled analgesia (EPCA) with those of intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (IVPCA) in fast-track video-assisted thoracoscopic (VATS) lobectomy. PATIENTS AND METHODS: EPCA or IVPCA was chosen by patients and was started immediately following tracheal extubation in the wake of completion of VATS lobectomy. EPCA analgesia was carried out with the PCA device programmed to deliver a bolus dose of 3 mL of 0.1% bupivacaine combined with 1.2 µg/mL fentanyl, and continuous epidural infusion at a rate of 4 mL/hour through an epidural catheter placed at the T(6-7) or T(7-8) level. IVPCA was made possible by a patient controlled infusion pump programmed to deliver 0.1% morphine with a loading dose of 3 mg, and the controlled bolus of 1 mg, at a lockout interval of 5 minutes. A rescue dose of 5 mg intravenous morphine was available for all patients in postoperative care unit. Pain management was assessed with visual analog scale at rest (VAS-R) and during motion (VAS-M); side effects including nausea, vomiting, pruritus, dizziness and sleepiness were recorded and analyzed from postoperative Day 1 (POD1) to Day 3 (POD3). RESULTS: This study included 105 patients. Satisfactory pain control was achieved, although 9/70 patients in the EPCA group and 5/35 patients in the IVPCA group needed rescue morphine in the recovery room. The VAS-R was significantly higher on POD1 than on POD2 or POD3 in both groups (p < 0.001). The VAS-R and VAS-M were comparable in both groups on POD1 and POD3 but significant lower VAS-M was seen in the EPCA group on POD2 (p = 0.008). Higher incidence of dizziness was found in the IVPCA group on POD1 (p = 0.044) but the EPCA group had a higher incidence of pruritus on POD2 (p = 0.024) and POD3 (p = 0.03). CONCLUSION: Our results indicated that the necessity of pain control was higher on POD1 for VATS lobectomy. Both EPCA and IVPCA can provide an adequate, continuous and effective means for postoperative pain management and a lower VAS-M was found in EPCA on POD2.