Perioperative fluid management for major elective surgery.

BACKGROUND: Adequate fluid balance before, during and after surgery may reduce morbidity. This review examines current concepts surrounding fluid management in major elective surgery. METHOD: A narrative review was undertaken following a PubMed search for English language reports published before July 2019 using the terms 'surgery', 'fluids', 'fluid therapy', 'colloids', 'crystalloids', 'albumin', 'starch', 'saline', 'gelatin' and 'goal directed therapy'. Additional reports were identified by examining the reference lists of selected articles. RESULTS: Fluid therapy is a cornerstone of the haemodynamic management of patients undergoing major elective surgery. Both fluid overload and hypovolaemia are deleterious during the perioperative phase. Zero-balance fluid therapy should be aimed for. In high-risk patients, individualized haemodynamic management should be titrated through the use of goal-directed therapy. The optimal type of fluid to be administered during major surgery remains to be determined. CONCLUSION: Perioperative fluid management is a key challenge during major surgery. Individualized volume optimization by means of goal-directed therapy is warranted during high-risk surgery. In most patients, balanced crystalloids are the first choice of fluids to be used in the operating theatre. Additional research on the optimal type of fluid for use during major surgery is needed.

ANTECEDENTES: Un equilibrio de líquido adecuado antes, durante y después de la cirugía puede reducir la morbilidad. Esta revisión presenta los conceptos actuales del manejo de líquidos en cirugía mayor electiva. MÉTODOS: Se realizó una revisión descriptiva tras llevar a cabo una búsqueda en PubMed de artículos publicados en inglés antes de julio 2019, utilizando los términos 'cirugía ' (surgery), 'líquidos' (fluids), `fluidoterapia` (fluid therapy), 'coloides' (colloids), 'cristaloides' (crystalloids), 'albúmina' (albumin), 'hidroxietil-almidón' (starch), 'salino' (saline), 'gelatina' (gelatin) y 'terapia dirigida por objetivo' (goald directed therapy). Se identificaron artículos adicionales a través de la lista de referencias bibliográficas de los artículos seleccionados. RESULTADOS: El tratamiento con líquidos constituye la piedra angular del manejo hemodinámico de los pacientes sometidos a cirugía mayor electiva. Tanto la sobrecarga de líquidos como la hipovolemia son perjudiciales durante el periodo perioperatorio. El tratamiento de líquidos con balance cero debe considerarse el objetivo. En pacientes de alto riesgo, el manejo hemodinámico personalizado se debe ajustar mediante la utilización del tratamiento dirigido por objetivos. El tipo óptimo de líquido que debe ser administrado durante la cirugía mayor todavía no se ha determinado. CONCLUSIÓN: El manejo perioperatorio de líquidos es un desafío clave durante la cirugía mayor. La optimización del volumen individualizado a través de un tratamiento dirigido por objetivos está justificada durante la cirugía de alto riesgo. En la mayoría de los casos, la administración equilibrada de cristaloides es la primera fluidoterapia de elección en el quirófano. Se necesitan más investigaciones sobre el tipo de líquidos más adecuado para utilizar durante la cirugía mayor.

Sexual dysfunction after elective laparoscopic or endovascular abdominal aortic aneurysm repair in men.

INTRODUCTION: Infrarenal abdominal aortic aneurysm (AAA) repair can lead to ejaculation and erection troubles in men. There are few studies on sexual dysfunction after endovascular repair (EVAR) but they suggest less retrograde ejaculation than after open repair. We assessed the sexual dysfunction and ejaculation troubles after elective laparoscopic repair or EVAR. METHODS: We conducted a monocentric prospective study on 124 patients undergoing AAA repair between 2013 and 2015. Sexual function was evaluated using the IIEF-15 questionnaire and questions on ejaculation. RESULTS: Only 45 patients (36.3%) accepted to complete the IIEF preoperatively with 20-37.8% having preoperative sexual dysfunction. Among them, 21 (46.7%) accepted to complete the questionnaire at 3, 6 and 12 months. Mean age at inclusion was 65±5.6 years in the laparoscopic group and 77±10.5 years in the EVAR group (P=0.003). Erectile and sexual function were slightly improved at 12 months in the laparoscopic group (+1.4 for erectile score and +4.6 for IIEF score) with no significant difference (P=0.83 and 0.74) whereas 8 patients (61.5%) had persistent ejaculation troubles at 3 months. In the EVAR group, patients had moderate sexual dysfunction at baseline without improvement at 12 months, but only one patient reported ejaculation troubles. CONCLUSIONS: Most patients eligible for AAA repair present with baseline erectile and sexual dysfunction. Laparoscopic AAA repair provides no onset of erectile or sexual dysfunction but a global improvement after surgery. Ejaculation troubles are frequent and persistent at 1 year. However, EVAR treatment, doesn't allow recovering of sexual function at 1 year. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 4.

An Experimental Study of Laser in situ Fenestration of Current Aortic Endografts.

OBJECTIVE/BACKGROUND: Laser in situ fenestration (LISF) is emerging as an immediately available alternative in the endovascular treatment of complex aortic aneurysm. However, its biomechanical features remain poorly understood. The aim of this study was to experimentally evaluate textile damage secondary to LISF and to compare LISF with mechanical in situ fenestration (MISF). METHODS: An in vitro study evaluated the damage created by LISF on endograft fabrics versus MISF using a needle. Five different models of commercially available aortic endografts were used (32 samples of polyethylene terephthalate and expanded polytetrafluoroethylene fabrics). Tensile strength tests were performed on the fabrics before and after in situ fenestration, to determine the loss of mechanical strength. Integral water permeability tests at the stent-fenestration interface evaluated the watertightness of junctions. Stability of the connection was assessed with a fatigue bench test flexing the branch on the fenestration. In a second step, an in vivo study evaluating LISF in sheep was conducted. RESULTS: Resulting holes had circular and cauterised edges following LISF, whereas fabric filaments were pushed aside after MISF. Tensile tests demonstrated a 34% and a 27% mechanical resistance loss after LISF (p = .004) and MISF (p = .001) compared with non-fenestrated samples. A non-significant global decrease of 7% in mechanical resistance was found following LISF compared with MISF (p = .520). Water permeability tests highlighted that leak rates were higher following LISF than with MISF with regard to multifilament specimens (p < .05). Fatigue tests induced modification of the morphology of fenestrations. The surface area of the fenestration was increased for all samples after 170,000 cycles. Regarding the in vivo study, 14 LISF were performed in 12 sheep with a technical success rate of 88%. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that both LISF and MISF create substantial damage to all available endograft fabrics. Until comparisons with reinforced fenestrations are performed, LISF and MISF should not be used outside investigational studies.

A Comprehensive Review of In Situ Fenestration of Aortic Endografts.

OBJECTIVE: Despite technical advances of fenestrated and branched endografts, endovascular exclusion of aneurysms involving renal, visceral, and/or supra-aortic branches remains a challenge. In situ fenestration (ISF) of standard endografts represents another endovascular means to maintain perfusion to such branches. This study aimed to review current indications, technical descriptions, and results of ISF. METHOD: A review of the English language literature was performed in Medline databases, Cochrane Database, Web of Science, and Scopus using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. Sixty-seven relevant papers were selected. Thirty-three papers were excluded, leaving 34 articles as the basis of the present review. RESULTS: Most experimental papers evaluated ISF feasibility and assessed the consequences of ISF on graft fabric. Regarding clinical papers, 73 ISF procedures have been attempted in 58 patients, including 26 (45%) emergent and three (5%) bailout cases. Sixty-five (89%) ISF were located at the level of the arch, and eight (11%) in the abdominal aorta. Graft perforation was performed by physical, mechanical, or unspecified means in 33 (45%), 38 (52%), and two vessels (3%), respectively. ISF was technically successful in 68/73 (93%) arteries. At 30 days, two (3.4%) patients died in the setting of an aorto-bronchial fistula and an aorto-oesophageal fistula, respectively. No post-operative death, major complication, or endoleak was described as secondary to the ISF procedure. With follow-up between 0 and 72 months, four (6.9%) late deaths were noted, unrelated to the aorta. One (1.7%) LSA stent was stenosed without symptoms. CONCLUSIONS: Although there may be publication bias, multiple techniques were described to perform ISF with satisfactory short-term results. Long-term data remain scarce. Aortic endograft ISF is an off-label procedure that should not be used outside emergent bailout techniques or investigational studies. A comparison with alternative techniques of preserving aortic side branches is needed.

Amplatzer Plug to Occlude the Internal Iliac Artery During Endovascular Aortic Aneurysm Repair: A Large Multicenter Study.

OBJECTIVE: During endovascular repair of abdominal aortic aneurysms (EVAR), in the absence of a distal iliac landing zone, the Amplatzer plug is increasingly being used to replace other internal iliac artery (IIA) embolization techniques. This study aimed at assessing the technical success, complication occurrence, and durability of the Amplatzer plug for IIA embolization. METHOD: From January 1, 2007 to December 31, 2013, all consecutive patients who underwent internal iliac embolization with an Amplatzer plug during EVAR were included in the study. There were 169 patients, (160 men, 9 women, mean 75 ± 9 years), treated by unilateral (158 cases, 93%) or bilateral (11 cases, 7%) embolization of the IIA, performed either separately prior to (65 cases, 38.5%) or during EVAR (104 cases, 61.5%). Follow up CT scan and/or US scan were performed 1 month after treatment and yearly thereafter. The inclusions were done retrospectively but the series was continuous and consecutive. Data were collected and analyzed using acquisition REDCap software. RESULTS: The technical success rate was 97.6%. Failures were device migration (n = 1), navigation failure (n = 2), and release outside the target zone (n = 1). On average, 1.43 plugs were required to achieve the embolization. The average amount of contrast agent for the embolization procedure was 111 ± 51 mL and the radiation dose was 127,777 ± 89,528 mGy/cm(2). The total fluoroscopy time was 854 ± 538 seconds. No re-canalization of the IIA trunk was observed during follow up. Complications were buttock claudication (n = 41, 24.3%), which resolved in 24 cases (58.5%, 24/41) at the first follow up, and intestinal ischemia requiring limited bowel resection in two cases. CONCLUSION: This multicenter study is the largest published to date. It demonstrates the efficacy and reliability of the Amplatzer plug to embolize the IIA during EVAR, with few side effects.

Digital metastasis of nasopharyngeal carcinoma: a surgical trap. Case report and literature review.

Acrometastases are rare and often misdiagnosed or overlooked. We report the case of an 80-year-old patient in whom an acrometastasis in the right long finger from a nasopharyngeal carcinoma was diagnosed. The treatment consisted of amputation through the proximal phalanx and resulted in a good recovery. To our knowledge, no case of acrometastasis from this origin has been reported in the literature to date. A literature review is also presented regarding acrometastasis diagnosis and treatment.