Redefining the stress cortisol response to surgery.

BACKGROUND: Cortisol levels rise with the physiological stress of surgery. Previous studies have used older, less-specific assays, have not differentiated by severity or only studied procedures of a defined type. The aim of this study was to examine this phenomenon in surgeries of varying severity using a widely used cortisol immunoassay. METHODS: Euadrenal patients undergoing elective surgery were enrolled prospectively. Serum samples were taken at 8 am on surgical day, induction and 1 hour, 2 hour, 4 hour and 8 hour after. Subsequent samples were taken daily at 8 am until postoperative day 5 or hospital discharge. Total cortisol was measured using an Abbott Architect immunoassay, and cortisol-binding globulin (CBG) using a radioimmunoassay. Surgical severity was classified by POSSUM operative severity score. RESULTS: Ninety-three patients underwent surgery: Major/Major+ (n = 37), Moderate (n = 33) and Minor (n = 23). Peak cortisol positively correlated to severity: Major/Major+ median 680 [range 375-1452], Moderate 581 [270-1009] and Minor 574 [272-1066] nmol/L (Kruskal-Wallis test, P = .0031). CBG fell by 23%; the magnitude of the drop positively correlated to severity. CONCLUSIONS: The range in baseline and peak cortisol response to surgery is wide, and peak cortisol levels are lower than previously appreciated. Improvements in surgery, anaesthetic techniques and cortisol assays might explain our observed lower peak cortisols. The criteria for the dynamic testing of cortisol response may need to be reduced to take account of these factors. Our data also support a lower-dose, stratified approach to dosing of steroid replacement in hypoadrenal patients, to minimize the deleterious effects of over-replacement.

Effect of hyaluronate-based bioresorbable membrane (Seprafilm) on outcomes of abdominal surgery: a meta-analysis and trial sequential analysis of randomised controlled trials.

We aimed to evaluate comparative outcomes of abdominal surgery with and without hyaluronate-based bioresorbable membrane (Seprafilm).We conducted a systematic search of electronic databases and bibliographic reference lists with application of a combination of free text and controlled vocabulary search adapted to thesaurus headings, search operators and limits. Small bowel obstruction, anastomotic leak, surgical site infections, ileus, and severity of adhesions were the evaluated outcome measures. Thirteen randomised controlled trials reporting a total of 3665 patients evaluating outcomes of abdominal surgeries with (n = 1800) or without (n = 1865) use of Seprafilm were identified. Use of Seprafilm was associated with significantly lower risk of small bowel obstruction (RR 0.53, 95% CI 0.38-0.73, P = 0.0001) but significantly higher rate of anastomotic leak (RR 1.85, 95% CI 1.15-3.00 P = 0.01). Moreover, while Seprafilm resulted in significantly more adhesions-free patients (RR 5.57, 95% CI 3.37-9.19, P < 0.0001) compared to no Seprafilm, its use was associated with significantly lower grade 2 (RR 0.57, 95% CI 0.35-0.95, P = 0.003) or 3 (RR 0.31, 95% CI 0.17-0.55, P < 0.0001) adhesions. There was no significant difference in surgical site infection (RR: 1.21, 95 CI 0.86-1.70, P = 0.28), intra-abdominal abscess (RR 1.46, 95 CI 0.92-2.32, P = 0.11) or paralytic ileus (RR 0.97, 95 CI 0.68-1.38, P = 0.87) between two groups. The trial sequential analysis demonstrated that the meta-analysis findings are conclusive. Our meta-analysis demonstrated that Seprafilm reduces the risk of small bowel obstruction and severity of adhesions after abdominal surgery. However, it may increase the risk of anastomotic leak. We recommend use of Seprafilm in any abdominal surgery which does not involve an anastomosis.

Spinal metastasis in head and neck cancer.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of head and neck cancer is relatively low in developed countries and highest in South East Asia. Notwithstanding advances in surgery and radiotherapy over the past several decades, the 5-year survival rate for head and neck cancer has stagnated and remains at 50-55%. This is due, in large part, to both regional and distant disease spread, including spinal metastasis. Spinal metastasis from head and neck cancer is rare, has a poor prognosis and can significantly impede end-stage quality of life; normally only palliative care is given.This study aims to conduct a systematic review of the evidence available on management of spinal metastasis from head and neck cancer and to use such evidence to draw up guiding principles in the management of the distant spread. METHODS: Systematic review of the electronic literature was conducted regarding the management of spinal metastasis of head and neck malignancies. RESULTS: Due to the exceptional rarity of head and neck cancers metastasizing to the spine, there is a paucity of good randomized controlled trials into the management of spinal metastasis. This review produced only 12 case studies/reports and 2 small retrospective cohort studies that lacked appropriate controls. CONCLUSION: Management should aim to improve end-stage quality of life and maintain neurological function. This review has found that radiotherapy +/- medical adjuvant is considered the principle treatment of spinal metastasis of head and neck cancers.There is an absence of a definitive treatment protocol for head and neck cancer spinal metastasis. Our failure to find and cite high-quality scientific evidence only serves to stress the need for good quality research in this area.