Safety of epidural analgesia in the perioperative care of patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy.

BACKGROUND: The perioperative coagulopathy, hemodynamic instability, and infectious complications that may occur during cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) has raised concerns about the safety of epidural analgesia in patients undergoing such procedures. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective review of the perioperative anesthetic management of 215 adult patients who had undergone CRS with HIPEC with epidural analgesia. We reviewed epidural-related complications and analyzed the effect of early initiation of continuous epidural analgesia on estimated blood loss, intraoperative fluid administration, blood transfusion and vasopressor requirements, time to extubation, and length of stay. RESULTS: No epidural hematomas or abscesses were reported. Two patients (0.9 %) had delays in epidural removal because of thrombocytopenia, and two had epidural-site erythema (0.9 %). The majority of postoperative epidural-related hypotensive episodes were successfully treated with fluid boluses. Early initiation of epidural analgesic infusions (before HIPEC) was associated with significantly less surgical blood loss and fluid requirements (P = 0.005 and 0.02, respectively). Pre-HIPEC initiation of epidural infusions was not associated with a statistically significant difference in the following: volume of blood transfused, intraoperative vasopressors use, time to extubation, and length of hospital stay. CONCLUSIONS: With close hematologic monitoring and particular attention to sterility, epidural analgesia can be safely provided to patients undergoing CRS with HIPEC. Early initiation of continuous epidural infusions during surgery could lead to decreased blood loss and less intraoperative fluid administration. Prospective randomized studies are required to further investigate these potential benefits.

Infectious complications related to intrathecal drug delivery system and spinal cord stimulator system implantations at a comprehensive cancer pain center.

BACKGROUND: Intrathecal drug delivery (IDD) and spinal cord stimulator (SCS) systems are implantable devices for the management of both chronic and cancer pain. Although these therapies have favorable long-term outcomes, they are associated with occasional complications including infection. The incidence of infectious complications varies from 2 - 8% and frequently requires prolonged antibiotics and device revision or removal. Cancer patients are particularly susceptible to infectious complications because they are immunocompromised, malnourished, and receiving cytotoxic cancer-related therapies. OBJECTIVE: Determine if cancer pain patients have a higher incidence of infectious complications following implantation of IDD or SCS systems than non-cancer pain patients. STUDY DESIGN: Retrospective chart review. SETTING: Single tertiary comprehensive cancer hospital. METHODS: Following local Institutional Review Board (IRB) approval, we collected data on infectious complications for IDD and SCS systems implanted at MD Anderson Cancer Center for the treatment of cancer and chronic pain. The examined implants were performed from July 15, 2006, to July 14, 2009. In addition, we obtained data regarding patient comorbidities and perioperative risk factors to assess their impact on infectious complications. RESULTS: One hundred forty-two devices were implanted in 131 patients during the examined period. Eighty-three of the devices were IDD systems and 59 were SCS systems. Eighty percent of the patients had a diagnosis of cancer. Four infectious complications were noted with an overall infectious risk of 2.8%. The infection rate was 2.4% for IDD systems versus 3.4% for SCS systems (P = 1). All infections were at the implantable pulse generator (IPG) or pump pocket site. The rate of infection was 2.7% for cancer patients and 3.3% for non-cancer patients (P = 1). Neither the perioperative administration of prophylactic antibiotics (P = 0.4) nor the National Nosocomial Infection Surveillance (NNIS) risk level for individual patients (P = 0.15) were statistically associated with infectious complication. The mean surgical time was longer for cases with infection at 215 ± 93 minutes versus 132 ± 52 minutes for those without infection which was statistically significant (P = 0.02). LIMITATIONS: The major limitation of this study is that it was a retrospective analysis. An additional limitation is that 51(38.9%) of our patients either died or were lost to follow-up during the year following implantation which may have led to an underestimation of our infection rates. CONCLUSIONS: The experience of this tertiary cancer pain center demonstrates that infectious complications following implantation of IDD and SCS systems are relatively rare events in cancer patients. Contrary to our initial hypothesis, no difference was found in the infection rate between cancer and non-cancer patients. The main factor associated with increased risk of infectious complications was increased surgical time, indicating a need to minimize patient time in the operating room. The low infectious complication rate seen in this series compared to previous reports in non-cancer patients is likely multifactorial in nature.