RESUMEN
AIMS: This review aims to evaluate the feasibility of robot-assisted laparoscopic surgery (RALS) as an alternative to standard laparoscopic surgery (SLS) for the treatment of bowel deep-infiltrative endometriosis. Additionally, it aims to provide guidance for future study design, by gaining insight into the current state of research, in accordance with the IDEAL framework. METHOD: A systematic review was conducted to identify relevant studies on RALS for bowel deep infiltrating endometriosis in Medline, Embase, Cochrane Library and PubMed databases up to August 2023 and reported in keeping with PRISMA guidelines. The study was registered with PROSPERO Registration: CRD42022308611 RESULTS: Eleven primary studies were identified, encompassing 364 RALS patients and 83 SLS patients, from which surgical details, operative and postoperative outcomes were extracted. In the RALS group, mean operating time was longer (235 ± 112 min) than in the standard laparoscopy group (171 ± 76 min) (p < 0.01). Patients in the RALS group experienced a shorter hospital stay (5.3 ± 3.5 days vs. 7.3 ± 4.1 days) (p < 0.01), and appeared to have fewer postoperative complications compared to standard laparoscopy. Research evidence for RALS in bowel DE is at an IDEAL Stage 2B of development. CONCLUSION: RALS is a safe and feasible alternative to standard laparoscopy for bowel endometriosis treatment, with a shorter overall length of stay despite longer operating times. Further robust randomized trials recommended to delineate other potential advantages of RALS.
Asunto(s)
Endometriosis , Laparoscopía , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados , Humanos , Endometriosis/cirugía , Endometriosis/patología , Femenino , Procedimientos Quirúrgicos Robotizados/métodos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Resultado del Tratamiento , Tiempo de Internación , Tempo Operativo , Enfermedades Intestinales/cirugíaRESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Very little information is currently available on the use and outcomes of venovenous bypass (VVB) in liver transplantation (LT) in adults in Australia. In this study, we explored the indications, intraoperative course, and postoperative outcomes of patients who underwent VVB in a high-volume LT unit. METHODS: The study was a single-center, retrospective observational case series of adult patients who underwent VVB during LT at Austin Health in Melbourne, Australia between March 2008 and March 2022. Information on baseline preoperative status and intraoperative variables, including specific VVB characteristics as well as postoperative and VVB-related complications was collected. The lengths of intensive care unit and hospital stays as well as intraoperative and in-hospital mortality were recorded. RESULTS: Of the 900 LTs performed at this center during the aforementioned 14-year period, 27 (3%) included a VVB procedure. VVB was performed electively in 16 of these 27 patients (59.3%) and as a rescue technique to control massive bleeding in the other 11 (40.1%). The median (interquartile range [IQR]) age of those who underwent VVB procedures was 48 (39-55) years; the median age was 56 (47-62) years in the non-VVB group (p<0.0001). The median model for end-stage liver disease (MELD) scores were similar between the two patient groups. Complete blood data was available for 622 non-VVB patients. Twenty-six VVB (96.3%) and 603 non-VVB (96.9%) patients required intraoperative blood transfusions. The median (IQR) number of units of packed red blood cells transfused was 7 (4.8-12.5) units in the VVB group compared to 3.0 units (1.0-6.0) in the non-VVB group (p<0.0001). Inpatient mortality was 18.5% and 1.1% for the VVB and non-VVB groups, respectively (p<0.0001). There were no significant differences in length of hospital stay or incidence of acute kidney injury, primary graft dysfunction, or long-term graft failure between the two groups. Patients in the VVB group experienced a higher rate of postoperative non-anastomotic biliary stricture compared to patients in the non-VVB group (33% and 7.9%, respectively; p = 0.0003). CONCLUSIONS: VVB continues to play a vital role in LT. This case series highlights the heightened risk of major complications linked to VVB. However, the global transition to selective use of VVB underscores the urgent need for collaborative multi-center studies designed to address outstanding questions and parameters related to the safe implementation of this procedure.
Asunto(s)
Trasplante de Hígado , Complicaciones Posoperatorias , Humanos , Trasplante de Hígado/efectos adversos , Persona de Mediana Edad , Masculino , Femenino , Adulto , Estudios Retrospectivos , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/etiología , Complicaciones Posoperatorias/epidemiología , Tiempo de Internación , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Receptores de Trasplantes/estadística & datos numéricos , Australia/epidemiologíaRESUMEN
INTRODUCTION: The optimal analgesic modality for patients undergoing hepato-pancreato-biliary (HPB) surgery remains unknown. The analgesic effects of a multimodal intrathecal analgesia (MITA) technique of intrathecal morphine (ITM) in combination with clonidine and bupivacaine compared to ITM alone have not been investigated in these patients. METHODS: We performed a multicenter retrospective study of patients undergoing complex HPB surgery who received ITM, bupivacaine, and clonidine (MITA group) or ITM-only (ITM group) as part of their perioperative analgesia strategy. The primary outcome was the unadjusted oral morphine equivalent daily dose (oMEDD) in milligrams on postoperative day 1. After adjusting for age, body mass index, hospital allocation, type of surgery, operation length, and intraoperative opioid use, postoperative oMEDD use was investigated using a bootstrapped quantile regression model. Other prespecified outcomes included postoperative pain scores, opioid-related adverse events, major complications, and length of hospital stay. RESULTS: In total, 118 patients received MITA and 155 patients received ITM-only. The median (IQR) cumulative oMEDD use on postoperative day 1 was 20.5 mg (8.6:31.0) in the MITA group and 52.1 mg (18.0:107.0) in the ITM group (P < 0.001). There was a variation in the magnitude of the difference in oMEDD use between the groups for different quartiles. For the MITA group, on postoperative day 1, patients in the 25th percentile required 14.0 mg less oMEDD (95% CI: -25.9 to -2.2; P = 0.025), patients in the 50th percentile required 27.8 mg less oMEDD (95% CI: -49.7 to -6.0; P = 0.005), and patients in the 75th percentile required 38.7 mg less oMEDD (95% CI: -72.2 to -5.1; P = 0.041) compared to patients in the same percentile of the ITM group. Patients in the MITA group had significantly lower pain scores in the postoperative recovery unit and on postoperative days 1 to 3. The incidence of postoperative respiratory depression was low (<1.5%) and similar between groups. Patients in the MITA group had a significantly higher incidence of postoperative hypotension requiring vasopressor support. However, no significant differences were observed in major postoperative complications, or the length of hospital stay. CONCLUSION: In patients undergoing complex HPB surgery, the use of MITA, consisting of ITM in combination with intrathecal clonidine and bupivacaine, was associated with reduced postoperative opioid use and resulted in superior postoperative analgesia without risk of respiratory depression when compared to patients who received ITM alone. A randomized prospective clinical trial investigating these two intrathecal analgesic techniques is justified.