Impact of enhanced recovery program implementation on postoperative outcomes after liver surgery: a monocentric retrospective study.

INTRODUCTION: It is still unclear whether enhanced recovery programs (ERPs) reduce postoperative morbidity after liver surgery. This study investigated the effect on liver surgery outcomes of labeling as a reference center for ERP. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Perioperative data from 75 consecutive patients who underwent hepatectomy in our institution after implementation and labeling of our ERP were retrospectively compared to 75 patients managed before ERP. Length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, and adherence to protocol were examined. RESULTS: Patient demographics, comorbidities, and intraoperative data were similar in the two groups. Our ERP resulted in shorter length of stay (3 days [1-6] vs. 4 days [2-7.5], p = 0.03) and fewer postoperative complications (24% vs. 45.3%, p = 0.0067). This reduction in postoperative morbidity can be attributed exclusively to a lower rate of minor complications (Clavien-dindo grade < IIIa), and in particular to a lower rate of postoperative ileus, after labeling. (5.3% vs. 25.3%, p = 0.0019). Other medical and surgical complications were not significantly reduced. Adherence to protocol improved after labeling (17 [16-18] vs. 14 [13-16] items, p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: The application of a labeled enhanced recovery program for liver surgery was associated with a significant shortening of hospital stay and a halving of postoperative morbidity, mainly ileus.

Bilateral subcostal transversus abdominis plane block does not improve the postoperative analgesia provided by multimodal analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A randomised placebo-controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic cholecystectomy might be considered minor surgery, but it may result in severe postoperative pain. Subcostal transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block, which produces long-lasting supra-umbilical parietal analgesia, might improve analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. OBJECTIVE: We investigated whether subcostal TAP block would reduce opioid consumption and pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy in patients provided with multimodal analgesia. DESIGN: A randomised, placebo-controlled, double-blind study. SETTING: The study was conducted at a university teaching hospital from December 2017 to June 2018. PATIENTS: Sixty patients scheduled for laparoscopic cholecystectomy were included. Anaesthesia and postoperative analgesia (etoricoxib, paracetamol, ketamine and dexamethasone) were standardised. INTERVENTION: After induction of anaesthesia, patients were allocated into two groups: ultrasound-guided bilateral subcostal TAP block with 20 ml of levobupivacaine 0.375% and epinephrine 5 µg ml or 0.9% saline with epinephrine 5 µg ml. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: Opioid consumption in the recovery room and during the first 24 h after surgery were recorded. Postoperative somatic and visceral pain scores, fatigue and nausea were measured. Intra-operative end-tidal concentrations of sevoflurane (FETSEVO) were also recorded. RESULTS: Twenty-four hour postoperative opioid consumption were similar in both groups: 21.2 mg (95% CI 15.3 to 27.1) vs. 25.2 (95% CI 15.1 to 35.5) oral morphine equivalent in the levobupivacaine and 0.9% saline groups, respectively; P = 0.48. No significant between-group differences were observed with regards to parietal (P = 0.56) and visceral (P = 0.50) pain scores, fatigue and nausea. FETSEVO was slightly lower in the levobupivacaine group (P < 0.01). CONCLUSION: Subcostal TAP block does not improve the analgesia provided by multimodal analgesia after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. It allows for a small reduction in intra-operative sevoflurane requirements. TRIAL REGISTRATION: NCT0339153.

Guidelines for Perioperative Care for Liver Transplantation: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Recommendations.

BACKGROUND: Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal, evidence-based, program of care developed to minimize the response to surgical stress, associated with reduced perioperative morbidity and hospital stay. This study presents the specific ERAS Society recommendations for liver transplantation (LT) based on the best available evidence and on expert consensus. METHODS: PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched in April 2019 for published and ongoing randomized clinical trials on LT in the last 15 y. Studies were selected by 5 independent reviewers and were eligible if focusing on each validated ERAS item in the area of adult LT. An e-Delphi method was used with an extended interdisciplinary panel of experts to validate the final recommendations. RESULTS: Forty-three articles were included in the systematic review. A consensus was reached among experts after the second round. Patients should be screened for malnutrition and treated whenever possible. Prophylactic nasogastric intubation and prophylactic abdominal drainage may be omitted, and early extubation should be considered. Early oral intake, mobilization, and multimodal-balanced analgesia are recommended. CONCLUSIONS: The current ERAS recommendations were elaborated based on the best available evidence and endorsed by the e-Delphi method. Nevertheless, prospective studies need to confirm the clinical use of the suggested protocol.

Pressure-controlled ventilation does not improve gas exchange in morbidly obese patients undergoing abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Morbid obesity results in marked respiratory pathophysiologic changes that may lead to impaired intraoperative gas exchange. The decelerating inspiratory flow and constant inspiratory airway pressure resulting from pressure-controlled ventilation (PCV) may be more adapted to these changes and improve gas exchanges compared with volume-controlled ventilation (VCV). METHODS: Forty morbidly obese patients scheduled for gastric bypass were included in this study. Total intravenous anesthesia was given using the target-controlled infusion technique. During the first intraoperative hour, VCV was used and the tidal volume was adjusted to keep end-tidal PCO(2) around 35 mmHg. After 1 h, patients were randomly allocated to 30-min VCV followed by 30-min PCV or the opposite sequence using a Siemens Servo 300. FiO(2) was 0.6. During PCV, airway pressure was adjusted to provide the same tidal volume as during VCV. Arterial blood was sampled for gas analysis every 15 min. Ventilatory parameters were also recorded. RESULTS: Peak inspiratory airway pressures were significantly lower during PCV than during VCV (P < 0.0001). The other ventilatory parameters were similar during the two periods of ventilation. PaO(2) and PaCO(2) were not significantly different during PCV and VCV. CONCLUSION: PCV does not improve gas exchange in morbidly obese patients undergoing gastric bypass compared to VCV.

Intravenous lidocaine infusion facilitates acute rehabilitation after laparoscopic colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Intravenous infusion of lidocaine decreases postoperative pain and speeds the return of bowel function. The authors therefore tested the hypothesis that perioperative lidocaine infusion facilitates acute rehabilitation protocol in patients undergoing laparoscopic colectomy. METHODS: Forty patients scheduled to undergo laparoscopic colectomy were randomly allocated to receive intravenous lidocaine (bolus injection of 1.5 mg/kg lidocaine at induction of anesthesia, then a continuous infusion of 2 mg.kg.h intraoperatively and 1.33 mg.kg.h for 24 h postoperatively) or an equal volume of saline. All patients received similar intensive postoperative rehabilitation. Postoperative pain scores, opioid consumption, and fatigue scores were measured. Times to first flatus, defecation, and hospital discharge were recorded. Postoperative endocrine (cortisol and catecholamines) and metabolic (leukocytes, C-reactive protein, and glucose) responses were measured for 48 h. Data (presented as median [25-75% interquartile range], lidocaine vs. saline groups) were analyzed using Mann-Whitney tests. P<0.05 was considered statistically significant. RESULTS: Patient demographics were similar in the two groups. Times to first flatus (17 [11-24] vs. 28 [25-33] h; P<0.001), defecation (28 [24-37] vs. 51 [41-70] h; P=0.001), and hospital discharge (2 [2-3] vs. 3 [3-4] days; P=0.001) were significantly shorter in patients who received lidocaine. Lidocaine significantly reduced opioid consumption (8 [5-18] vs. 22 [14-36] mg; P=0.005) and postoperative pain and fatigue scores. In contrast, endocrine and metabolic responses were similar in the two groups. CONCLUSIONS: Intravenous lidocaine improves postoperative analgesia, fatigue, and bowel function after laparoscopic colectomy. These benefits are associated with a significant reduction in hospital stay.

Spinal mechanisms contribute to analgesia produced by epidural sufentanil combined with bupivacaine for postoperative analgesia.

UNLABELLED: When used alone, lipid-soluble epidural opioids are thought to produce analgesia supraspinally via systemic absorption. However, spinal opioids and local anesthetics have been shown to act synergistically at the spinal level in animal studies. We, therefore, tested the hypothesis that sufentanil requirements will be less when given epidurally than IV in patients simultaneously given epidural bupivacaine after major abdominal surgery. Forty patients were anesthetized with isoflurane and epidural bupivacaine for major abdominal surgery. After surgery, each was given a continuous epidural infusion of bupivacaine at a rate of 5 mg/h and sufentanil patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). In a randomized, double-blinded fashion, the sufentanil was given either epidurally or IV. PCA settings were the same in each group. For 60 hrs after surgery, the following variables were measured: pain scores at rest, during mobilization, and during coughing; extension of sensory block; side effects; and sufentanil consumption. Pain scores, extension of sensory block, and the incidence of side effects did not differ between the two groups. Consumption of sufentanil in the epidural group was half that of the IV group (48 h after surgery: 107 +/- 57 microg versus 207 +/- 100 microg for the epidural and IV groups, respectively; P < 0.05). We conclude that spinal mechanisms contribute to the analgesia produced by epidural sufentanil in combination with a local anesthetic. IMPLICATIONS: When combined with epidural bupivacaine, the sufentanil requirement was 50% less when given epidurally than IV. Epidural sufentanil thus appears to have a spinal mechanism of action.