A Comparison Between Enteral and Intravenous Nimodipine in Subarachnoid Hemorrhage: A Systematic Review and Network Meta-Analysis.

Our objective was to compare the effectiveness of intravenous and enteral nimodipine in preventing poor outcome from delayed cerebral ischemia in patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage. We performed a systematic search and a network meta-analysis using the following databases: PubMed, Scopus, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, and Google Scholar. Risk of Bias 2 tool was used to assess risk of bias of included studies. A ranking among methods was performed on the basis of the frequentist analog of the surface under the cumulative ranking curve. Published studies that met the following population, intervention, comparison, outcomes and study (PICOS) criteria were included: patients with subarachnoid hemorrhage aged 15 years or older (P); nimodipine, intravenous and oral formulation (I); placebo or no intervention (C); poor outcome measured at 3 months (defined as death, vegetative state, or severe disability), case fatality at 3 months, delayed cerebral ischemia, delayed ischaemic neurologic deficit, and vasospasm measured with transcranial Doppler or digital subtraction angiography (O); and randomized controlled trials (S). No language or publication date restrictions were applied. Ten studies were finally included, with a total of 1527 randomly assigned patients. Oral and intravenous nimodipine were both effective in preventing poor outcome, delayed cerebral ischemia, and delayed ischaemic neurological deficit. Neither treatment was effective in improving case fatality. Evolving clinical protocols over a 30-year period and the risk of bias of the included studies may limit the strength of our results. Enteral and intravenous nimodipine may have a similar effectiveness in terms of preventing poor outcome, delayed cerebral ischemia, and delayed ischaemic neurological deficit. More research may be needed to fully establish the role of intravenous nimodipine in current clinical practice.

Breast Regional Anesthesia Practice in the Italian Public Health System (BRA-SURVEY): A Survey-Based National Study.

BACKGROUND: Breast cancer is the most common malignancy in women. Surgery is a mainstay therapy unfortunately burdened by complications as severe postoperative pain. Regional anesthesia may play a role in a multimodal strategy for prevention and treatment of postoperative pain. The main purpose of this survey was to investigate the rate of use of regional anesthesia techniques in patients undergoing breast surgery in the Italian public hospital system. METHODS: We designed an online survey that consisted of 22 questions investigating the anesthesia management of breast surgery, particularly focused on regional anesthesia. The survey lasted from November 18, 2019 to February 28, 2020. Directors of anesthesia departments of 168 Italian public health system hospitals were contacted and invited to forward the survey to every anesthesiologist in their unit. RESULTS: A total of 935 anesthesiologists received the survey; among them 460 entered the final analysis. Regional anesthesia was not used by 44.6% of the anesthesiologists and lack of experience/training was the main cause (75.6%). Logistic regression models revealed that anesthesiologists with more than 15 years of experience (odds ratio [OR] = 0.55; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.33-0.93) or working most of their days in intensive care unit (ICU) compared to operating theater (OR = 0.25; 95% CI, 0.14-0.43) were less likely to perform regional anesthesia techniques. CONCLUSIONS: Low implementation of regional anesthesia techniques in breast surgery emerges from our survey and the major reason cited is a lack of proper training. An improved training program in regional anesthesia, especially in residents' curricula, could be useful to increase its rate of use and to standardize its practice.

Patient satisfaction after thyroid RFA versus surgery for benign thyroid nodules: a telephone survey.

INTRODUCTION: Minimally invasive nonsurgical techniques are gaining ground as alternatives to surgery for the treatment of benign thyroid nodules. Here, we aimed at comparing patient satisfaction after radiofrequency ablation (RFA) to that after surgery. METHODS: In this cross-sectional study, we recruited 126 patients treated with RFA and 84 treated with surgery for a single benign thyroid nodule. All patients were contacted by phone call and were asked the following questions: Are you satisfied with the symptom resolution?; Are you satisfied with the cosmetic results?; Are you satisfied overall with the procedure?; Are you taking any medication for your thyroid? Patients' general characteristics were collected from our database. RESULTS: In the surgery group, there was a higher percentage of patients fully satisfied with the resolution of nodule-related symptoms (p = .02). In the RFA group, there was a higher percentage of patients fully satisfied with the cosmetic results (p = .001). In terms of overall satisfaction, there were no differences between the groups (p = .26). Nevertheless, RFA led to differing results based on thyroid nodule function. In patients with nonfunctioning thyroid nodules, RFA was as effective as surgery in terms of satisfaction with symptom resolution, while it was not in patients with autonomously functioning thyroid nodules (AFTN). CONCLUSION: Our data on postoperative patient satisfaction support the notion that both RFA and surgery are valid therapeutic options for nonfunctioning thyroid nodules, while surgery should be still preferred for AFTN.

Postoperative hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure after neoadjuvant treatment for lung cancer: radiologic findings and risk factors.

OBJECTIVES: To investigate the rate of hypoxaemic acute respiratory failure (hARF) on patients undergoing surgery for non-small-cell lung cancer (NSCLC) after neoadjuvant chemotherapy, to describe clinical and radiological findings and to explore potential risk factors for this complication. METHODS: Retrospective review of medical records of all patients who underwent surgery for NSCLC after neoadjuvant chemotherapy at a single centre between 2014 and 2021. Computed tomography scans of patients who developed hARF were reviewed by an experienced radiologist to provide a quantitative assessment of radiologic alterations. RESULTS: The final cohort consisted of 211 patients. Major morbidity was 13.3% (28/211) and hARF was the most common major complication (n = 11, 5.2%). Postoperative mortality was 1.9% (4/211) and occurred only in patients who experienced hARF. Most patients who experienced hARF underwent major procedures, including pneumonectomy (n = 3), lobectomy with chest wall resection (n = 3), bronchial or vascular reconstructions (n = 3) and extended or bilateral resections (n = 2). Analysis of computed tomography findings revealed that crazy paving and ground glass were the most common alterations and were more represented in the non-operated lung. Male gender, current smoking status, pathologic stage III-IV and operative time resulted significant risk factors for hARF at univariable analysis (P < 0.05). CONCLUSIONS: hARF is the main cause of major morbidity and mortality after neoadjuvant therapy and surgery for NSCLC and occurs more frequently after complex and lengthier surgical procedures. Overall, our findings suggest that operative time may represent the most important risk factor for hARF.