Subject(s)
Gastric Bypass , Laparoscopy , Obesity, Morbid , Anastomosis, Surgical , Duodenum/surgery , Gastrectomy , Humans , Obesity, Morbid/surgery , Retrospective StudiesABSTRACT
PURPOSE: Single-port sleeve gastrectomy (SPSG) is increasingly performed in an ambulatory setting. Pain intensity when returning home remains a problem. The challenge is to be able to predict the evolution of postoperative pain (POP) at home by using parameters collected during the hospital stay. This study aimed to investigate whether immediate POP in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) can predict pain intensity 24 h after surgery. METHODS: Single-center retrospective study in patients with obesity who underwent ambulatory SPSG. POP and opiate requirements during PACU stay were registered. Patients were followed up at home during the first 4 postoperative days. The primary outcome was the correlation between opiate requirements in the PACU and Numerical Rating Scale (NRS) at home 24 h after surgery. Secondly, logistic regression was used to identify risk factors for moderate/intense pain 24 h after surgery. RESULTS: Ninety-four patients were included during the study period. Twenty-two patients had NRS > 3/10 24 h after surgery. No correlation was found between the total dose of morphine in the PACU and pain intensity 24 h after surgery (r2 = - 0.07; P = 0.49). No predictive factor for moderate/intense pain 24 h after surgery was found. CONCLUSION: No correlation was found between opiate requirements in the PACU and pain at home 24 h after SPSG. Based on these results, it does not seem possible to predict intense pain at home from pain profile and morphine requirement during the immediate postoperative period.
Subject(s)
Opiate Alkaloids , Pain, Postoperative , Humans , Retrospective Studies , Pain, Postoperative/diagnosis , Pain, Postoperative/drug therapy , Pain, Postoperative/etiology , Gastrectomy/adverse effects , Gastrectomy/methods , Analgesics, Opioid/therapeutic use , Morphine DerivativesABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: The aim of the study was to determine the predictors of discharge timing and 90-day unplanned readmission after laparoscopic liver resection (LLR). METHODS: Consecutive LLR performed at the "Institut Mutualiste Montsouris" between 2000 and 2019 were retrieved from a prospectively maintained database. Length of stay (LOS) was stratified according to surgical difficulty and was categorized as early (LOS<25th percentile), routine (25th percentile<75th percentile), and delayed discharge otherwise. Uni-and-multivariate analyses were conducted to determine the factors associated with the time of discharge and 90-day unplanned readmission. RESULTS: Early discharge occurred in 15.7% patients whereas delayed discharge occurred in 20.6% patients. Concomitant pancreatic resections (OR 26.8, 95% CI 5.75-125, p < 0.0001) and removal of colorectal primary tumors (OR 7.14, 95% CI 3.98-12.8, p < 0.0001) were the strongest predictors of delayed discharge whereas ERP implementation was the strongest predictor of early discharge (OR 7.4, 95% CI 4.60-11.9, p < 0.0001). Unplanned readmission rate was lower among early discharged patients (7.4% vs. 23.8%, p < 0.0001). Bile leakage was the strongest predictor of 90-day unplanned readmission (OR 3.8, 95% CI 1.12-15.8, p = 0.045). CONCLUSION: Concomitant colorectal or pancreatic resections were the strongest predictors of delayed discharge. Postoperative bile leakage was the strongest predictor of 90-day unplanned readmission following LLR.
Subject(s)
Colorectal Neoplasms , Laparoscopy , Humans , Laparoscopy/adverse effects , Length of Stay , Liver , Patient Discharge , Patient Readmission , Postoperative Complications/etiology , Postoperative Complications/therapy , Retrospective Studies , Risk FactorsABSTRACT
BACKGROUND: To validate the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification as a difficulty scoring system applicable to laparoscopic repeat liver resections and identify risk-factors of unexpected difficulty. METHODS: From a prospectively collected database between 2000 and 2019, patients undergoing laparoscopic repeat liver resections were classified according to the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification. Doubly robust estimators (weighted regressions) were used to assess the effect of factors on intra- and postoperative outcomes and allowed for strong adjustment on age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists, carcinoembryonic antigen, number, and size of lesions. Unexpected difficulty was defined as a composite indicator which included substantial blood loss and/or substantial operative time and/or conversion. RESULTS: Of 205 laparoscopic repeat liver resections patients, 87, 25, and 93 procedures were classified as grade 1, 2, and 3 laparoscopic repeat liver resections, respectively. After doubly robust adjustment, the IMM classification was associated with blood loss (Cohen f2 0.12; P = 0.001), operative time (Cohen f2 0.07; P = .001), and length of stay (Cohen f2 0.13; P = .001), as well as with the risk of both minor and severe complications (odd ratio = 2.94; 95% confidence interval: 2.06-4.20) and the chances of achieving textbook outcome (relative risk = 0.57; 95% confidence interval: 0.41-0.81). Independently from the Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification, a first major hepatectomy (relative risk = 1.15, 95% confidence interval: 1.03-1.29) as well as sinusoidal obstruction syndrome (relative risk = 1.24, 95% confidence interval: 1.09-1.41) were independent risk factors of unexpected difficulty. A first major resection was associated with decreased chances of textbook outcome (relative risk = 0.53; 95% confidence interval: 0.33-0.85). CONCLUSION: The Institut Mutualiste Montsouris classification is a valuable difficulty scoring system for laparoscopic repeat liver resections procedures, while previous major resection and presence of sinusoidal obstruction syndrome are likely to jeopardize the outcomes.