Adverse side-effects of dexamethasone in surgical patients - an abridged Cochrane systematic review.

In the peri-operative period, dexamethasone is widely and effectively used for prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting. The objective of this meta-analysis was to assess the adverse effects of an incidental steroid load of dexamethasone in adult surgical patients. We searched in MEDLINE, Embase, the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials and the Web of Science for randomised controlled trials comparing an incidental steroid load of dexamethasone with a control intervention in adult patients undergoing surgery. Two review authors independently screened studies for eligibility, extracted data and assessed all included studies for bias. Our primary outcomes were postoperative systemic or wound infection, delayed wound healing and glycaemic response within 24 h. We included 37 studies in this meta-analysis. The pooled results found no evidence that dexamethasone increased the risk of a postoperative wound infection, Peto OR (95%CI) 1.01 (0.80-1.27); 4603 participants, 26 studies; I² = 32%; moderate-quality evidence. Whether dexamethasone influenced wound healing was unclear due to the large confidence intervals, Peto OR (95%CI) 0.99 (0.28-3.43); 1072 participants, 8 studies; I² = 0%; low-quality evidence. Dexamethasone produced a mild increase in glucose levels among participants without diabetes during the first 12 h after surgery, mean difference (95%CI) 0.7 mmol.l-1 (0.3-1.2) 10 studies; 595 participants; I² = 50%; low-quality evidence. This article is an abridged version of a Cochrane Review.

Peri-operative continuation of metformin does not improve glycaemic control in patients with type 2 diabetes: A randomized controlled trial.

Historically, metformin was withheld before surgery for fear of metformin-associated lactic acidosis. Currently, however, this risk is deemed to be low and guidelines have moved towards the continuation of metformin. We hypothesized that continuing metformin peri-operatively would lower postoperative serum glucose level without an effect on plasma lactate levels. We performed a single-blind multicentre randomized controlled trial in people with type 2 diabetes mellitus scheduled for non-cardiac surgery and continued (MF+ group) or withheld (MF- group) metformin before surgery. The main outcome measures were the differences in peri-operative plasma glucose and lactate levels. We randomized 70 patients (37 MF+ group and 33 MF- group) with type 2 diabetes mellitus. Postoperative glucose levels were similar in the MF+ and the MF- groups (8.2 ± 1.8 vs 8.3 ± 2.3 mmol/L P = .95) Although preoperative lactate levels were slightly higher in the MF+ group compared with the MF- group (1.5 vs 1.2 mmol/L; P = .02), the postoperative lactate levels were not significantly different (1.2 vs 1.0 mmol/L; P = .18). In conclusion, continuation of metformin during elective non-cardiac surgery does not improve glucose control or raise lactate levels to a clinically relevant degree.

Peri-operative management of patients with type-2 diabetes mellitus undergoing non-cardiac surgery using liraglutide, glucose-insulin-potassium infusion or intravenous insulin bolus regimens: a randomised controlled trial.

In this open-label multicentre randomised controlled trial, we investigated three peri-operative treatment strategies to lower glucose and reduce the need for rescue insulin in patients aged 18-75 years with type-2 diabetes mellitus undergoing non-cardiac surgery. Patients were randomly allocated using a web-based randomisation program to premedication with liraglutide (liraglutide group), glucose-insulin-potassium infusion (insulin infusion group) or insulin bolus regimen (insulin bolus group), targeting a glucose < 8.0 mmol.l-1 . The primary outcome was the between group difference in median glucose levels 1 h after surgery. We analysed 150 patients (liraglutide group n = 44, insulin infusion group n = 53, insulin bolus group n = 53) according to the intention-to-treat principle. Median (IQR [range]) plasma glucose 1 h postoperatively was lower in the liraglutide group compared with the insulin infusion and insulin bolus groups (6.6 (5.6-7.7 [4.2-13.5]) mmol.l-1 vs. 7.5 (6.4-8.3 [3.9-16.6]) mmol.l-1 (p = 0.026) and 7.6 (6.4-8.9 [4.7-13.2]) mmol.l-1 ) p = 0.006, respectively). The incidence of hypoglycaemia and postoperative complications did not differ between the groups. Six patients had pre-operative nausea in the liraglutide group, of which two had severe nausea, compared with no patients in the insulin infusion and insulin bolus groups (p = 0.007). The pre-operative administration of liraglutide stabilised peri-operative plasma glucose levels and reduced peri-operative insulin requirements, at the expense of increased pre-operative nausea rates.

Very Long-Chain Acyl-Coenzyme A Dehydrogenase Deficiency and Perioperative Management in Adult Patients.

Surgery and anesthesia pose a threat to patients with very long-chain acyl-CoA dehydrogenase deficiency (VLCADD), because prolonged fasting, stress, and pain are known risk factors for the induction of metabolic derangement. The optimal perioperative management in these patients is unknown and the use of volatile agents and agents dissolved in fatty acids has been related to postoperative metabolic complications. However, the occurrence of metabolic derangement is multifactorial and depends, amongst others, on the severity of the mutation and residual enzyme activity. Current guidelines suggest avoiding both volatile anesthetics as well as propofol, which seriously limits the options for providing safe anesthesia. Therefore, we reviewed the available literature on the perioperative management of patients with VLCADD. We concluded that the use of some medications, such as volatile anesthetics, in patients with VLCADD might be wrongfully avoided and could in fact prevent metabolic derangement by the adequate suppression of pain and stress during surgery. We will illustrate this with a case report of an adult VLCADD patient undergoing minor surgery. Besides the use of remifentanil, anesthesia was uneventfully maintained with the use of sevoflurane, a volatile agent, and continuous glucose infusion. The patient was monitored with a continuous glucose meter and creatinine kinase measurements.

Is "really conscious" sedation with solely an opioid an alternative to every day used sedation regimes for colonoscopies in a teaching hospital? Midazolam/fentanyl, propofol/alfentanil, or alfentanil only for colonoscopy: a randomized trial.

BACKGROUND: We investigated the satisfaction of patients and endoscopists and concurrently safety aspects of an "alfentanil only" and two clinically routinely used sedation regimes in patients undergoing colonoscopy in a teaching hospital. METHODS: One hundred and eighty patients were prospectively randomized in three groups: M (midazolam/fentanyl), A (alfentanil), and P (propofol/alfentanil); M and A were administered by an endoscopy nurse, P by an anesthesia nurse. Interventions, heart rate, saturation, electrocardiogram, noninvasive blood pressure, and expiratory CO2 were monitored using video assistance. After endoscopy, patients and gastroenterologists completed questionnaires about satisfaction. RESULTS: A high level of satisfaction was found in all groups, with patients in group P being more satisfied with their sedation experience (median 1.75, p < 0.001). Gastroenterologist satisfaction varied not significantly between the three alternatives. Patients in group A felt less drowsy, could communicate more rapidly than patients in both other groups, and met discharge criteria immediately after the end of the procedure. Respiratory events associated with sedation were observed in 43% patients in group M, 47% in group P, but only 13% in group A (p < 0.001). CONCLUSIONS: These results suggest that alfentanil could be an alternative for sedation in colonoscopy even in the setting of a teaching hospital. It results in satisfied patients easily taking up information, and recovering rapidly. Although one might expect to observe more respiratory depression with an "opioid only" sedation technique without involvement of anesthesia partners, respiratory events were less frequent than when other methods were used.