RESUMEN
Background: Pectoral nerve block (PECS) is increasingly performed in breast surgery. Aim: The study evaluated the clinical impact of these blocks in the postoperative course. Patients & methods: In this case-control study, patients undergoing breast surgery with 'enhanced recovery after surgery' pathways were divided into group 1 (57 patients) in whom PECS was performed before general anesthesia, and group 2 (57 patients) in whom only general anesthesia was effected. Results: Postoperative opioid consumption (p < 0.002), pain at 32 h after surgery (p < 0.005) and the length of stay (p < 0.003) were significantly lower in group 1. Conclusion: Reducing opioid consumption and pain after surgery, PECS could favor a faster recovery with a reduction in length of stay, ensuring a higher turnover of patients undergoing breast surgery.
'Enhanced recovery after surgery' (ERAS) protocols have been recently applied in breast cancer patients in order to improve the postoperative course. However, the incidence of moderate to severe pain after breast surgery is frequent, and a multimodal approach is recommended. In this view, the interfascial plane blocks are advocated as a valid alternative to both paravertebral and epidural blockade. In this study, we evaluated the effects of these blocks on the postoperative course in patients undergoing breast surgery with ERAS protocols. We compared two patient groups: in the first, pectoral blocks were performed before general anesthesia, while in the second no block was carried out. We found that in the patient group receiving the blocks, postoperative opioid consumption (with essentially the same pain after surgery) and length of stay were significantly lower. Therefore, although more robust studies are needed to confirm our findings, these emerging locoregional techniques could favor a faster recovery in the context of ERAS in breast surgery. These results could have important clinical implications in terms of not only reducing healthcare costs but also ensuring a higher turnover of patients undergoing breast surgery.
Asunto(s)
Neoplasias de la Mama , Nervios Torácicos , Humanos , Femenino , Analgésicos Opioides , Estudios de Casos y Controles , Dolor Postoperatorio/prevención & control , Neoplasias de la Mama/cirugíaRESUMEN
OBJECTIVES: To investigate risk factors for non-invasive/invasive ventilatory support (NI/I-VS) in patients with coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19). METHODS: All consecutive patients admitted to the Infectious Diseases Unit and Intensive Care Unit (ICU) of Santa Maria Annunziata Hospital (Florence, Italy), from February 25 to April 25, 2020, with a confirmed COVID-19 diagnosis were enrolled in this retrospective cohort study. NI/I-VS was defined as the need for continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) or bilevel positive airway pressure (BPAP) (non-invasive ventilation) or mechanical ventilation, not including low-flow systems of oxygen therapy such as the Venturi mask or nasal cannula. RESULTS: Ninety-seven patients were enrolled; 61.9% (60/97) were male and the median patient age was 64 years. The in-hospital mortality was 9.3%. Thirty-five of the 97 patients (36%) required ICU admission and 94.8% (92/97) were prescribed oxygen therapy: 10.8% (10/92) by nasal cannula, 44.5% (41/92) by Venturi mask, 31.5% (29/92) by CPAP, 2.2% (2/92) by BPAP, and 10.8% (10/92) by mechanical ventilation following intubation. On univariate analysis, patients with a body mass index >30, type II diabetes mellitus, and those presenting with dyspnoea, asthenia, SOFA score ≥2 points, PaO2/FiO2 <300, temperature >38 °C, increased levels of lactate dehydrogenase (LDH), alanine aminotransferase, and C-reactive protein, and a d-dimer >1000 ng/mL at admission more frequently underwent NI/I-VS. Multivariate logistic regression analysis confirmed temperature >38 °C (odds ratio (OR) 21.2, 95% confidential interval (95% CI) 3.5-124.5, p = 0.001), LDH >250 U/l (OR 15.2, 95% CI 1.8-128.8, p = 0.012), and d-dimer >1000 ng/mL (OR 4.5, 95% CI 1.2-17.3, p = 0.027) as significantly associated with the requirement for NI/I-VS. A non-significant trend (p = 0.051) was described for PaO2/FiO2 <300. CONCLUSIONS: Temperature >38 °C, LDH > 250 U/l, and d-dimer >1000 ng/mL were found to be independent risk factors for NI/I-VS in COVID-19 patients. In order to quickly identify patients likely at risk of developing a critical illness, inflammatory markers should be assessed upon hospital admission.
Asunto(s)
COVID-19/terapia , Respiración Artificial , Adulto , Anciano , Anciano de 80 o más Años , Estudios de Cohortes , Enfermedad Crítica , Diabetes Mellitus Tipo 2/complicaciones , Femenino , Mortalidad Hospitalaria , Hospitalización , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Pandemias , Estudios Retrospectivos , Factores de Riesgo , SARS-CoV-2RESUMEN
BACKGROUND: Critically ill COVID-19 patients have a clear pattern of inflammation and hypercoagulable state. The main aim of the study was to evaluate the outcome of severe COVID-19 patients basing on prothrombotic risk factors (i.e. D-dimer). We also evaluated the impact of different doses of low molecular weight heparin (LMWH) on the incidence of bleedings. METHODS: The data of forty-two patients admitted to the Intensive Care Unit (ICU) were retrospectively analyzed. On ICU admission, patients with D-dimerâ¯<â¯3000â¯ng/mL (Group 1) received enoxaparin 4000 UI (6000 UI, if body mass index >35) subcutaneously b.i.d. and patients with D-dimerâ¯≥â¯3000â¯ng/mL (Group 2) received enoxaparin 100â¯UI/kg every 12â¯h. Aspirin was administered to all patients once a day. RESULTS: Both groups presented a high incidence of perivascular thrombosis (40.9% in Group 1 and 30% in Group 2). Patients of Group 2 suffered a higher incidence of venous thromboembolism (VTE) than Group 1 (65% vs 13.6%, pâ¯=â¯0.001). One patient (4.5%) of Group 1 and three patients (15%) of Group 2 suffered from minor bleeding; no patient had major bleeding. Group 2 had a longer ICU and hospital stay than Group 1 (11.5⯱â¯5.6 vs 9.0⯱â¯4.8 and 30⯱â¯4.9 vs 21⯱â¯2.3, pâ¯<â¯0.05, respectively) as well as increased ICU mortality (25% vs 9.1%). CONCLUSIONS: More severe critically ill COVID-19 patients have a high incidence of VTE and worse outcome, despite the use of heparin at the therapeutic dose. However, the use of heparin did not increase the incidence of bleeding complications.
Asunto(s)
Anticoagulantes/efectos adversos , Aspirina/efectos adversos , COVID-19/complicaciones , Hemorragia/inducido químicamente , Heparina de Bajo-Peso-Molecular/efectos adversos , SARS-CoV-2 , Tromboembolia Venosa/epidemiología , Adulto , Anciano , Enfermedad Crítica , Femenino , Humanos , Unidades de Cuidados Intensivos , Masculino , Persona de Mediana Edad , Estudios RetrospectivosRESUMEN
Critically ill patients with COVID-19 pneumonia suffered both high thrombotic and bleeding risk. The effect of SARS-CoV-2 on coagulation and fibrinolysis is not well known. We conducted a retrospective study of critically ill patients admitted to an intensive care unit (ICU) a cause of severe COVID-19 pneumonia and we evaluated coagulation function using rotational thromboelastometry (ROTEM) on day of admission (T0) and 5 (T5) and 10 (T10) days after admission to ICU. Coagulation standard parameters were also evaluated. Forty patients were enrolled into the study. The ICU and the hospital mortality were 10% and 12.5%, respectively. On ICU admission, prothrombin time was slightly reduced and it increased significantly at T10 (T0 = 65.1 ± 9.8 vs T10 = 85.7 ± 1.5, p = 0.002), while activated partial thromboplastin time and fibrinogen values were higher at T0 than T10 (32.2 ± 2.9 vs 27.2 ± 2.1, p = 0.017 and 895.1 ± 110 vs 332.5 ± 50, p = 0.002, respectively); moreover, whole blood thromboelastometry profiles were consistent with hypercoagulability characterized by an acceleration of the propagation phase of blood clot formation [i.e., CFT below the lower limit in INTEM 16/40 patients (40%) and EXTEM 20/40 patients (50%)] and significant higher clot strength [MCF above the upper limit in INTEM 20/40 patients (50%), in EXTEM 28/40 patients (70%) and in FIBTEM 29/40 patients (72.5%)]; however, this hypercoagulable state persists in the first five days, but it decreases ten day after, without returning to normal values. No sign of secondary hyperfibrinolysis or sepsis induced coagulopathy (SIC) were found during the study period. In six patients (15%) a deep vein thrombosis and in 2 patients (5%) a thromboembolic event, were found; 12 patients (30%) had a catheter-related thrombosis. ROTEM analysis confirms that patients with severe COVID-19 pneumonia had a hypercoagulation state that persisted over time.