Topical lyophilized thrombin application improves wound healing for posterior spinal surgery.

Background: The erector spinae plane block (ESPB) was proposed as a part of the postoperative multimodal analgesic regimen to improve pain management after posterior spinal surgery. However, ESPB might cause more surgical incisional wound exudate and poor wound healing, which might be improved after topical lyophilized thrombin application. Materials and methods: We performed a retrospective study on patients who received posterior spinal surgery between January 2018 and December 2021. These patients were assigned into three groups: group A (general anesthesia), group B (general anesthesia with ESPB), and group C (general anesthesia with ESPB and topical 1000-unit thrombin application). Postoperative outcomes, including times of dressing changes, duration of suture removal, and incisional wound healing, were compared among these groups. Results: Our study included 89 patients, with 48, 20, and 21 patients in groups A, B, and C, respectively. Baseline demographics, height, weight, comorbidities, and operation duration were comparable among the three groups. Group B required statistically significantly more dressing changes and had a prolonged duration of suture removal than group A (9.4 ± 4.7 versus 6.5 ± 2.0 times, 16.2 ± 3.7 versus 14.2 ± 1.4 days, respectively), which could be statistically significantly improved after the thrombin application in group C. Group B also had more frequent poor wound healing (25.0 %), which could also be improved after the thrombin application (0.0 %). Conclusions: ESPB could cause more dressing changes and poor surgical wound healing after posterior spinal surgery, which could be improved by topical lyophilized thrombin powder application.

Prognostic value of soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor in coronary artery disease: A meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: A potential inflammatory biomarker, soluble urokinase-type plasminogen activator receptor (suPAR) has been utilized to assist the prognostic assessment of coronary artery disease (CAD) patients; however, outcomes have been inconsistent. The prognostic relevance of suPAR as a predictor of CAD patient adverse outcomes was therefore examined. METHODS: Research articles published as of 1 January 2022 were retrieved from PubMed, Embase, the Web of Science and the Cochrane Library. All-cause mortality, cardiovascular mortality and other major cardiovascular events (nonfatal myocardial infarction, heart failure or stroke) were analysed as a subset of relevant studies' results. We calculated hazard ratios (HRs) and 95% confidence intervals (CIs) for each study. The broad EQUATOR guidelines were conformed. Risk of bias was assessed with ROBINS-I tool. RESULTS: In total, this analysis included nine studies including 14,738 CAD patients. All included studies made a correction for certain potential confounders. However, risk of bias ranged from moderate to critical. When the ROBINS-I tool was used. Patients with CAD that exhibited increased suPAR levels had a substantially higher risk of all-cause mortality (HR = 2.24; 95% CI 1.97-2.55) or cardiovascular mortality (HR = 2.02; 95% CI 1.58-2.58), but not of developing other major cardiovascular events (HR = 1.63; 95% CI 0.86-3.11). Considerable heterogeneity across studies was observed in our meta-analyses, but no significant publication bias was detected. CONCLUSION: In patients with coronary disease, suPAR may have prognostic value for both all-cause and cardiovascular mortality but not for other major cardiovascular events.

Efficacy and safety of remifentanil and sulfentanyl in painless gastroscopic examination: a prospective study.

We aim to assess efficacy and safety of remifentanil or sulfentanyl combined with propofol during painless gastroscopic examination in patients. In this study, 270 patients were randomly divided into 3 groups: propofol was given only in group P; propofol and remifentanil in group PR; propofol and sulfentanyl in group PS during the gastroscopic examination. Efficiency of group P was significantly higher than that of group PR and PS (P<0.01) [corrected]. Efficiency of group PR was lower than that of group PS (P<0.05). Incidence of chest wall rigidity and oxygen desaturation in group PR were higher than group P and PS (P<0.05), whereas there was no difference between groups P and PS (P>0.05). Propofol combined with remifentanil could provide satisfying anesthesia and more respiratory depression, whereas sulfentanyl at equivalent dose combined with propofol could also provide with satisfying anesthesia and less respiratory depression. Combined sufentanyl with propofol would be an effective anesthesia technique in the daytime procedure.

Lateral position could provide more excellent hemodynamic parameters during video-assisted thoracoscopic esophagectomy for cancer.

BACKGROUND: Thoracoscopic esophagectomy is a feasible technique that has been shown to be safe for the treatment of esophageal cancer. There continues to be controversy about the optimal position during thoracoscopic esophagectomy. In this study, we compared the intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, clinical pathological characteristics, as well as postoperative complications in patients who underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomy in the prone position (PP) or left-lateral decubitus position (LDP). METHODS: Between January 2011 and June 2011, 23 patients underwent thoracoscopic esophagectomies for cancer of the esophagus in LDP (group A). Since February 2011, we have performed thoracoscopic esophagectomies for cancer of the esophagus in PP for 21 patients (group B). The demographics and clinicopathologic factors, as well as the intraoperative hemodynamic parameters, of the two groups were analyzed. RESULTS: No postoperative death occurred in these 44 patients. Overall morbidity was similar in the two groups. No significant difference in the length of operation or number of retrieved mediastinal nodes between the two groups was observed, but the intraoperative blood loss in group A was significantly higher than in group B (P = 0.0228). There was no significant difference of the intraoperative mean arterial pressure, central venous pressure, heart rate, and stroke volume variation between the two groups and various positions. In group A, the cardiac output (CO), cardiac index (CI), as well as stroke volume index (SVI) did not exhibit significant difference after altering patients' position from LDP to SP. However, patients who underwent thorascopic esophagectomy in PP had lower CO, CI, and SVI than in LDP during the thoracoscopic stage. CONCLUSIONS: Compared with the PP, the LDP could provide more excellent hemodynamic parameters during thoracoscopic esophagectomy. However, the various hemodynamic statuses did not exert significant influence on the occurrence of postoperative complications.