scholarly journals The need for post-operative vasopressor infusions after major gynae-oncologic surgery within an ERAS (Enhanced Recovery After Surgery) pathway

2020 ◽  
Vol 9 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Michèle Bossy ◽  
Molly Nyman ◽  
Thumuluru Kavitha Madhuri ◽  
Anil Tailor ◽  
Jayanta Chatterjee ◽  
...  

Abstract Background Hypotension following major abdominal surgery is common, and once hypovolaemia has been optimally treated, is often due to vasodilation which can be treated with vasopressor infusions. There is unpredictability in the dose and duration of post-operative vasopressor infusions, and factors associated with this have not been determined. Methods We present a case series of consecutive patients who received major gynae-oncology surgery delivered within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathway at a single institution. Patients were electively admitted from theatre directly to the intensive care unit (ICU). Data was collected prospectively into electronic databases (Philips ICCA, Wardwatcher) and then retrospectively collated and appropriate statistical analyses were performed. In the absence of a consensus definition of vasoplegia, we, necessarily arbitrarily, chose a noradrenaline dose of > 0.1 mcg/kg/min at 08:00 on the first post-operative day. The rationale is that this would be more than would typically be expected to counteract the vasodilatory effects of epidural analgesia, which is commonly used at our institution. Results Data was collected from 324 patients, all treated between February 2014 and July 2016. The average age was 67 years and 39% received neoadjuvant chemotherapy. The commonest tumour type was ovarian (58%). The median estimated blood loss was 800 ml and epidural analgesia was used in 71%. Fifty per cent received post-operative vasopressor infusions: factors associated with this included epidural use and estimated blood loss. Nineteen per cent met our criteria for vasoplegia: factors associated with this included CRP on post-operative day 1 and P-POSSUM morbidity score. Hospital and ICU length of stay was prolonged in those who had vasoplegia. Conclusions Patients commonly receive vasopressors following major gynae-oncologic surgery, and this can be at relatively high doses. Clinical factors only accounted for a minority of the variability in vasopressor usage—suggesting considerable biological variability. Optimal care of patients having major abdomino-pelvic surgery may include advanced haemodynamic monitoring and ready availability of infused vasopressors, in a suitable environment.

2020 ◽  
Vol 19 (1) ◽  
pp. 51-57 ◽  
Author(s):  
Xiao-Yu Zhang ◽  
Xiao-Zhen Zhang ◽  
Fang-Yan Lu ◽  
Qi Zhang ◽  
Wei Chen ◽  
...  

2020 ◽  
Vol 41 (6) ◽  
pp. 102679 ◽  
Author(s):  
Garren M.I. Low ◽  
Kimberley L. Kiong ◽  
Ruth Amaku ◽  
Brittany Kruse ◽  
Gang Zheng ◽  
...  

2019 ◽  
Vol 46 (4) ◽  
pp. E18 ◽  
Author(s):  
Dong Hwa Heo ◽  
Choon Keun Park

OBJECTIVEThe aims of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) are to improve surgical outcomes, shorten hospital stays, and reduce complications. The objective of this study was to introduce ERAS with biportal endoscopic transforaminal lumbar interbody fusion (TLIF) and to investigate the clinical results.METHODSPatients were divided into two groups based on the fusion procedures. Patients who received microscopic TLIF without ERAS were classified as the non-ERAS group, whereas those who received percutaneous biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS were classified as the ERAS group. The mean Oswestry Disability Index (ODI) and visual analog scale (VAS) scores were compared between the two groups. In addition, demographic characteristics, diagnosis, mean operative time, estimated blood loss (EBL), fusion rate, readmissions, and complications were investigated and compared.RESULTSForty-six patients were grouped into the non-ERAS group (microscopic TLIF without ERAS) and 23 patients into the ERAS group (biportal endoscopic TLIF with ERAS). The VAS score for preoperative back pain on days 1 and 2 was significantly higher in the non-ERAS group than in the ERAS group (p < 0.05). The mean operative duration was significantly higher in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group, while the mean EBL was significantly lower in the ERAS group than in the non-ERAS group (p < 0.05). There was no significant difference in fusion rate between the two groups (p > 0.05). Readmission was required in 2 patients who were from the non-ERAS group. Postoperative complications occurred in 6 cases in the non-ERAS group and in 2 cases in the ERAS group.CONCLUSIONSPercutaneous biportal endoscopic TLIF with an ERAS pathway may have good aspects in reducing bleeding and postoperative pain. Endoscopic fusion surgery along with the ERAS concept may help to accelerate recovery after surgery.


2019 ◽  
Vol 2019 ◽  
pp. 1-5
Author(s):  
Siv Venkat ◽  
Andre Matteliano ◽  
Darrel Drachenberg

The thoracoabdominal incision was first described in 1946 as an approach to concomitant abdominal, retroperitoneal, and thoracic injuries. In urology, this technique was popularized in 1949 for the resection of large renal tumours. Today, it is reserved for complex cases where optimal exposure of the renal hilum and adrenal and superior pole of the kidney is necessary. We present four consecutive cases in which this approach was taken by a single surgeon at our tertiary surgical centre. The outcomes, postoperative course, and pathology are described. We provide a comprehensive literature review and outline the indications, advantages, and disadvantages of this approach. Objectives. To present a case series outlining the efficacy and safety of the thoracoabdominal incision in complex oncologic procedures in urology. Methods. Four cases utilizing the thoracoabdominal incision, performed by a single surgeon at our tertiary care center, were reviewed. Case history, preoperative imaging, intraoperative experience, postoperative course, final pathology, and complications were examined. A thorough literature review was performed and comparison made with historical cohorts for estimated blood loss, length of stay, and complications encountered versus other common surgical approaches. The indications, advantages, and disadvantages of the thoracoabdominal approach were outlined. Results. All patients had large retroperitoneal masses of varying complexity, requiring maximal surgical exposure. Surgery was straightforward in all cases, without any significant perioperative or postoperative complications. Postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and analgesia requirements were all similar to open and mini-flank approaches in review of historical case series cohorts. Laparoscopic approaches had lower estimated blood loss and length of stay. Conclusions. The thoracoabdominal approach is rarely utilized in urological surgery, due to the perceived morbidity in violating the thoracic cavity. These cases outline the benefit of the thoracoabdominal approach in select cases requiring maximal surgical exposure, and the generally benign postoperative course that appropriately selected patients may hope to endure. Postoperative pain, length of hospital stay, estimated blood loss, and analgesia requirements can be expected to be similar open and mini-flank approaches. As expected, laparoscopic approaches had lower estimated blood loss and length of stay.


VASA ◽  
2020 ◽  
pp. 1-9
Author(s):  
Anne Marie Augustin ◽  
Giulia Dalla Torre ◽  
Arkadius Kocot ◽  
Thorsten Alexander Bley ◽  
Charis Kalogirou ◽  
...  

Summary: Background: Arterioureteral fistulas (AUFs) are severe pathologies of different origin and with increasing incidence frequently appear in patients with underlying extensive malignancy and after pelvic surgery. AUF therapy is challenging since symptoms are frequently non-specific and patients are often unsuitable surgical candidates due to comorbidities. Since experiences with endovascular treatment strategies are limited, the feasibility, effectiveness, and safety were evaluated in a consecutive case series. Patients and methods: A retrospective analysis of five patients with endovascular AUF exclusion was performed. Probable predisposing factors for an AUF included history of pelvic malignancy with oncologic surgery in four patients, radiotherapy in four patients, and indwelling ureteral stents in four patients. Clinical presentation, diagnostic management, and site of fistula were assessed. Furthermore, technical and clinical success as well as complications were evaluated. Results: All patients presented with gross haematuria. In four patients, haematuria occurred during endoscopic ureteral stent manipulation. Affected vessels were the internal pudendal artery in one, intrarenal segmental artery and external iliac artery in two, and internal iliac artery in another two patients. Treatment included coil embolisation (n = 2), plug embolisation (n = 3), particulate embolisation (n = 1), and covered stent implantation (n = 2). Technical success was achieved in all procedures. In two cases, re-intervention was necessary due to AUF recurrence, resulting in a clinical success rate of 60.0%. One major complication class D was documented. Conclusions: AUFs can be treated effectively and safely using endovascular techniques. Diagnostic and therapeutic management of this rare entity requires a high level of awareness for potential risk factors as well as an optimal multidisciplinary coordination.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document