Dataset Information

Plasma pro-atrial natriuretic peptide to estimate fluid balance during open and robot-assisted esophagectomy: a prospective observational study.

ABSTRACT: It remains debated how much fluid should be administered during surgery. The atrial natriuretic peptide precursor proANP is released by atrial distension and deviations in plasma proANP are reported associated with perioperative fluid balance. We hypothesized that plasma proANP would decrease when the central blood volume is compromised during the abdominal part of robot-assisted hybrid (RE) esophagectomy and that a positive fluid balance would be required to maintain plasma proANP.Patients undergoing RE (n?=?25) or open (OE; n?=?25) esophagectomy for gastroesophageal cancer were included consecutively in this prospective observational study. Plasma proANP was determined repetitively during esophagectomy to allow for distinction between the abdominal and thoracic part of the procedure. The RE group was 15° head up tilted during the abdominal procedure.The blood loss was 250 (150-375) (RE) and 600 ml (390-855) (OE) (p?=?0.01), but the two groups of patients were provided with a similar positive fluid balance: 1705 (1390-1983) vs. 1528 ml (1316-1834) (p?=?0.4). However, plasma proANP decreased by 21% (p?

SUBMITTER: Strandby RB

PROVIDER: S-EPMC5291941 | biostudies-literature | 2017 Feb

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Plasma pro-atrial natriuretic peptide to estimate fluid balance during open and robot-assisted esophagectomy: a prospective observational study.

Strandby Rune Broni RB Ambrus Rikard R Secher Niels H NH Goetze Jens Peter JP Achiam Michael Patrick MP Svendsen Lars Bo LB

BMC anesthesiology 20170203 1

<h4>Background</h4>It remains debated how much fluid should be administered during surgery. The atrial natriuretic peptide precursor proANP is released by atrial distension and deviations in plasma proANP are reported associated with perioperative fluid balance. We hypothesized that plasma proANP would decrease when the central blood volume is compromised during the abdominal part of robot-assisted hybrid (RE) esophagectomy and that a positive fluid balance would be required to maintain plasma p ...[more]

PMID: 28159014

Similar Datasets

Project description:For esophageal cancer patients, radical esophagolymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of multimodality treatment with curative intent. Transthoracic esophagectomy is the preferred surgical approach worldwide allowing for en-bloc resection of the tumor with the surrounding lymph nodes. However, the percentage of cardiopulmonary complications associated with the transthoracic approach is high (50 to 70%).Recent studies have shown that robot-assisted minimally invasive thoraco-laparoscopic esophagectomy (RATE) is at least equivalent to the open transthoracic approach for esophageal cancer in terms of short-term oncological outcomes. RATE was accompanied with reduced blood loss, shorter ICU stay and improved lymph node retrieval compared with open esophagectomy, and the pulmonary complication rate, hospital stay and perioperative mortality were comparable. The objective is to evaluate the efficacy, risks, quality of life and cost-effectiveness of RATE as an alternative to open transthoracic esophagectomy for treatment of esophageal cancer.This is an investigator-initiated and investigator-driven monocenter randomized controlled parallel-group, superiority trial. All adult patients (age ? 18 and ? 80 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3, M0) esophageal carcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus and with European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 will be assessed for eligibility and included after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 112) with resectable esophageal cancer are randomized in the outpatient department to either RATE (n = 56) or open three-stage transthoracic esophageal resection (n = 56). The primary outcome of this study is the percentage of overall complications (grade 2 and higher) as stated by the modified Clavien-Dindo classification of surgical complications.This is the first randomized controlled trial designed to compare RATE with open transthoracic esophagectomy as surgical treatment for resectable esophageal cancer. If our hypothesis is proven correct, RATE will result in a lower percentage of postoperative complications, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay, but with at least similar oncologic outcomes and better postoperative quality of life compared with open transthoracic esophagectomy. The study started in January 2012. Follow-up will be 5 years. Short-term results will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient.Dutch trial register: NTR3291 ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT01544790.

Project description:BackgroundAdequate pain control after open esophagectomy is associated with reduced complications, earlier recovery and higher patient satisfaction. While further developing surgical procedures like robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) it is relevant to adapt postoperative pain management. The primary question of this observational survey was whether one of the two standard treatments, thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) or intravenous patient-controlled analgesia (PCA), is superior for pain control after RAMIE as the optimal pain management for these patients still remains unclear. Use of additional analgesics, changes in forced expiratory volume in 1 s (FEV1), postoperative complications and duration of intensive care and hospital stay were also analyzed.MethodsThis prospective observational pilot study analyzed 50 patients undergoing RAMIE (postoperative PCA with piritramide or TEA using bupivacaine; each n = 25). Patient reported pain using the numeric rating scale score and differences in FEV1 using a micro spirometer were measured at postoperative day 1, 3 and 7. Additional data of secondary endpoints were collected from patient charts.ResultsKey demographics, comorbidity, clinical and operative variables were equivalently distributed. Patients receiving TEA had lower pain scores and a longer-lasting pain relief. Moreover, TEA was an independent predictive variable for reduced length of hospital stay (HR -3.560 (95% CI: -6.838 to -0.282), p = 0.034).ConclusionsAlthough RAMIE leads to reduced surgical trauma, a less invasive pain therapy with PCA appears to be inferior compared to TEA in case of sufficient postoperative analgesia and length of hospital stay. According to the results of this observational pilot study analgesia with TEA provided better and longer-lasting pain relief compared to PCA. Further randomized controlled trials should be conducted to evaluate the optimal postoperative analgesic treatment for RAMIE.

Project description:ImportanceThe utilization of robot-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) for esophageal cancer is increasing, despite limited data comparing RAMIE with other surgical approaches.ObjectiveTo evaluate the literature for clinical outcomes of RAMIE compared with video-assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (VAMIE) and open esophagectomy (OE).Data sourcesA systematic search of PubMed, Cochrane, Ovid Medline, and Embase databases from January 1, 2013, to May 6, 2020, was performed.Study selectionStudies that compared RAMIE with VAMIE and/or OE for cancer were included.Data extraction and synthesisFollowing the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) reporting guideline, data were extracted by independent reviewers. A random-effects meta-analysis of 9 propensity-matched studies was performed for the RAMIE vs VAMIE comparison only. A narrative synthesis of RAMIE vs VAMIE and OE was performed.Main outcomes and measuresThe outcomes of interest were intraoperative outcomes (ie, estimated blood loss [EBL], operative time, lymph node [LN] harvest), short-term outcomes (anastomotic leak, recurrent laryngeal nerve [RLN] palsy, pulmonary and total complications, and 90-day mortality), and long-term oncologic outcomes.ResultsOverall, 21 studies (2 randomized clinical trials, 11 propensity-matched studies, and 8 unmatched studies) with 9355 patients were included. A meta-analysis was performed with 9 propensity-matched studies comparing RAMIE with VAMIE. The random-effects pooled estimate found an adjusted risk difference (RD) of -0.06 (95% CI, -0.11 to -0.01) favoring fewer pulmonary complications with RAMIE. There was no evidence of differences between RAMIE and VAMIE in LN harvest (mean difference [MD], -1.1 LN; 95% CI, -2.45 to 0.25 LNs), anastomotic leak (RD, 0.0; 95% CI, -0.03 to 0.03), EBL (MD, -6.25 mL; 95% CI, -18.26 to 5.77 mL), RLN palsy (RD, 0.01; 95% CI, -0.08 to 0.10), total complications (RD, 0.05; 95% CI, -0.01 to 0.11), or 90-day mortality (RD, -0.01; 95% CI, -0.02 to 0.0). There was low certainty of evidence that RAMIE was associated with a longer disease-free survival compared with VAMIE. For OE comparisons (data not pooled), RAMIE was associated with a longer operative time, decreased EBL, and less pulmonary and total complications.Conclusions and relevanceIn this study, RAMIE had similar outcomes as VAMIE but was associated with fewer pulmonary complications compared with VAMIE and OE. Studies on long-term functional and cancer outcomes are needed.

Project description:BACKGROUND:Currently, there are three main surgical approaches for resectable esophageal cancer: open transthoracic esophagectomy (OTE), conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot-assisted esophagectomy (RAE). Previous studies had demonstrated the better short-term outcomes in MIE or RAE when compared to OTE, respectively. However, to date, no prospective study was designed to compare these two minimally invasive approaches (MIE and RAE). The primary objective of this study is to compare the outcomes on survival, safety and efficacy, quality of life between RAE and MIE in the treatment for resectable esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC). METHODS:This study is designed as a multicenter, prospective, randomized, non-inferiority phase III clinical trial, investigating the safety and efficacy of RAE compared with MIE in the treatment of resectable ESCC. Eligible patients are randomly assigned to either RAE (n?=?180) or MIE (n?=?180) group. The follow-up visits will be scheduled at 3, 6, 9, and 12?months in the first two years, and then every 6?months until the end of the study. During the follow-up period, clinical data and quality of life questionnaires will be examined. The primary endpoint is the 5-year overall survival (OS). The secondary endpoints are 3-year OS, 5-year disease-free survival (DFS), short-term outcomes as well as quality of life. DISCUSSION:This is the first prospectively randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAE with MIE as surgical treatment for resectable ESCC. According to our hypothesis, RAE will result in at least similar oncologic outcomes and long-term quality of life, but with a shorter operation time, lower percentage of perioperative complications, lower blood loss, and shorter hospital stay when compared with MIE. This study started in July 2017. Follow-up will terminate after 5?years from the time when the last patient was enrolled. TRIAL REGISTRATION:ClinicalTrial.gov: NCT03094351 (March 29, 2017). The trial was prospectively registered.

Project description:BackgroundFor patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma or cancer of the gastroesophageal junction, radical esophagectomy with 2-field lymphadenectomy is the cornerstone of the multimodality treatment with curative intent. Both conventional minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) and robot assisted minimally invasive esophagectomy (RAMIE) were shown to be superior compared to open transthoracic esophagectomy considering postoperative complications. However, no randomized comparison exists between MIE and RAMIE in the Western World for patients with esophageal adenocarcinoma.MethodsThis is an investigator-initiated and investigator-driven multicenter randomized controlled parallel-group superiority trial. All adult patients (age ≥ 18 and ≤ 90 years) with histologically proven, surgically resectable (cT1-4a, N0-3, M0) esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction and with European Clinical Oncology Group performance status 0, 1 or 2 will be assessed for eligibility and included after obtaining informed consent. Patients (n = 218) with resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma of the intrathoracic esophagus or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction are randomized to either RAMIE (n = 109) or MIE (n = 109). The primary outcome of this study is the total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes specified per lymph node station.ConclusionThis is the first randomized controlled trial designed to compare RAMIE to MIE as surgical treatment for resectable esophageal adenocarcinoma or adenocarcinoma of the gastroesophageal junction in the Western World. The hypothesis of the proposed study is that RAMIE will result in a higher abdominal and mediastinal lymph node yield specified per station compared to conventional MIE. Short-term results and the primary endpoint (total number of resected abdominal and mediastinal lymph nodes per lymph node station) will be analyzed and published after discharge of the last randomized patient within this trial.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04306458 . Registered 13th March 2020, https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT04306458; Date of first enrolment 18.01.2021; Target sample size 218; Recruitment status: Recruiting; Protocol version 2; Issue date 10.03.2020; Rev. 02.02.2021; Authors ET, PCvdS, PPG.

Project description:BackgroundWhether extended robot-assisted esophagectomy with thoracic duct resection (RAE-TDR) has a favorable effect on esophageal cancer patients is not yet known. This study sought to analyze the safety and efficiency of RAE-TDR.MethodsFrom January 2019 to July 2020, 73 thoracic duct (TD)-resected and 127 TD-preserved consecutive patients who received standard RAE McKeown surgery were enrolled in this study. The perioperative-related indicators of recurrence-free survival (RFS) and overall survival (OS) at 1-year were compared between the 2 groups.ResultsIn relation to morbidity, the Clavien-Dindo (CD) classifications for grades greater than or equal to II-III were similar between the 2 groups (P>0.05). The number of retrieved total lymph nodes (LNs) and mediastinal nodes were significantly higher in the TD-resected group than in the TD-preserved group (total lymph nodes: 29.0±11.1 vs. 25.1±8.5, P=0.006; mediastinal nodes: 19.5±8.0 vs. 16.1±5.5, P=0.002). Additionally, more metastatic TD-related LNs were harvested in cT3-4 patients (2.3±3.7 vs. 1.7±2.8; P=0.21). The rates of LN recurrence and local recurrence were similar between the 2 groups (LN recurrence: 6.8% vs. 7.1%, P>0.99; local recurrence: 1.4% vs. 2.4%, P>0.99). The OS and RFS at 1-year were equivalent regardless of the TD procedure at each stage (P>0.05). However, the rate of hematogenous metastasis in the TD-resected group was significantly elevated (17.8% vs. 7.9%; P=0.034).ConclusionsRAE-TDR may help to improve total and metastatic LN harvest, especially in patients with advanced esophageal squamous cell carcinoma (ESCC) without increasing the intra- and post-operative adverse events. However, RAE-TDR did not lead to a decrease in the local recurrence rate within the short-term follow-up period. Whether the increase in distant metastasis rate in the TD-resected group was associated with relevant immune system damage is unclear. Thus, nonselective RAE-TDR is not routinely recommended.

Dataset Information

Plasma pro-atrial natriuretic peptide to estimate fluid balance during open and robot-assisted esophagectomy: a prospective observational study.

Publications

Plasma pro-atrial natriuretic peptide to estimate fluid balance during open and robot-assisted esophagectomy: a prospective observational study.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets