Dataset Information

Effect of intraoperative paravertebral or intravenous lidocaine versus control during lung resection surgery on postoperative complications: A randomized controlled trial.

ABSTRACT: BACKGROUND:Use of minimally invasive surgical techniques for lung resection surgery (LRS), such as video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS), has increased in recent years. However, there is little information about the best anesthetic technique in this context. This surgical approach is associated with a lower intensity of postoperative pain, and its use has been proposed in programs for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). This study compares the severity of postoperative complications in patients undergoing LRS who have received lidocaine intraoperatively either intravenously or via paravertebral administration versus saline. METHODS/DESIGN:We will conduct a single-center randomized controlled trial involving 153 patients undergoing LRS through a thoracoscopic approach. The patients will be randomly assigned to one of the following study groups: intravenous lidocaine with more paravertebral thoracic (PVT) saline, PVT lidocaine with more intravenous saline, or intravenous remifentanil with more PVT saline. The primary outcome will be the comparison of the postoperative course through Clavien-Dindo classification. Furthermore, we will compare the perioperative pulmonary and systemic inflammatory response by monitoring biomarkers in the bronchoalveolar lavage fluid and blood, as well as postoperative analgesic consumption between the three groups of patients. We will use an ANOVA to compare quantitative variables and a chi-squared test to compare qualitative variables. DISCUSSION:The development of less invasive surgical techniques means that anesthesiologists must adapt their perioperative management protocols and look for anesthetic techniques that provide good analgesic quality and allow rapid rehabilitation of the patient, as proposed in the ERAS protocols. The administration of a continuous infusion of intravenous lidocaine has proven to be useful and safe for the management of other types of surgery, as demonstrated in colorectal cancer. We want to know whether the continuous administration of lidocaine by a paravertebral route can be substituted with the intravenous administration of this local anesthetic in a safe and effective way while avoiding the risks inherent in the use of regional anesthetic techniques. In this way, this technique could be used in a safe and effective way in ERAS programs for pulmonary resection. TRIAL REGISTRATION:EudraCT, 2016-004271-52; ClinicalTrials.gov, NCT03905837 . Protocol number IGGFGG-2016 version 4.0, 27th April 2017.

SUBMITTER: De la Gala F

PROVIDER: S-EPMC6836654 | biostudies-literature | 2019 Nov

REPOSITORIES: biostudies-literature

ACCESS DATA

Publications

Effect of intraoperative paravertebral or intravenous lidocaine versus control during lung resection surgery on postoperative complications: A randomized controlled trial.

De la Gala Francisco F Piñeiro Patricia P Reyes Almudena A Simón Carlos C Vara Elena E Rancan Lisa L Huerta Luis Javier LJ Gonzalez Guillermo G Benito Carmen C Muñoz Marta M Grande Pilar P Paredes Sergio D SD Aznar Pablo Tomas PT Perez Alvaro A Martinez David D Higuero Fernando F Sanz David D De Miguel Juan Pedro JP Cruz Patricia P Olmedilla Luis L Lopez Gil Elena E Duque Patricia P Sanchez-Pedrosa Guillermo G Valle Mayte M Garutti Ignacio I

Trials 20191106 1

<h4>Background</h4>Use of minimally invasive surgical techniques for lung resection surgery (LRS), such as video-assisted thoracoscopy (VATS), has increased in recent years. However, there is little information about the best anesthetic technique in this context. This surgical approach is associated with a lower intensity of postoperative pain, and its use has been proposed in programs for enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS). This study compares the severity of postoperative complications in ...[more]

PMID: 31694684

Similar Datasets

Project description:BackgroundCompared with historic ventilation strategies, modern lung-protective ventilation includes lower tidal volumes (VT), lower driving pressures, and application of positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP). The contributions of each component to an overall intraoperative protective ventilation strategy aimed at reducing postoperative pulmonary complications have neither been adequately resolved, nor comprehensively evaluated within an adult cardiac surgical population. The authors hypothesized that a bundled intraoperative protective ventilation strategy was independently associated with decreased odds of pulmonary complications after cardiac surgery.MethodsIn this observational cohort study, the authors reviewed nonemergent cardiac surgical procedures using cardiopulmonary bypass at a tertiary care academic medical center from 2006 to 2017. The authors tested associations between bundled or component intraoperative protective ventilation strategies (VT below 8 ml/kg ideal body weight, modified driving pressure [peak inspiratory pressure - PEEP] below 16 cm H2O, and PEEP greater than or equal to 5 cm H2O) and postoperative outcomes, adjusting for previously identified risk factors. The primary outcome was a composite pulmonary complication; secondary outcomes included individual pulmonary complications, postoperative mortality, as well as durations of mechanical ventilation, intensive care unit stay, and hospital stay.ResultsAmong 4,694 cases reviewed, 513 (10.9%) experienced pulmonary complications. After adjustment, an intraoperative lung-protective ventilation bundle was associated with decreased pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.42-0.75). Via a sensitivity analysis, modified driving pressure below 16 cm H2O was independently associated with decreased pulmonary complications (adjusted odds ratio, 0.51; 95% CI, 0.39-0.66), but VT below 8 ml/kg and PEEP greater than or equal to 5 cm H2O were not.ConclusionsThe authors identified an intraoperative lung-protective ventilation bundle as independently associated with pulmonary complications after cardiac surgery. The findings offer insight into components of protective ventilation associated with adverse outcomes and may serve as targets for future prospective interventional studies investigating the impact of specific protective ventilation strategies on postoperative outcomes after cardiac surgery.

Project description:Despite the laparoscopic approach becoming the standard in colorectal surgery, postoperative pain management for minimally invasive surgery is still mainly based on strategies that have been established for open surgical procedures. Patient-controlled epidural and intravenous analgesia are considered standard postoperative analgesia regimens in colorectal surgery. Epidural analgesia provides excellent analgesia, but is increasingly scrutinized in laparoscopic surgery since postoperative pain after the laparoscopic approach is significantly reduced. Moreover, epidural analgesia can be associated with numerous complications. Therefore, epidural analgesia is no longer recommended for the management of postoperative pain in laparoscopic colorectal surgery. Likewise, patient-controlled intravenous analgesia is subject to significant side effects. Given these important limitations of the traditional strategies for postoperative analgesia, effective and efficient alternatives in patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery are needed. Both the transversus abdominis plane block and systemically administered lidocaine have already been reported to effectively reduce pain after laparoscopic colorectal surgery. We hypothesize that the transversus abdominis plane block is superior to perioperative intravenous lidocaine.One hundred and twenty five patients undergoing laparoscopic colorectal surgery will be included in this prospective, randomized, double-blind controlled clinical trial. Patients will be randomly allocated to three different postoperative strategies: postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine (control group, n = 25), a transversus abdominis plane block with ropivacaine 0.375% at the end of surgery plus postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine (TAP group, n = 50), or perioperative intravenous lidocaine plus postoperative patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine (LIDO group, n = 50). As the primary outcome parameter, we will evaluate the opioid consumption during the first 24 postoperative hours. Secondary endpoints include the Numeric Rating Scale, time to return of intestinal function, time to mobilization, inflammatory response, incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, length of hospital stay and postoperative morbidity as assessed with the Clavien-Dindo classification.Recognizing the importance of a multimodal approach for perioperative pain management, we aim to investigate whether a transversus abdominis plane block delivers superior pain control in comparison to perioperative intravenous lidocaine and patient-controlled intravenous analgesia with morphine alone.EudraCT Identifier: 2014-001499-73; 31 July 2014.

Project description:BackgroundPostoperative complications after major gastrointestinal surgery are a major contributor to hospital costs. Thus, reducing postoperative complications is a key target for cost-containment strategies. We aimed to evaluate the relationship between postoperative complications and hospital costs following small bowel resection.MethodsPostoperative complications were recorded for 284 adult patients undergoing major small bowel resection surgery between January 2013 and June 2018. Complications were defined and graded according to the Clavien-Dindo classification system. In-hospital cost of index admission was calculated using an activity-based costing methodology; it was reported in US dollars at 2019 rates. Regression modeling was used to investigate the relationships among a priori selected perioperative variables, complications, and costs.FindingsThe overall complication prevalence was 81.6% (95% CI: 85.7-77.5). Most complications (69%) were minor, but 22.9% of patients developed a severe complication (Clavien-Dindo grades III or IV). The unadjusted median total hospital cost for patients with any complication was 70% higher than patients without complications (median [IQR] USD 19,659.64 [13,545.81-35,407.14] vs. 11,551.88 [8,849.46-15,329.87], P < 0.001). The development of 1, 2, 3, and ≥ 4 complications increased hospital costs by 11%, 41%, 50%, and 195%, respectively. Similarly, more severe complications incurred higher hospital costs (P < 0.001). After adjustments were made (for the Charlson Comorbidity Index, anemia, surgical urgency and technique, intraoperative fluid administration, blood transfusion, and hospital readmissions), a greater number and increased severity of complications were associated with a higher adjusted median hospital cost. Patients who experienced complications had an adjusted additional median cost of USD 4,187.10 (95% CI: 1,264.89-7,109.31, P = 0.005) compared to those without complications.ConclusionsPostoperative complications are a key target for cost-containment strategies. Our findings demonstrate a high prevalence of postoperative complications following small bowel resection surgery and quantify their associated increase in hospital costs.Trial registrationAustralian Clinical Trials Registration number: 12620000322932.

Project description:BackgroundThere is no consensus regarding the superiority of volatile or total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) in reducing the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications (PPCs) after lung resection surgery (LRS). Thus, the aim of this study was to investigate the different anesthetic regimens and the incidence of PPCs in patients who underwent LRS. We hypothesized that TIVA is associated with a lower incidence of PPCs than volatile anesthesia.MethodsThis was a retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent LRS at Taipei Veterans General Hospital between January 2016 and December 2020. The patients' charts were reviewed and data on patient characteristics, perioperative features, and postoperative outcomes were extracted and analyzed. The patients were categorized into TIVA or volatile anesthesia groups and their clinical data were compared. Propensity score matching was performed to reduce potential selection bias. The primary outcome was the incidence of PPCs, whereas the secondary outcomes were the incidences of other postoperative events, such as length of hospital stay (LOS) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).ResultsA total of 392 patients each were included in the TIVA and volatile anesthesia groups. There was no statistically significant difference in the incidence of PPCs between the volatile anesthesia and TIVA groups. The TIVA group had a shorter LOS (p < 0.001) and a lower incidence of PONV than the volatile anesthesia group (4.6% in the TIVA group vs. 8.2% in the volatile anesthesia group; p = 0.041). However, there were no significant differences in reintubation, 30-day readmission, and re-operation rates between the two groups.ConclusionsThere was no significant difference between the incidence of PPCs in patients who underwent LRS under TIVA and that in patients who underwent LRS under volatile anesthesia. However, TIVA had shorter LOS and lower incidence of PONV which may be a better choice for maintenance of anesthesia in patients undergoing LRS.

Dataset Information

Effect of intraoperative paravertebral or intravenous lidocaine versus control during lung resection surgery on postoperative complications: A randomized controlled trial.

Publications

Effect of intraoperative paravertebral or intravenous lidocaine versus control during lung resection surgery on postoperative complications: A randomized controlled trial.

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets