Paravertebral catheter versus EPidural analgesia in Minimally invasive Esophageal resectioN: a randomized controlled multicenter trial (PEPMEN trial).

BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural analgesia is the standard postoperative pain management strategy in esophageal cancer surgery. However, paravertebral block analgesia may achieve comparable pain control while inducing less side effects, which may be beneficial for postoperative recovery. This study primarily aims to compare the postoperative quality of recovery between paravertebral catheter versus thoracic epidural analgesia in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy. METHODS: This study represents a randomized controlled superiority trial. A total of 192 patients will be randomized in 4 Dutch high-volume centers for esophageal cancer surgery. Patients are eligible for inclusion if they are at least 18 years old, able to provide written informed consent and complete questionnaires in Dutch, scheduled to undergo minimally invasive esophagectomy with two-field lymphadenectomy and an intrathoracic anastomosis, and have no contra-indications to either epidural or paravertebral analgesia. The primary outcome is the quality of postoperative recovery, as measured by the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire on the morning of postoperative day 3. Secondary outcomes include the QoR-40 questionnaire score Area Under the Curve on postoperative days 1-3, the integrated pain and systemic opioid score and patient satisfaction and pain experience according to the International Pain Outcomes (IPO) questionnaire, and cost-effectiveness. Furthermore, the groups will be compared regarding the need for additional rescue medication on postoperative days 0-3, technical failure of the pain treatment, duration of anesthesia, duration of surgery, total postoperative fluid administration day 0-3, postoperative vasopressor and inotrope use, length of urinary catheter use, length of hospital stay, postoperative complications, chronic pain at six months after surgery, and other adverse effects. DISCUSSION: In this study, it is hypothesized that paravertebral analgesia achieves comparable pain control while causing less side-effects such as hypotension when compared to epidural analgesia, leading to shorter postoperative length of stay on a monitored ward and superior quality of recovery. If this hypothesis is confirmed, the results of this study can be used to update the relevant guidelines on postoperative pain management for patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Netherlands Trial Registry, NL8037. Registered 19 September 2019.

A structured training program for minimally invasive esophagectomy for esophageal cancer- a Delphi consensus study in Europe.

Evidence suggests that structured training programs for laparoscopic procedures can ensure a safe standard of skill acquisition prior to independent practice. Although minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIO) is technically demanding, no consensus on requirements for training for the MIO procedure exists. The aim of this study is to determine essential steps required for a structured training program in MIO using the Delphi consensus methodology. Eighteen MIO experts from 13 European hospitals were asked to participate in this study. The consensus process consisted of two structured meetings with the expert panel, and two Delphi questionnaire rounds. A list of items required for training MIO were constructed for three key domains of MIO, including (1) requisite criteria for units wishing to be trained and (2) to proctor MIO, and (3) a framework of a MIO training program. Items were rated by the experts on a scale 1-5, where 1 signified 'not important' and 5 represented 'very important.' Consensus for each domain was defined as achieving Cronbach alpha ≥0.70. Items were considered as fundamental when ≥75% of experts rated it important (4) or very important (5). Both Delphi rounds were completed by 16 (89%) of the 18 invited experts, with a median experience of 18 years with minimally invasive surgery. Consensus was achieved for all three key domains. Following two rounds of a 107-item questionnaire, 50 items were rated as essential for training MIO. A consensus among European MIO experts on essential items required for training MIO is presented. The identified items can serve as directive principles and core standards for creating a comprehensive training program for MIO.

Postoperative pain management after esophagectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis.

Effective pain management after esophagectomy is essential for patient comfort, early recovery, low surgical morbidity, and short hospitalization. This systematic review and meta-analysis aims to determine the best pain management modality focusing on the balance between benefits and risks. Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane library were systematically searched to identify all studies investigating different pain management modalities after esophagectomy in relation to primary outcomes (postoperative pain scores at 24 and 48 hours, technical failure, and opioid consumption), and secondary outcomes (pulmonary complications, nausea and vomiting, hypotension, urinary retention, and length of hospital stay). Ten studies investigating systemic, epidural, intrathecal, intrapleural and paravertebral analgesia involving 891 patients following esophagectomy were included. No significant differences were found in postoperative pain scores between systemic and epidural analgesia at 24 (mean difference (MD) 0.89; 95% confidence interval (CI) -0.47-2.24) and 48 hours (MD 0.15; 95%CI -0.60-0.91), nor described for systemic and other regional analgesia. Also, no significant differences in pulmonary complication rates were identified between systemic and epidural analgesia (relative risk (RR) 1.69; 95%CI 0.86-3.29), or between systemic and paravertebral analgesia (RR 1.49; 95%CI 0.31-7.12). Technical failure ranged from 17% to 22% for epidural analgesia. Sample sizes were too small to draw inferences on opioid consumption, the risk of nausea and vomiting, hypotension, urinary retention, and length of hospital stay when comparing the different pain management modalities including systemic, epidural, intrathecal, intrapleural, and paravertebral analgesia. This systematic review and meta-analysis shows no differences in postoperative pain scores or pulmonary complications after esophagectomy between systemic and epidural analgesia, and between systemic and paravertebral analgesia. Further randomized controlled trails are warranted to determine the optimal pain management modality after esophagectomy.