Active gas aspiration in reducing pain after laparoscopic cholecystectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials.

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain is a common issue following laparoscopic cholecystectomy. This meta-analysis aimed to determine if active gas aspiration is more effective than passive gas aspiration in reducing postoperative pain and analgesic requirements. METHODOLOGY: The study conducted a systematic search of various databases, including Embase, Medline, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) via Ovid. It also searched trial registries and reference lists of included studies, with no date restrictions but limited to English language, up to December 21, 2022. The study included all randomized clinical trials that had documented elective laparoscopic cholecystectomy procedure and reported at least one relevant outcome. Articles that included subdiaphragmatic drain, intraperitoneal normal saline infusion, or pulmonary recruitment maneuver were excluded from the analysis. Two reviewers independently and in duplicate assessed the eligibility of studies and extracted data. The study reported findings according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) guidelines. The risk of bias of the included trials was assessed using the Revised Cochrane Risk of Bias Assessment Tool. The study used a random-effects model to pool data. RESULTS: This meta-analysis included 5 randomized clinical trials with 367 participants and found that active gas aspiration resulted in significantly lower residual gas volume and total analgesia requirements compared to passive gas aspiration. Active gas aspiration also led to significantly lower shoulder pain scores at 24 h postoperatively. However, no significant differences were observed in hospital stay duration or abdominal pain scores. CONCLUSION: The study found that active gas aspiration can be effective in reducing postoperative shoulder pain and analgesic requirements after laparoscopic cholecystectomy, which has important implications for patient care and healthcare costs. Importantly, this intervention does not impose any additional time or financial burden. However, further research is needed to evaluate its impact on other laparoscopic procedures.

Influence of perioperative opioid-related patient education: A systematic review and meta-analysis.

OBJECTIVE: To determine the role of perioperative protocolized opioid-specific patient education on opioid consumption for individuals undergoing surgical procedures. METHODS: We searched Medline, Embase, and the Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) that compared protocolized perioperative opioid-specific patient education to the usual care for adult individuals undergoing surgical interventions. The standardized mean difference (SMD) was used to represent continuous outcomes while the risk ratio (RR) was used to represent dichotomous outcomes. RESULTS: In total, 15 RCTs that enrolled 2546 participants were deemed eligible. Protocolized opioid-specific patient education showed a significant reduction in postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain score compared to usual care (SMD= -0.15, 95% confidence interval [CI]: -0.28 to -0.03 and SMD= -0.17, 95% CI: -0.28 to -0.06, respectively). No significant difference was found between the protocolized opioid-specific patient education and the usual care in terms of the number of refill requests (RR=0.82, 95% CI: 0.50-1.34), patients with opioid leftovers (RR=0.92, 95% CI: 0.78-1.08), and patients taking opioids after hospital discharge. CONCLUSIONS: This meta-analysis demonstrated that protocolized opioid-specific patient education significantly reduces postoperative opioid consumption and pain score but has no influence on the number of opioid refill requests, opioid leftovers, and opioid use after hospital discharge. PRACTICE IMPLICATIONS: Healthcare professionals may offer opioid-related educational sessions for the surgical patients during the perioperative period through a video-based material that emphasizes the role of alternative analgesics to opioids, patients' expectations about the post-operative pain, and the potential side effects of opioid consumptions.

Risk Factors, Clinical Manifestations and Treatment Outcomes of Colon Cancer Patients in National Guard Hospital in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia.

Introduction Colon cancer is the third most common cancer worldwide and its incidence is increasing day by day. Provision of early management to cancer patients can lead to a good prognosis. Hence, we evaluated the risk factors, clinical manifestations and treatment outcomes for colon cancer patients in National Guard Health Affairs (NGHA), Jeddah, Saudi Arabia from January 2010 to December 2020 by comparing those results according to their age groups. Methods A retrospective cohort study was performed on 251 colon cancer patients who underwent a surgical procedure. The patients were divided into the following age groups: ≤ 50 (young), 51-60 and > 60 (old) years old. The demographic variables such as age and gender were collected. The results were classified into risk factors, clinical features and treatment outcomes. The comparison between different age groups was made using Chi-square or Fisher's exact test. The data was stored in Excel 2016 (Microsoft Corporation, Redmond, USA) and analyzed using SPSS (IBM Corp, Armonk, USA). Results The results revealed that most patients were males and the median age for diagnosis was 58 years old. There were 15.1% of patients with a positive family history. Moreover, the most common anatomical position was the left side of the colon in all age groups. Most patients had moderately differentiated colon cancer in the histopathological diagnosis. Laparotomy was the most common procedure done to patients in all age groups. There was no difference between all age groups and the aggressiveness of colon cancer. Young patients (≤ 50 years) had a higher percentage to have 5-year recurrence rate (42 % vs 19% vs 25%, p-value < 0.05) in comparison to patients between 51-60 years and old patients (> 60 years) respectively. However, there was no association between all age groups and 5-year mortality rate (22% vs 9% vs 19%, p-value = 0.171). Conclusion In comparison to old patients (> 60 years), young patients (≤ 50 years) have a more rate of recurrent colon cancer. In relation to all age groups, there were no differences in terms of the aggressive presentation or 5-year mortality rates. In addition, it appears that there were some differences between our study results and worldwide results. This may be because of occupational, cultural and/or genetic variations. Further studies with a higher number of patients and multicenter data collection are highly recommended.