Sodium Thiosulfate Reduces Acute Kidney Injury in Patients Undergoing Cytoreductive Surgery Plus Hyperthermic Intraperitoneal Chemotherapy with Cisplatin: A Single-Center Observational Study.

BACKGROUND: Cytoreductive surgery (CRS) in combination with hyperthermic intraperitoneal chemotherapy (HIPEC) represents a multimodal treatment concept for patients with peritoneal surface malignancies. The use of intraperitoneal cisplatin (CDDP) is associated with a risk of acute kidney injury (AKI). The aim of this study is to evaluate the protective effect of perioperative sodium thiosulfate (STS) administration on kidney function in patients undergoing CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC. PATIENTS AND METHODS: We retrospectively analyzed clinical data of all patients who underwent CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC at our hospital between March 2017 and August 2020. Patients were stratified according to the use of sodium thiosulfate (STS vs. no STS). We compared kidney function and clinical outcome parameters between both groups and determined risk factors for postoperative AKI on univariate and multivariate analysis. AKI was classified according to acute kidney injury network (AKIN) criteria. RESULTS: Of 238 patients who underwent CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC, 46 patients received STS and 192 patients did not. There were no significant differences in baseline characteristics. In patients who received STS, a lower incidence (6.5% vs. 30.7%; p = 0.001) and severity of AKI (p = 0.009) were observed. On multivariate analysis, the use of STS (OR 0.089, p = 0.001) remained an independent kidney-protective factor, while arterial hypertension (OR 5.283, p < 0.001) and elevated preoperative urea serum level (OR 5.278, p = 0.032) were predictors for postoperative AKI. CONCLUSIONS: The present data suggest that STS protects patients from AKI caused by CRS and CDDP-based HIPEC. Further prospective studies are needed to validate the benefit of STS among kidney-protective strategies.

Intraoperative Computed Tomography Versus 3D C-Arm Imaging for Navigated Spinal Instrumentation.

STUDY DESIGN: A prospective case-series study and a retrospective analysis of historical patients for comparison of data. OBJECTIVE: To compare accuracy and limitations of intraoperative computed tomography (iCT)- versus 3D C-arm-based spinal navigation for posterior pedicle screw implantation. SUMMARY OF BACKGROUND DATA: Despite the higher accuracy of navigated compared to non-navigated pedicle screw implantation, it remains a matter of debate whether the use of iCT imaging may further benefit navigated spinal instrumentation compared to more commonly used isocentric 3D C-arm imaging. METHODS: Between 2013 and 2016, 1527 pedicle screws were implanted in 260 patients with iCT (1219 screws) or 3D C-arm (308 screws)-based spinal navigation. Screw positioning was intraoperatively assessed by a second iCT or 3D C-arm (intraoperative accuracy). If necessary, immediate intraoperative screw revision was performed. Thereafter, a third iCT or 3D C-arm scan was performed to confirm repositioning (final accuracy). Clinical and patient data, intraoperative screw assessability, and accuracy rates were retrospectively reviewed and analyzed by an independent observer. RESULTS: Intraoperative CT permitted immediate intraoperative assessment of each implanted screw. In contrast, 39 of the screws visualized with 3D C-arm imaging were intraoperatively not clearly assessable. Regarding the overall precision, iCT and 3D C-arm navigation yielded a comparable intraoperative accuracy (iCT 94.7% vs 3D C-arm 89.4%) and immediate correction of misplaced screws was feasible with both modalities (final accuracy: iCT 95.4% vs 3D C-arm 91.6%). Regarding the region specific performance, however, iCT-based navigation yielded significantly higher final accuracy rates in the cervical (iCT 99.5% vs 3D C-arm 88.9%, P < 0.01) and thoracic (iCT 97.7% vs 3D C-arm 88.8%, P < 0.001) regions. CONCLUSION: Both iCT and 3D C-arm-based spinal navigation provides high pedicle screw accuracy rates. Immediate screw assessability and placement accuracy in the cervical-thoracic spine, however, appear to be limited with intraoperative 3D C-arm imaging alone. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: 3.

Rocuronium reversed by sugammadex versus mivacurium during high-risk eye surgery: an institutional anaesthetic practice evaluation.

OBJECTIVE: This institutional anaesthetic practice evaluation compared patient safety with respect to residual neuromuscular blockade (NMB) at the time of tracheal extubation in patients undergoing high-risk eye surgery. METHODS: Two muscle relaxation regimens were compared: rocuronium administered via intravenous (i.v.) bolus dosing combined with reversal through sugammadex at end of surgery (group R/S; 17 patients); mivacurium administered via continuous i.v. infusion without antagonization (group M; 22 patients). Train-of-four (TOF) monitoring determined the depth of NMB. RESULTS: The TOF ratio at the time of tracheal extubation was greater in group R/S (median 1.03) than in group M (median 0.62). Time from end of surgery to tracheal extubation was not significantly different. The surgeons were 100% satisfied with the working conditions provided under both relaxation regimens. CONCLUSIONS: Residual postoperative curarization at the time of extubation was frequently observed in group M, whereas there was complete recovery in group R/S. Reversal of NMB by sugammadex provides an additional safety dimension to patient care and should thus be considered especially for those at risk of airway complications or aspiration, in addition to frail patients.