ROUTINE USE OF SUGAMMADEX DOES NOT SHORTEN PACU LENGTH OF STAY: A PROSPECTIVE DOUBLE-BLINDED RANDOMIZED CONTROLLED TRIAL.

BACKGROUND: The reversal agent sugammadex has been shown to be more efficacious at reversal from neuromuscular blockade (NMB) induced by the aminosteroid class of non-depolarizing muscle relaxants than the traditionally used medication neostigmine. However, whether these differences lead to significantly faster PACU discharge readiness remains unknown. Given the increased acquisition cost of sugammadex as compared to neostigmine we compared these two reversal agents in our surgical population to determine if its pharmacokinetic superiority warranted a change in current practice. METHODS: We conducted a single-center randomized patient and assessor blinded clinical trial. A total of 201 patients presenting for surgery requiring NMB with an estimated duration of ≤ 6 hours were included in the intention-to-treat (ITT) analysis. The primary outcome was time from reversal agent administration to PACU discharge readiness, measured by either the institutional discharge scoring tool or bedside clinical assessment by a PACU physician or advanced practice provider. Secondary outcomes included subjective assessment of recovery by the patient (pain, visual changes, speaking difficulty, swallowing difficulty, PONV, anxiety) and a simple strength assessment. RESULTS: Median time from reversal administration to PACU discharge readiness was 3.59 hours (IQR 2.49-5.09) in the neostigmine group and 3.62 hours (IQR 2.70-5.87) in the sugammadex group. Patients who received sugammadex had 8% longer reversal to PACU discharge times (exp(estimate) 1.08, 95% CI [0.87-1.34], p=0.499). Patients age 70 or older had 28% longer reversal to PACU discharge times (exp(estimate) of 1.28, 95% CI [0.91-1.80], P=0.158). In the a modified ITT analysis, sugammadex patients were estimated to be in PACU 13% longer than neostigmine arm patients (exp(estimate) 1.13, 95% CI [0.91-1.40], p=0.265) and patients older than or equal to 70 years 31% longer than patients less than 70 years old (exp(estimate) 1.31, 95% CI [0.93-1.84], p=0.121). Treatment arm was not associated with any of the secondary outcomes. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in time to readiness to discharge from PACU, and there were no subjective or objective clinically relevant differences in recovery from neuromuscular blockade between the groups. Findings of this study support continued use of either agent at the anesthesiologist's discretion.

Intraoperative fluid management and complications following pancreatectomy.

BACKGROUND: Considerable debate exists as to appropriate perioperative fluid management. Data from several studies suggest that the amount of fluid administered perioperatively influences surgical outcome. Pancreatic resection is a major procedure in which complications are common. We examined 1,030 sequential patients who had undergone pancreatic resection at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center. We documented the prevalence and nature of their complications, and then correlated complications to intraoperative fluid administration. METHODS: We retrospectively examined 1,030 pancreatic resections performed at Memorial Sloan-Kettering Cancer Center between May 2004 and December 2009 from our pancreatic database. Intraoperative administration of colloid and crystalloid was obtained from anesthesia records, and complication data from our institutional database. RESULTS: The overall in-hospital mortality was 1.7%. Operative mortality was due predominantly to intraabdominal infection. Sixty percent of the mortality resulted from intraabdominal complications related to the procedure. We did not demonstrate a clinically significant relationship between intraoperative fluid administration and complications, although minor statistical significance was suggested. CONCLUSIONS: In this retrospective review of intraoperative fluid administration we were not able to demonstrate a clinically significant association between postoperative complications and intraoperative crystalloid and colloid fluid administration. A randomized controlled trial has been initiated to address this question.

Antifibrinolytic therapy and perioperative blood loss in cancer patients undergoing major orthopedic surgery.

BACKGROUND: Aprotinin has been reported to reduce blood loss and transfusion requirements in patients having major orthopedic operations. Data on whether epsilon amino-caproic acid (EACA) is effective in this population are sparse. METHODS: Sixty-nine adults with malignancy scheduled for either pelvic, extremity or spine surgery during general anesthesia entered this randomized, double-blind, placebo-controlled trial, and received either intravenous aprotinin (n = 23), bolus of 2 x 10(6) kallikrein inactivator units (KIU), followed by an infusion of 5 x 10(5) KIU/h, or EACA (n = 22), bolus of 150 mg/kg, followed by a 15 mg/kg/h infusion or saline placebo (n = 24) during surgery. Our goal was to determine whether prophylactic EACA or aprotinin therapy would reduce perioperative blood loss (intraoperative + first 48h) >30% when compared to placebo. RESULTS: The mean age of the study population was 52 +/- 17 yr. The groups did not differ in age, duration of surgery, perioperative blood loss or number of packed erythrocyte units transfused. When compared to the placebo group, the two treated groups had a significantly lower D-Dimer level immediately after surgery, P < 0.01. CONCLUSIONS: Under the conditions of this study, we were unable to find a clinical benefit to using aprotinin or EACA to reduce perioperative blood loss or transfusion requirements during major orthopedic surgery in cancer patients.