Subpleural multilevel intercostal continuous analgesia after thoracoscopic pulmonary resection: a pilot study.

BACKGROUND: Sufficient pain control and rapid mobilisation after VATS are important to enhance recovery and prevent complications. Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is the gold standard, but failure rates of 9-30% have been described. In addition, TEA reduces patient mobilisation and bladder function. Subpleural continuous analgesia (SCA) is a regional analgesic technique that is placed under direct thoracoscopic vision and is not associated with the mentioned disadvantages of TEA. The objective of this study was to assess surgical feasibility, pain control and patient satisfaction of SCA. METHODS: Observational pilot study in patients who underwent VATS pulmonary resection and received SCA (n = 23). Pain scores (numeric rating scale 0-10) and patient satisfaction (5-point Likert scale) were collected on postoperative day (POD) 0-3. Secondary outcomes were the period of urinary catheter use and period to full mobilisation. RESULTS: Placement of the subpleural catheter took an average of 11 min (SD 5) and was successful in all patients. Pain scores on POD 0-3 were 1.2 (SD 1.2), 2.0 (SD 1.9), 1.7 (SD 1.5) and 1.2 (SD 1.1) respectively. On POD 0-3 at least 79% of patients were satisfied or very satisfied on pain relief and mobilisation. The duration of subpleural continuous analgesia was 4 days (IQR 3-5, range 2-11). Urinary catheters were used zero days (IQR 0-1, range 0-6) and full mobilisation was achieved on POD 2 (IQR 1-2, range 1-6). CONCLUSION: Subpleural continuous analgesia in VATS pulmonary resection is feasible and provides adequate pain control and good patient satisfaction. TRIAL REGISTRATION: This pilot study was not registered in a trial register.

A systematic review and meta-analysis of the influence of peritoneal dialysis catheter type on complication rate and catheter survival.

Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. There are several configurations of PD catheter design that may impact catheter function, such as the shape of the intraperitoneal segment, the number of cuffs, and the subcutaneous configuration. This review and meta-analysis was carried out to determine whether there is a clinical advantage for one of the catheter types or configurations. Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2012, issue 10). The methodology was in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for Interventional Systematic Reviews and written based on the PRISMA statement. The initial search yielded 682 hits from which 13 randomized controlled trials were identified. Outcomes of interest were as follows: catheter survival, drainage dysfunction, migration, leakage, exit-site infections, peritonitis, and catheter removal. Comparing straight vs. swan neck and single vs. double-cuffed catheters, no differences were found when results were pooled. Comparison of straight vs. coiled-tip catheters demonstrated that survival was significantly different in favor of straight catheters (hazard ratio 2.05; confidence interval 1.10-3.79, P=0.02). For surgically inserted catheters, the removal rate and survival at 1 year after insertion were significantly in favor of straight catheters. Our meta-analysis clearly demonstrates benefits for catheters with a straight intraperitoneal segment.

A randomized comparison between records made with an anesthesia information management system and by hand, and evaluation of the Hawthorne effect.

PURPOSE: Anesthesia information management system (AIMS) technology is designed to facilitate high-quality anesthetic recordkeeping. We examined the hypothesis that no difference exists between AIMS and handwritten anesthetic records in regard to the completeness of important information contained as text data. We also investigated the effect of observational research on the completeness of anesthesiologists' recordkeeping. METHODS: As part of a larger randomized controlled trial, participants were randomized to produce 400 anesthetic records, either handwritten (n = 200) or using an AIMS (n = 200). Records were assessed against a 32-item checklist modified from a clinical guideline. Intravenous agent and bolus recordings were quantified, and data were compared between handwritten and AIMS records. Records produced with intensive research observation during the initial phase of the study (n = 200) were compared with records produced with reduced intensity observation during the final phase of the study (n = 200). RESULTS: The AIMS records were more complete than the handwritten records (mean difference 7.1%; 95% confidence interval [CI] 5.6 to 8.6%; P < 0.0001), with higher completion rates for six individual items on the checklist (P < 0.0001). Drug annotation data were equal between arms. The records completed early in the study, during a period of more intense observation, were more thorough than subsequent records (87.3% vs 81.6%, respectively; mean difference 5.7%; 95% CI 4.2 to 7.3%; P < 0.0001). CONCLUSIONS: The AIMS records were more complete than the handwritten records for 32 predefined items. The potential of observational research to influence professional behaviour in an anesthetic context was confirmed. This trial was registered at the Australian New Zealand Clinical Trials Registry No 12608000068369.

Localized encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis constricting the terminal ileum--an unusual appearance requiring surgical intervention.

BACKGROUND: Encapsulating peritoneal sclerosis (EPS) is a rare complication of peritoneal dialysis (PD). It is characterized by encapsulation of the bowel, causing symptoms of intestinal obstruction. Exclusive involvement of parts of the bowel may occur and may be more common than previously thought. Our main objective was to investigate and report on patients with localized EPS. METHODS: Between July 2002 and December 2011, 9 of 17 EPS patients were referred to our department of surgery for a diagnostic laparotomy. Three of the 9 cases showed localized encapsulation of the small bowel and were selected for the purpose of this study. RESULTS: All 3 patients presented with an acute inflammatory state and symptoms of bowel obstruction. In 2 patients, EPS became clinically overt after kidney transplantation; the third patient was diagnosed while on hemodialysis. All shared a history of PD ranging from 31 to 101 months. In none of the patients was radiologic examination conclusive, although 2 showed peritoneal thickening and ascites. Each patient underwent laparotomy, confirming EPS. In all cases, a thickened peritoneal membrane became apparent, predominantly covering the ileocecal region of the intestine. In addition, a constrictive membrane at the level of the terminal ileum was noted. In 2 cases, the patients underwent enterolysis and dissection of the constricting fibrotic peritoneal membrane (peritonectomy) without bowel resection. The 3rd patient was managed with parenteral nutrition and tamoxifen. The postoperative course in 1 patient was complicated by infected ascites that resolved with antibiotic treatment. Eventually, all patients were doing well, with adequate oral intake and without the need for repeat surgery. CONCLUSIONS: Localized EPS may be more common than previously thought. It has a predilection for the level of the terminal ileum. We believe that an elective diagnostic laparotomy should be considered early, because this procedure offers both diagnostic opportunities and therapeutic options. Localized EPS cases may benefit most from enterolysis and peritonectomy.

Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis is an effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. Key to successful peritoneal dialysis is a well-functioning catheter. The different insertion techniques may be of great importance. Mostly, the standard operative approach is the open technique; however, laparoscopic insertion is increasingly popular. Catheter malfunction is reported up to 35% for the open technique and up to 13% for the laparoscopic technique. However, evidence is lacking to definitely conclude that the laparoscopic approach is to be preferred. This review and meta-analysis was carried out to investigate if one of the techniques is superior to the other. METHODS: Comprehensive searches were conducted in MEDLINE, Embase and CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library 2012, issue 10). Reference lists were searched manually. The methodology was in accordance with the Cochrane Handbook for interventional systematic reviews, and written based on the PRISMA-statement. RESULTS: Three randomized controlled trials and eight cohort studies were identified. Nine postoperative outcome measures were meta-analyzed; of these, seven were not different between operation techniques. Based on the meta-analysis, the proportion of migrating catheters was lower (odds ratio (OR) 0.21, confidence interval (CI) 0.07 to 0.63; P = 0.006), and the one-year catheter survival was higher in the laparoscopic group (OR 3.93, CI 1.80 to 8.57; P = 0.0006). CONCLUSIONS: Based on these results there is some evidence in favour of the laparoscopic insertion technique for having a higher one-year catheter survival and less migration, which would be clinically relevant.

Systematic review and meta-analysis of the relation between body mass index and short-term donor outcome of laparoscopic donor nephrectomy.

In this era of organ donor shortage, live kidney donation has been proven to increase the donor pool; however, it is extremely important to make careful decisions in the selection of possible live donors. A body mass index (BMI) above 35 is generally considered as a relative contraindication for donation. To determine whether this is justified, a systematic review and meta-analysis were carried out to compare perioperative outcome of live donor nephrectomy between donors with high and low BMI. A comprehensive literature search was performed in MEDLINE, Embase, and CENTRAL (the Cochrane Library). All aspects of the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses statement were followed. Of 14 studies reviewed, eight perioperative donor outcome measures were meta-analyzed, and, of these, five were not different between BMI categories. Three found significant differences in favor of low BMI (29.9 and less) donors with significant mean differences in operation duration (16.9 min (confidence interval (CI) 9.1-24.8)), mean difference in rise in serum creatinine (0.05 mg/dl (CI 0.01-0.09)), and risk ratio for conversion (1.69 (CI 1.12-2.56)). Thus, a high body mass index (BMI) alone is no contraindication for live kidney donation regarding short-term outcome.

Laparoscopic versus open peritoneal dialysis catheter insertion, the LOCI-trial: a study protocol.

BACKGROUND: Peritoneal dialysis (PD) is an effective treatment for end-stage renal disease. It allows patients more freedom to perform daily activities compared to haemodialysis. Key to successful PD is the presence of a well-functioning dialysis catheter. Several complications, such as in- and outflow obstruction, peritonitis, exit-site infections, leakage and migration, can lead to catheter removal and loss of peritoneal access. Currently, different surgical techniques are in practice for PD-catheter placement. The type of insertion technique used may greatly influence the occurrence of complications. In the literature, up to 35% catheter failure has been described when using the open technique and only 13% for the laparoscopic technique. However, a well-designed randomized controlled trial is lacking. METHODS/DESIGN: The LOCI-trial is a multi-center randomized controlled, single-blind trial (pilot). The study compares the laparoscopic with the open technique for PD catheter insertion. The primary objective is to determine the optimum placement technique in order to minimize the incidence of catheter malfunction at 6 weeks postoperatively. Secondary objectives are to determine the best approach to optimize catheter function and to study the quality of life at 6 months postoperatively comparing the two operative techniques. DISCUSSION: This study will generate evidence on any benefits of laparoscopic versus open PD catheter insertion. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Dutch Trial Register NTR2878.