Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block after robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomised clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Transversus abdominis plane (TAP) block is widely used as a part of pain management after various abdominal surgeries. We evaluated the effect of TAP block as an add-on to the routine analgesic regimen in patients undergoing robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy. METHODS: In a prospective blinded study, 70 patients scheduled for elective robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy were randomised to receive either TAP block (ropivacaine 0.5%, 20 ml on each side) or sham block (isotonic saline 0.9%, 20 ml on each side). All patients had patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) with morphine on top of paracetamol and ibuprofen or diclofenac. For the first 24 post-operative hours, we monitored PCA morphine consumption and pain scores with visual analogue scale (VAS) at rest and while coughing. Post-operative nausea and number of vomits (PONV) were recorded. RESULTS: Sixty-five patients completed the study, 34 receiving TAP block with ropivacaine and 31 receiving sham block with isotonic saline. We found no differences in median (interquartile range) morphine consumption the first 24 h between the TAP block group [17.5 mg (6.9-36.0 mg)] and the placebo group [17.5 mg (2.9-38.0 mg)] (95% confidence interval 10.0-22.6 mg, P = 0.648). No differences were found for VAS scores between the two groups, calculated as area under the curve/1-24 h, neither at rest (P = 0.112) nor while coughing (P = 0.345), or for PONV between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In our study, the TAP block combined with paracetamol and Nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAID) treatment, had no effect on morphine consumption, VAS pain scores, or frequency of nausea and vomiting after robot-assisted laparoscopic hysterectomy compared with paracetamol and NSAID alone.

Scrutinizing incident reporting in anaesthesia: why is an incident perceived as critical?

BACKGROUND: The purpose of the present study was to measure the incidence and type of incidents that occurred in relation to anaesthesia and surgery during a 1-year period in six Danish hospitals. Furthermore, we wanted to identify risk factors for incidents, as well as risk factors for incidents being deemed critical. METHODS: A four-page questionnaire describing patient data, type of anaesthesia and surgery, and occurrence of incidents was filled in for all anaesthesias in the period, and subsequently processed. The incident reporting form incorporated 59 predefined adverse events. The occurrence of one or more of these events described the incident. When the reporting anaesthetist deemed that an incident had harmed the patient, that incident was defined as critical. RESULTS: A total of 64,312 anaesthesias were reported, and in 7754 of them one or more incidents occurred. A total of 8510 incidents occurred, 4077 of them were solely related to the anaesthetic procedure, 3702 described events related to physiological alterations in the patient (physiological incidents). Three hundred and twenty-three of the incidents were deemed critical. High ASA score, high age, abdominal surgery, urgent surgery, and complex anaesthetic procedure were significant risk factors for physiological incidents and critical incidents. We could not identify a simple subset of adverse events that could adequately be used to describe the critical incidents. However, complex incidents, i.e. incidents involving more than one adverse event, were more likely to be deemed critical than simple incidents. CONCLUSION: The incidence of incidents was 12.1%, and the incidence of critical incidents was 0.5%. Incidents were more likely to be deemed critical in patients with an ASA score of III and above undergoing urgent surgery.

Qualitative analysis of unanticipated difficult airway management.

BACKGROUND: Unanticipated difficult airway management (DAM) is a major challenge for the anaesthesiologist and is associated with a risk of severe patient damage. We analysed 24 cases of unanticipated DAM for actual case management and anaesthesiologists knowledge, technical and non-technical skills. Anaesthesiologists' opinions, as well as environmental factors of importance for DAM proficiency, were also assessed. METHODS: Departments of Anaesthesiology in three Copenhagen University Hospitals participated in a prospective study of unanticipated DAM. Anaesthesiologists recorded the details of the cases on a data sheet. Qualitative data were collected in a semi-structured interview if the value of the Intubation Difficulty Score (IDS) was more than five, if the value of the visual analogue scale score for mask ventilation was more than five or in the case of a registered complication. Transcripts were theme analysed independently by two analysts. Data sheets and interviews were used in the final evaluation. RESULTS: All 24 cases concerned difficult tracheal intubation, and this was associated with difficult mask ventilation on four occasions. Management in three cases demonstrated strict adherence to a DAM practice guideline. Anaesthesiologists lacked standards for DAM. Inadequate knowledge, training and training facilities were documented. Sudden re-allocation of personnel and change of anaesthetic technique were potential risk factors for DAM. Insufficient airway assessment, insufficient patient information and registration of difficulties were demonstrated. Ethical issues were raised concerning the use of patients for skills practice. CONCLUSIONS: Both personal and system failures resulted in unanticipated DAM. There was insufficient knowledge of DAM and anaesthesiologists lacked DAM training. Standards for DAM and curricula for continuing education in DAM are needed.

Intubation conditions after rocuronium or succinylcholine for rapid sequence induction with alfentanil and propofol in the emergency patient.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Previous studies mainly conducted on elective patients recommend doses of 0.9-1.2 mg kg[-1] rocuronium to obtain comparable intubation conditions with succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg[-1] after 60 s during a rapid-sequence induction. We decided to compare the overall intubating conditions of standard doses of rocuronium 0.6 mg kg[-1] and succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg[-1] during a strict rapid-sequence induction regimen including propofol and alfentanil. METHODS: Male and female patients (ASA I-III) older than 17 yr scheduled for emergency abdominal or gynaecological surgery and with increased risk of pulmonary aspiration of gastric content were randomized to a rapid-sequence induction with succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg[-1] or rocuronium 0.6 mg kg[-1]. Patients with a predicted difficult airway were excluded. A senior anaesthesiologist 'blinded' for the randomization performed the intubation 60 s after injection of the neuromuscular blocker. Intubating conditions were evaluated according to an established guideline. Tracheal intubation not completed within 30 s was recorded as failed. RESULTS: 222 patients were randomized. Three patients had their operation cancelled and 10 did not fulfil the inclusion criteria. Clinically acceptable intubation conditions were present in 93.5% and 96.1% of patients in the succinylcholine group (n=107) and the rocuronium group (n=102), respectively (P=0.59). CONCLUSIONS: During a rapid-sequence induction with alfentanil and propofol, both rocuronium 0.6 mg kg[-1] and succinylcholine 1.0 mg kg[-1] provide clinically acceptable intubation conditions in 60 s in patients scheduled for emergency surgery. Under the conditions of this rapid-sequence induction regimen rocuronium may be a substitute for succinylcholine.

Intra-operative remifentanil might influence pain levels in the immediate post-operative period after major abdominal surgery.

BACKGROUND: Remifentanil, a widely used analgesic agent in anaesthesia, has a rapid onset and short duration of action. In clinical settings, this requires an appropriate pain strategy to prevent unacceptable pain in the post-operative period. The aim of this study was to investigate whether remifentanil had any impact on post-operative pain and opioid consumption after major abdominal surgery. METHODS: Fifty patients undergoing major abdominal surgery were randomized to receive either remifentanil 0.4 microg/kg/min or placebo intra-operatively, in addition to basic combined general and epidural anaesthesia, in this double-blind study. Patients received patient-controlled analgesia with morphine for 24 h post-operatively. Morphine consumption, assessment of pain at rest and during coughing, side-effects and levels of sensory block were recorded during the first 24 h post-operatively. RESULTS: Twenty-one patients receiving remifentanil and 18 patients receiving placebo completed the study. The median visual analogue scale (VAS) score at rest from 0 to 2 h was significantly increased in the remifentanil group [40 mm (27-61 mm)] vs. placebo [13 mm (3-35 mm)] (P < 0.05). No significant differences in morphine consumption, VAS score during coughing or adverse effects were observed between the groups. CONCLUSION: The results are weak and difficult to interpret. They could indicate that a high dose of remifentanil added to otherwise sufficient combined general and epidural anaesthesia may induce opioid-induced hyperalgesia and/or clinically acute opioid tolerance after major abdominal surgery; however, as no significant differences could be observed between the groups after 2 h post-operatively, the clinical relevance of these observations is questionable.

Optimizing peroperative compliance with PEEP during upper abdominal surgery: effects on perioperative oxygenation and complications in patients without preoperative cardiopulmonary dysfunction.

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: Late postoperative hypoxaemia after upper abdominal surgery is common even among cardiopulmonary healthy patients. Atelectasis may develop after intubation and persist into or reveal a disposition for atelectasis in the postoperative period. Positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) eliminates peroperative atelectasis but the effect on perioperative oxygenation is controversial. This study evaluated the effect of peroperative PEEP optimized pulmonary compliance on perioperative oxygenation and complications. METHODS: Forty patients assessed by electrocardiography, spirometry, functional residual capacity and diffusion capacity were randomly assigned to receive positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) or zero end-expiratory pressure (ZEEP) during surgery. PaO2, SPO2 and complications in the postoperative period were evaluated without knowledge of peroperative PEEP or ZEEP application. RESULTS: Peroperative arterial oxygenation improved for all patients receiving PEEP, mean 2.1 kPa (0.7-3.5 kPa). There was no difference in postoperative median PaO2 between the groups. The differences in the incidence of late prolonged postoperative hypoxaemia and complications were 25% (-5% to 55%) and -1% (-31% to 29%) between the ZEEP and the PEEP group, but were not statistically significant.

PaO2 during anaesthesia and years of smoking predict late postoperative hypoxaemia and complications after upper abdominal surgery in patients without preoperative cardiopulmonary dysfunction.

BACKGROUND: The incidence of late postoperative hypoxaemia and complications after upper abdominal surgery is 20-50% among cardiopulmonary healthy patients. Atelectasis development during anaesthesia and surgery is the main hypothesis to explain postoperative hypoxaemia. This study tested the predictive value of PaO2<19 kPa during combined general and thoracic epidural anaesthesia and the preoperative functional residual capacity (FRC) reduction in the 30 degree head tilt-down position for the development of late prolonged postoperative hypoxaemia, PaO2<8.5 kPa for a minimum of 3 out of 4 days, and other complications. Forty patients without cardiopulmonary morbidity, assessed by ECG, spirometry, FRC and diffusion capacity preoperatively, underwent upper abdominal surgery. PaO2 during anaesthesia and preoperative FRC reduction were compared to known risk factors for the development of hypoxaemia and complications: age, pack-years of smoking and duration of operation. The effect of optimizing pulmonary compliance with peroperative positive end-expiratory pressure (PEEP) on postoperative hypoxaemia and complications was evaluated in a blinded and randomized manner. RESULTS: Late prolonged postoperative hypoxaemia and other complications were found in 37% and 38% of the patients, respectively. Patients with PaO2>19 kPa during anaesthesia with F(I)O2=0.33 exhibited a risk, irrespective of PEEP status, of suffering late prolonged hypoxaemia of 0% (0;23) and patients with PaO2<19 kPa a risk of 52% (32;71), P<0.005. Having smoked more than 20 pack-years was associated with a 47% (19;75) higher incidence of postoperative complications than having smoked less than 20 pack-years, P<0.006. CONCLUSIONS: PaO2 during anaesthesia and smoked pack-years provide new tools evaluating patients undergoing upper abdominal surgery in order to predict the patients who develop late postoperative hypoxaemia and complications.