A comparison between thoracic epidural analgesia and rectus sheath catheter analgesia after open midline major abdominal surgery: randomized clinical trial.

BACKGROUND: Rectus sheath catheter analgesia (RSCA) and thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) are both used for analgesia following laparotomy. The aim was to compare the analgesic effectiveness of RSCA with TEA after laparotomy for elective colorectal and urological surgery. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective midline laparotomy were randomized in a non-blinded fashion to receive RSCA or TEA for postoperative analgesia at a single UK teaching hospital. The primary quantitative outcome measure was dynamic pain score at 24 h after surgery. A nested qualitative study (reported elsewhere) explored the dual primary outcome of patient experience and acceptability. Secondary outcome measures included rest and movement pain scores over 72 h, functional analgesia, analgesia satisfaction, opiate consumption, functional recovery, morbidity, safety, and cost-effectiveness. RESULTS: A total of 131 patients were randomized: 66 in the RSCA group and 65 in the TEA group. The median (interquartile range; i.q.r.) dynamic pain score at 24 h was significantly lower after TEA than RSCA (33 (11-60) versus 50.5 (24.50-77.25); P = 0.018). Resting pain score at 72 h was significantly lower after RSCA (4.5 (0.25-13.75) versus 12.5 (2-13); P = 0.019). Opiate consumption on postoperative day 3 (median (i.q.r.) morphine equivalent 17 (10-30) mg versus 40 (13.25-88.50) mg; P = 0.038), hypotension, or vasopressor dependency (29.7 versus 49.2 per cent; P = 0.023) and weight gain to day 3 (median (i.q.r.) 0 (-1-2) kg versus 1 (0-3) kg; P = 0.046) were all significantly greater after TEA, compared with RSCA. There were no significant differences between groups in other secondary outcomes, although more participants experienced serious adverse events after TEA compared with RSCA, which was also the more cost-effective. CONCLUSIONS: TEA provided superior initial postoperative analgesia but only for the first 24 h. By 72 hours RSCA provides superior analgesia, is associated with a lower incidence of unwanted effects, and may be more cost-effective.

Anaesthesia for Pancreatic Surgery.

This article provides a broad perspective on the salient perioperative issues encountered when caring for patients undergoing pancreatic surgery in the setting of pancreatic cancer. It describes the epidemiology of pancreatic cancer, the indications for and evolution of pancreatic resection surgery, the challenges faced perioperatively including patient selection, optimization, anesthetic considerations, postoperative analgesia, fluid management, and nutrition and discusses some of the common complications and their management. It finishes by outlining the future directions for research and development required to continue improving outcomes for these patients.

Opioid-Sparing Perioperative Analgesia Within Enhanced Recovery Programs.

Opioid-based analgesia in the perioperative period can provide excellent pain control, but this approach exposes the patient to avoidable side effects and possible harm. Optimal analgesia, an approach that targets the fastest functional recovery with adequate pain control while minimizing side effects, can be achieved with opioid minimization. Many different options for nonopioid multimodal analgesia exist and have been shown to be efficacious, with certain modalities being more beneficial for specific surgeries. This review will present the evidence and practical tips for these management strategies.

Anaesthesia for Hepatic Resection Surgery.

This article will focus on the perioperative management of hepatic resection for colorectal cancer (CRC) liver metastases (CLRMs) (the liver is the dominant metastatic site for CRC) within the context of the Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) paradigm. It discusses the epidemiology and outcomes along with the history of hepatic resection surgery and pertinent anatomy. The discussion of the preoperative phase includes patient selection, assessment of liver functional status, and new developments in prehabilitation. The intraoperative phase details developments in surgical and anesthetic techniques to minimize liver hemorrhage and reduce the risk of postoperative hepatic failure. Newer analgesic options are included. Management of potential complications is outlined in the postoperative section followed by a description of current evidence for ERAS and future directions.

Augmented renal clearance: a retrospective, cohort study of urinary creatinine clearance in critically ill patients in the United Kingdom.

OBJECTIVE: Augmented renal clearance (ARC) is associated with sub-therapeutic antibiotic, anti-epileptic, and anticoagulant serum concentrations leading to adverse patient outcomes. We aimed to describe the prevalence and associated risk factors for ARC development in a large, single-centre cohort in the United Kingdom. METHODS: We conducted a retrospective observational study of critically unwell patients admitted to intensive care between 2014 and 2016. Urinary creatinine clearance was used to determine the ARC prevalence during the first 7 days of admission. Repeated measures logistic regression was used to determine risk factors for ARC development. RESULTS: The ARC prevalence was 47.0% (95% confidence interval [95%CI]: 44.3%-49.7%). Age, sex, Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation (APACHE) II score, and sepsis diagnosis were significantly associated with ARC. ARC was more prevalent in younger vs. older (odds ratio [OR] 0.95 [95%CI: 0.94-0.96]), male vs. female (OR 0.32 [95%CI: 0.26-0.40]) patients with lower vs. higher APACHE II scores (OR 0.94 [95%CI: 0.92-0.96]). CONCLUSIONS: This patient group probably remains unknown to many clinicians because measuring urinary creatinine clearance is not usually indicated in this group. Clinicians should be aware of the ARC risk in this group and consider measurement of urinary creatinine clearance.

Heart rate variability: Measurement and emerging use in critical care medicine.

Variation in the time interval between consecutive R wave peaks of the QRS complex has long been recognised. Measurement of this RR interval is used to derive heart rate variability. Heart rate variability is thought to reflect modulation of automaticity of the sinus node by the sympathetic and parasympathetic components of the autonomic nervous system. The clinical application of heart rate variability in determining prognosis post myocardial infarction and the risk of sudden cardiac death is well recognised. More recently, analysis of heart rate variability has found utility in predicting foetal deterioration, deterioration due to sepsis and impending multiorgan dysfunction syndrome in critically unwell adults. Moreover, reductions in heart rate variability have been associated with increased mortality in patients admitted to the intensive care unit. It is hypothesised that heart rate variability reflects and quantifies the neural regulation of organ systems such as the cardiovascular and respiratory systems. In disease states, it is thought that there is an 'uncoupling' of organ systems, leading to alterations in 'inter-organ communication' and a clinically detectable reduction in heart rate variability. Despite the increasing evidence of the utility of measuring heart rate variability, there remains debate as to the methodology that best represents clinically relevant outcomes. With continuing advances in technology, our understanding of the physiology responsible for heart rate variability evolves. In this article, we review the current understanding of the physiological basis of heart rate variability and the methods available for its measurement. Finally, we review the emerging use of heart rate variability analysis in intensive care medicine and conditions in which heart rate variability has shown promise as a potential physiomarker of disease.

Fluid responsiveness prediction using Vigileo FloTrac measured cardiac output changes during passive leg raise test.

BACKGROUND: Passive leg raising (PLR) is a so called self-volume challenge used to test for fluid responsiveness. Changes in cardiac output (CO) or stroke volume (SV) measured during PLR are used to predict the need for subsequent fluid loading. This requires a device that can measure CO changes rapidly. The Vigileo™ monitor, using third-generation software, allows continuous CO monitoring. The aim of this study was to compare changes in CO (measured with the Vigileo device) during a PLR manoeuvre to calculate the accuracy for predicting fluid responsiveness. METHODS: This is a prospective study in a 20-bedded mixed general critical care unit in a large non-university regional referral hospital. Fluid responders were defined as having an increase in CO of greater than 15 % following a fluid challenge. Patients meeting the criteria for circulatory shock with a Vigileo™ monitor (Vigileo™; FloTrac; Edwards™; Lifesciences, Irvine, CA, USA) already in situ, and assessed as requiring volume expansion by the clinical team based on clinical criteria, were included. All patients underwent a PLR manoeuvre followed by a fluid challenge. RESULTS: Data was collected and analysed on stroke volume variation (SVV) at baseline and CO and SVV changes during the PLR manoeuvre and following a subsequent fluid challenge in 33 patients. The majority had septic shock. Patient characteristics, baseline haemodynamic variables and baseline vasoactive infusion requirements were similar between fluid responders (10 patients) and non-responders (23 patients). Peak increase in CO occurred within 120 s during the PLR in all cases. Using an optimal cut point of 9 % increase in CO during the PLR produced an area under the receiver operating characteristic curve of 0.85 (95 % CI 0.63 to 1.00) with a sensitivity of 80 % (95 % CI 44 to 96 %) and a specificity of 91 % (95 % CI 70 to 98 %). CONCLUSIONS: CO changes measured by the Vigileo™ monitor using third-generation software during a PLR test predict fluid responsiveness in mixed medical and surgical patients with vasopressor-dependent circulatory shock.

Cardiopulmonary exercise testing in a patient with a permanent tracheostomy.

The benefits of cardiopulmonary exercise testing have been well established. Certain patient groups present challenges for conducting such a test. We were presented with a patient with a permanent tracheostomy at the preoperative assessment clinic. We describe our technique in overcoming the problem of connecting him to the testing machine, as this is normally done with the aid of a tight-fitting face mask. We used a cuffed tracheostomy tube together with some widely available tubing from theaters to connect the patient to the gas analyzer. The test was only stopped because of excessive secretions from the patient, and we had already established enough data to tell us that the patient was fit enough to proceed to surgery. As more patients present with tracheostomies, we feel that this case would be a useful reference in managing and assessing such patients.

Thoracic Epidural analgesia versus Rectus Sheath Catheters for open midline incisions in major abdominal surgery within an enhanced recovery programme (TERSC): study protocol for a randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: Thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) is recommended for post-operative pain relief in patients undergoing major abdominal surgery via a midline incision. However, the effectiveness of TEA is variable with high failure rates reported post-operatively. Common side effects such as low blood pressure and motor block can reduce mobility and hinder recovery, and a number of rare but serious complications can also occur following their use.Rectus sheath catheters (RSC) may provide a novel alternative approach to somatic analgesia without the associated adverse effects of TEA. The aim of this study is to compare the efficacy of both techniques in terms of pain relief, patient experience, post-operative functional recovery, safety and cost-effectiveness. METHODS/DESIGN: This is a single-centre randomised controlled non-blinded trial, which also includes a nested qualitative study. Over a two-year period, 132 patients undergoing major abdominal surgery via a midline incision will be randomised to receive either TEA or RSC for post-operative analgesia. The primary outcome measures pain scores on moving from a supine to a sitting position at 24 hours post wound closure, and the patient experience between groups evaluated through in-depth interviews. Secondary outcomes include pain scores at rest and on movement at other time points, opiate consumption, functional recovery, morbidity and cost-effectiveness. DISCUSSION: This will be the first randomised controlled trial comparing thoracic epidurals to ultrasound-guided rectus sheath catheters in adults undergoing elective midline laparotomy. The standardised care provided by an Enhanced Recovery Programme makes this a comparison between two complex pain packages and not simply two analgesic techniques, in order to ascertain if RSC is a viable alternative to TEA. TRIAL REGISTRATION: Current Controlled Trials ISRCTN81223298 (16 January 2014).