Regional analgesia and surgical site infections after colorectal surgery: a retrospective cohort analysis

Abstract Background The effect of regional analgesia on perioperative infectious complications remains unknown. We therefore tested the hypothesis that a composite of serious infections after colorectal surgery is less common in patients with regional analgesia than in those given Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia (IV-PCA) with opiates. Methods Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery lasting one hour or more under general anesthesia at the Cleveland Clinic Main Campus between 2009 and 2015 were included in this retrospective analysis. Exposures were defined as regional postoperative analgesia with epidurals or Transversus Abdominis Plane blocks (TAP); or IV-PCA with opiates only. The outcome was defined as a composite of in-hospital serious infections, including intraabdominal abscess, pelvic abscess, deep or organ-space Surgical Site Infection (SSI), clostridium difficile, pneumonia, or sepsis. Logistic regression model adjusted for the imbalanced potential confounding factors among the subset of matched surgeries was used to report the odds ratios along with 95% confidence limits. The significance criterion was p < 0.05. Results A total of 7811 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria of which we successfully matched 681 regional anesthesia patients to 2862 IV-PCA only patients based on propensity scores derived from potential confounding factors. There were 82 (12%) in-hospital postoperative serious infections in the regional analgesia group vs. 285 (10%) in IV-PCA patients. Regional analgesia was not significantly associated with serious infection (odds ratio: 1.14; 95% Confidence Interval 0.87‒1.49; p-value = 0.339) after adjusting for surgical duration and volume of intraoperative crystalloids. Conclusion Regional analgesia should not be selected as postoperative analgesic technique to reduce infections.

Regional analgesia and surgical site infections after colorectal surgery: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: The effect of regional analgesia on perioperative infectious complications remains unknown. We therefore tested the hypothesis that a composite of serious infections after colorectal surgery is less common in patients with regional analgesia than in those given Intravenous Patient-Controlled Analgesia (IV-PCA) with opiates. METHODS: Patients undergoing elective colorectal surgery lasting one hour or more under general anesthesia at the Cleveland Clinic Main Campus between 2009 and 2015 were included in this retrospective analysis. Exposures were defined as regional postoperative analgesia with epidurals or Transversus Abdominis Plane blocks (TAP); or IV-PCA with opiates only. The outcome was defined as a composite of in-hospital serious infections, including intraabdominal abscess, pelvic abscess, deep or organ-space Surgical Site Infection (SSI), clostridium difficile, pneumonia, or sepsis. Logistic regression model adjusted for the imbalanced potential confounding factors among the subset of matched surgeries was used to report the odds ratios along with 95% confidence limits. The significance criterion was p < 0.05. RESULTS: A total of 7811 patients met inclusion and exclusion criteria of which we successfully matched 681 regional anesthesia patients to 2862 IV-PCA only patients based on propensity scores derived from potential confounding factors. There were 82 (12%) in-hospital postoperative serious infections in the regional analgesia group vs. 285 (10%) in IV-PCA patients. Regional analgesia was not significantly associated with serious infection (odds ratio: 1.14; 95% Confidence Interval 0.87‒1.49; p-value = 0.339) after adjusting for surgical duration and volume of intraoperative crystalloids. CONCLUSION: Regional analgesia should not be selected as postoperative analgesic technique to reduce infections.

Renal injury after open versus laparoscopic non-cardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort analysis.

BACKGROUND: Laparoscopic surgical approaches enhance recovery, reduce postoperative pain, and shorten hospital length-of-stay. Nevertheless, increased intra-abdominal pressure is associated with decreased renal blood flow, renal hypoxia and acute kidney injury. When combined with Trendelenburg positioning, renal function may further deteriorate. We tested the primary hypothesis that the combination of laparoscopic surgical approach and Trendelenburg position is associated with larger reductions in estimated Glomerular Filtration Rate (eGFR) within the initial 48 postoperative hours compared to open surgery without Trendelenburg positioning. Secondarily, we tested, if laparoscopic procedures are associated with greater incidence of postoperative acute kidney injury. METHODS: Adults who had laparoscopic colorectal surgery in Trendelenburg position at the Cleveland Clinic Main Campus from 2009 to 2016 were propensity-matched to patients who had comparable open procedures. Patients with pre-existing renal impairment were excluded. RESULTS: Among 7,357 eligible patients, 1,846 laparoscopic cases with Trendelenburg were matched to 1,846 open cases. No association was found between laparoscopic approach and postoperative eGFR. A significant protective effect of the laparoscopic procedure on the odds of having AKI was found. Patients who had laparoscopic surgeries were an estimated 0.70 (95% CI 0.55, 0.90, pHolm-adj = 0.006) times as likely to have AKI as open surgical patients. CONCLUSION: Despite compelling potential mechanisms, laparoscopic approach with Trendelenburg position in adult colorectal surgeries did not worsen postoperative eGFR, and actually reduced postoperative acute kidney injury. Given the other advantages of laparoscopic surgery, the approach should not be avoided for concerns about renal injury.