A Randomized Controlled Trial of Topical Analgesia Post-Hemorrhoidectomy (TAPH Trial).

BACKGROUND: Postoperative pain remains the greatest problem after hemorrhoidectomy. Pain is hypothesized to arise from bacterial infection, sphincter spasm, and local inflammation. OBJECTIVE: A randomized controlled factorial trial was conducted to assess the effects of metronidazole, diltiazem, and lidocaine on post-hemorrhoidectomy pain. DESIGN: A double blinded randomized controlled factorial trial. SETTINGS: A multicenter trial was conducted in Auckland, New Zealand. PATIENTS: 192 Participants were randomized (1:1:1:1) into four parallel arms. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized into one of four groups receiving topical treatment with 10% metronidazole (M), 10% metronidazole + 2% diltiazem (MD), 10% metronidazole + 4% lidocaine (ML), or 10% metronidazole + 2% diltiazem + 4% lidocaine (MDL). Participants were instructed to apply to the anal verge 3 times daily for 7 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was pain on the visual analogue scale on day 4. The secondary outcomes included analgesia usage, pain on bowel motion, and functional recovery index. RESULTS: There was no significant difference in the pain and recovery scores when diltiazem or lidocaine was added to metronidazole (score difference between presence and absence of D in the formulation: -3.69, 95% CI: -13.3, 5.94, p = 0.46; between presence and absence of L: -5.67, 95% CI: -15.5, 3.80, p = 0.24). The combination of MDL did not further reduce pain. Secondary analysis revealed a significant difference between the best (ML) and worst (MDL) groups in both pain and functional recovery scores. There were no significant differences in analgesic usage, complications, or return to work between the groups. No clinically important adverse events were reported. The adverse event rate did not change in the intervention groups. LIMITATIONS: Topical metronidazole was utilized in the control group, rather than a pure placebo. CONCLUSION: There was no significant difference in pain when topical diltiazem or lidocaine, or both, was added to topical metronidazole. CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION IDENTIFIER: NCT04276298.

Consensus-defined sarcopenia predicts adverse outcomes after elective abdominal surgery: meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Sarcopenia refers to the progressive age- or pathology-associated loss of skeletal muscle. When measured radiologically as reduced muscle mass, sarcopenia has been shown to independently predict morbidity and mortality after elective abdominal surgery. However, the European Working Group on Sarcopenia in Older People (EWGSOP) recently updated their sarcopenia definition, emphasizing both low muscle 'strength' and 'mass'. The aim of this systematic review and meta-analysis was to determine the prognostic impact of this updated consensus definition of sarcopenia after elective abdominal surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase, Scopus, and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials (CENTRAL) databases were systematically searched for studies comparing prognostic outcomes between sarcopenic versus non-sarcopenic adults after elective abdominal surgery from inception to 15 June 2022. The primary outcomes were postoperative morbidity and mortality. Sensitivity analyses adjusting for confounding patient factors were also performed. Methodological quality assessment of studies was performed independently by two authors using the QUality in Prognosis Studies (QUIPS) tool. RESULTS: Twenty articles with 5421 patients (1059 sarcopenic and 4362 non-sarcopenic) were included. Sarcopenic patients were at significantly greater risk of incurring postoperative complications, despite adjusted multivariate analysis (adjusted OR 1.56, 95 per cent c.i. 1.39 to 1.76). Sarcopenic patients also had significantly higher rates of in-hospital (OR 7.62, 95 per cent c.i. 2.86 to 20.34), 30-day (OR 3.84, 95 per cent c.i. 1.27 to 11.64), and 90-day (OR 3.73, 95 per cent c.i. 1.19 to 11.70) mortality. Sarcopenia was an independent risk factor for poorer overall survival in multivariate Cox regression analysis (adjusted HR 1.28, 95 per cent c.i. 1.13 to 1.44). CONCLUSION: Consensus-defined sarcopenia provides important prognostic information after elective abdominal surgery and can be appropriately measured in the preoperative setting. Development of targeted exercise-based interventions that minimize sarcopenia may improve outcomes for patients who are undergoing elective abdominal surgery.

Evaluation of the inflammatory profile following uncomplicated elective colectomy.

BACKGROUND: Attenuation of the inflammatory response in patients undergoing colectomy with modern perioperative care and laparoscopic surgery has been a focus of research in recent years. Despite reported benefits, significant heterogeneity remains with studies including patients undergoing both rectal and colon surgery and including surgery with postoperative complications. Therefore, the aim of the study was to evaluate the inflammatory response in patients undergoing elective colectomy without complications, specifically comparing open and laparoscopic approaches. METHODS: A multicenter prospective study was conducted across four public hospitals in Auckland and Christchurch, New Zealand. Consecutive adults undergoing elective colectomy were included over a 3-year period. Perioperative blood samples were collected and analysed for the following inflammatory markers: IL-6, IL-1ß, TNFα, IL-10, CRP, leucocyte and neutrophil count. Statistical analysis was performed using SPSS statistical software. RESULTS: A total of 168 colectomy patients without complications were included in the analysis. Patients that underwent laparoscopy had significantly reduced IL-6, neutrophils and CRP on postoperative day (POD) 1 (p < 0.05) compared to an open approach. IL-10 and TNFα were significantly reduced on POD 2 (p < 0.05) in laparoscopic patients. Patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) greater than 30 kg/m2 had significantly higher levels of CRP regardless of operative approach. Statins altered both preoperative and postoperative inflammatory markers. CONCLUSION: The postoperative inflammatory response is influenced by surgical approach, perioperative medications, and patient factors. These findings have important implications in the utility of biomarkers in the diagnosis of postoperative surgical complications, in particular in the early diagnosis of anastomotic leak.

Age-Adjusted Reference Values for Prostate Specific Antigen - A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

OBJECTIVES: To systematically evaluates the evidence on ethnic differences in age-adjusted reference values of PSA. MATERIALS AND METHODS: In concordance with the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-analysis statement, a review of English articles using Medline, Embase and Cochrane databases, from inception to December 2019 was conducted. Studies that reported the PSA upper reference value as 95th percentile of the cohort distribution, in healthy men aged 40 to 79, were included. Methodological quality was assessed with a modified version of the Agency for Healthcare Research and Quality checklist for cross-sectional studies. RESULTS: Forty-three studies examining 325,514 participants were included in the analysis. These were published between 1993 and 2018. Majority were prospective observational studies and reported the reference values in ten-year age intervals. Only five reports directly compared ethnic differences in PSA values. Due to missing data, six studies were not considered in the quantitative synthesis. For the remainder (37/43), heterogeneity in PSA reference values was considerable (Higgin's index = 99.2%), with age and ethnicity being the sole identified significant contributors. Accordingly, the pooled upper limits for PSA reference values were 2.1, 3.2, 4.9 and 6.5 ng/ml for men in their 40 s, 50 s, 60 s, and 70 s, respectively. CONCLUSION: Moderate quality evidence suggest that upper PSA reference limits increased with age and significant ethnic differences were present.

Intravenous Local Anesthetic Compared With Intraperitoneal Local Anesthetic in Laparoscopic Colectomy: A Double-blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

INTRODUCTION: Controlling perioperative pain is essential to improving patient experience and satisfaction following surgery. Traditionally opioids have been frequently utilized for postoperative analgesia. Although they are effective at controlling pain, they are associated with adverse effects, including postoperative nausea, vomiting, ileus, and long-term opioid dependency.Following laparoscopic colectomy, the use of intravenous or intraperitoneal infusions of lidocaine (IVL, IPL) are promising emerging analgesic options. Although both techniques are promising, there have been no direct, prospective randomized comparisons in patients undergoing laparoscopic colon resection. The purpose of this study was to compare IPL with IVL. METHODS: Double-blinded, randomized controlled trial of patients undergoing laparoscopic colonic resection. The 2 groups received equal doses of either IPL or IVL which commenced intra-operatively with a bolus followed by a continuous infusion for 3 days postoperatively. Patients were cared for through a standardized enhanced recovery after surgery program. The primary outcome was total postoperative opioid consumption over the first 3 postoperative days. Patients were followed for 60 days. RESULTS: Fifty-six patients were randomized in a 1:1 fashion to the IVL or IPL groups. Total opioid consumption over the first 3 postoperative days was significantly lower in the IPL group (70.9 mg vs 157.8 mg P < 0.05) and overall opioid consumption during the total length of stay was also significantly lower (80.3 mg vs 187.36 mg P < 0.05. Pain scores were significantly lower at 2 hours postoperatively in the IPL group, however, all other time points were not significant. There were no differences in complications between the 2 groups. CONCLUSION: Perioperative use of IPL results in a significant reduction in opioid consumption following laparoscopic colon surgery when compared to IVL. This suggests that the peritoneal cavity/compartment is a strategic target for local anesthetic administration. Future enhanced recovery after surgery recommendations should consider IPL as an important component of a multimodal pain strategy following colectomy.

Topical Versus Oral Metronidazole After Excisional Hemorrhoidectomy: A Double-Blind Randomized Controlled Trial.

BACKGROUND: Both topical and oral metronidazole have been shown to reduce pain after excisional hemorrhoidectomy. Although recent meta-analyses have demonstrated efficacy against placebo, there has been no comparison between the 2 routes. OBJECTIVE: This study aims to investigate whether topical or oral metronidazole provides the most analgesic properties after excisional hemorrhoidectomy. DESIGN: A prospective, double-blind, randomized controlled trial was performed. SETTING: This trial was conducted at 2 hospitals in New Zealand between March 2019 and February 2020. PATIENTS: Adults undergoing elective excisional hemorrhoidectomy for grade III/IV hemorrhoids were randomized. INTERVENTIONS: Participants were randomized to receive either topical metronidazole ointment and an oral placebo versus oral metronidazole with a placebo ointment for 7 days. MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES: The primary outcome was daily pain scores for 7 days, estimated using a generalized linear mixed model fitted with time and treatment arm and tested for interaction with time and treatment arm. Secondary outcomes included additional analgesia, return to normal activity, recovery scores, and adverse effects. RESULTS: A total of 120 participants were included, with 60 in each group. A unimodal peak of pain was recorded with the maximum at days 3 and 4, but there was no significant difference in resting pain scores, with a mean difference at day 3 of 0.47 (-0.48, 1.42). There were no significant differences for secondary outcomes. Fourteen (11.7%) participants were readmitted, without significant difference between groups. Fifty-nine percent of participants preferred topical analgesic compared with 31% who preferred oral and 9.7% who had no preference. LIMITATIONS: This was a pragmatic study in which we could not have stopped participants seeking other analgesics and with less than perfect complete compliance. CONCLUSION: Postoperative oral and topical metronidazole provide similar analgesia after excisional hemorrhoidectomy. The route should depend on patient preference, with topical administration potentially benefiting from improved antimicrobial stewardship and having less effect on the gut microbiome. See Video Abstract at http:/links.lww.com/DCR/B853 .METRONIDAZOL TÓPICO VERSUS ORAL DESPUÉS DE UNA HEMORROIDECTOMÍA POR ESCISIÓN: UN ENSAYO CONTROLADO ALEATORIO DOBLE CIEGO. ANTECEDENTES: Se ha demostrado que tanto el metronidazol tópico como el oral reducen el dolor después de una hemorroidectomía por escisión. Aunque los metaanálisis más recientes han demostrado eficacia frente al placebo, no ha habido comparación entre las dos vías. OBJETIVO: Este estudio tiene como objetivo investigar si el metronidazol tópico u oral proporciona las propiedades más analgésicas después de una hemorroidectomía por escisión. DISEO: Se realizó un ensayo prospectivo, controlado, aleatorio, a doble ciego. AJUSTE: Este ensayo fue realizado en dos hospitales de Nueva Zelanda entre marzo de 2019 y febrero de 2020. PACIENTES: Se asignaron al azar pacientes adultos sometidos a hemorroidectomía por escisión electiva por hemorroides de grado III / IV. INTERVENCIONES: Los participantes fueron asignados al azar para recibir un ungüento de metronidazol tópico y un placebo oral versus metronidazol oral con un ungüento de placebo durante siete días. PRINCIPALES MEDIDAS DE RESULTADO: El resultado primario fueron las puntuaciones diarias de dolor durante siete días, estimadas mediante un modelo lineal mixto generalizado ajustado tanto con el tiempo y el brazo de tratamiento y probado para la interacción con el tiempo y el brazo de tratamiento. Los resultados secundarios incluyen analgesia adicional, retorno a la actividad normal, puntuaciones de recuperación y efectos adversos. RESULTADOS: Se incluyó un total de 120 participantes, 60 en cada grupo. Se registró un pico de dolor unimodal con el máximo en los días 3 y 4, pero no hubo diferencias significativas en las puntuaciones de dolor en reposo, con una diferencia media en el día 3 de 0,47 (-0,48, 1,42). No hubo diferencias significativas para los resultados secundarios. Catorce (11,7%) participantes fueron readmitidos, sin diferencias significativas entre los grupos. El cincuenta y nueve por ciento de los participantes prefirió el tópico, en comparación con el 31% por vía oral y el 9,7% sin preferencia. LIMITACIONES: Este fue un estudio pragmático en el que no pudimos haber impedido que los participantes buscaran otros analgésicos, con un cumplimiento completo menos que perfecto. CONCLUSINES: El metronidazol posoperatorio por vía oral o tópica proporciona una analgesia similar después de una hemorroidectomía por escisión. La vía debe depender de la preferencia del paciente, y la administración tópica se beneficia potencialmente por una mejor protección de los antimicrobianos y un menor efecto sobre el microbioma intestinal. Consulte Video Resumen en http://links.lww.com/DCR/B853 . (Traducción-Dr Osvaldo Gauto).

Patient Experiences of the Emergency Laparotomy Pathway: A Qualitative Study.

INTRODUCTION: Emergency laparotomy (EL) is a commonly performed operation with high rates of morbidity and mortality. Despite a growing body of literature on outcomes from EL, there is sparse literature on the patient experience. The aim of this study is to capture the perspective of patients on their EL experience. Qualitative methodology is used as a platform to allow patients to express their personal experiences and ideas around the EL process. MATERIALS AND METHOD: Participants were consented as a part of a large observational study, established across the three public teaching hospitals in Auckland, New Zealand. Patients who had an EL within the past 4 months were recruited. A recorded interview was conducted either face-to-face or over the telephone, using questions formulated from a previous systematic review on EL outcomes. Transcripts were transported to NVivo and thematically analysed by two reviewers. RESULTS: Fifteen participants were interviewed. The majority of participants were female, New Zealand European and 65 or older. Five important themes were identified. Overall, participants expressed satisfaction with their interactions with hospital staff. However, they wanted more information about their condition, operation and what outcomes might occur. Participants also described post-operative priorities in the acute setting, as well as long-standing physical and emotional impacts. CONCLUSION: This study provides a better understanding of what is important to patients during the EL process. This information is important when considering ways to improve care and communication with patients undergoing EL.

Pilonidal sinus: is histological examination necessary?

BACKGROUND: Pilonidal sinus is a common pathology occurring in a number of sites including the gluteal cleft between the buttocks. Surgery is the principal mode of treatment with a variety of techniques proposed to cure the disease and prevent recurrence. The rate of malignant degeneration is estimated at 0.1% in patients with chronic pilonidal disease. A case series study of pilonidal sinus found that most patients with malignancy were over the age of 50 years and had had chronic pilonidal disease for several years. This study aimed to review the value of histological analysis of pilonidal sinus specimens. METHODS: A retrospective observational study was conducted of all patients who have undergone pilonidal sinus excision by the Department of General Surgery at Counties Manukau District Health Board in the past 10 years. RESULTS: This study reviewed 1324 admissions with a pilonidal disease requiring surgical management. There were 325 pilonidal resections with 320 histological specimens analysed. Pilonidal sinus was detected in 312 specimens, eight others were benign and there were no specimens with malignancy. CONCLUSION: No cases of malignancy were found in all pilonidal specimens that were sent for histological review. Routine histological examination of pilonidal sinus specimens appears to be unnecessary; however, it should be considered in patients over the age of 50 years.

Epidemiology of haemorrhoids and publicly funded excisional haemorrhoidectomies in New Zealand (2007-2016): a population-based cross-sectional study.

AIM: Haemorrhoids are frequently encountered by the general or colorectal surgeon. Although a benign disease, those with symptomatic, advanced grades frequently require excisional haemorrhoidectomy for definitive management. Despite their widespread nature, the epidemiological burden of haemorrhoids and haemorrhoidectomies on populations is not well described. This study seeks to establish the incidence of both haemorrhoids diagnosed and haemorrhoidectomies performed in New Zealand. METHOD: This is a population-based cross-sectional study examining the incidence of all patients who were newly diagnosed with haemorrhoids in New Zealand public hospital outpatient clinics and those who received excisional haemorrhoidectomy in New Zealand public hospitals from 2007 to 2016. Data were extracted and linked using the New Zealand National Minimum Dataset and the National Non-Admitted Patient Collection. Variables collected included age group, sex, ethnicity and geographical location. RESULTS: A total of 46 095 recorded diagnoses of haemorrhoids were made, with a total of 18 739 haemorrhoidectomies in the 10-year period recorded. The incidence rate of diagnosis increased from 84.6 to 120.5 per 100 000 and the incidence rate of haemorrhoidectomies performed from 30.4 to 51.1 per 100 000, a significantly increased annual incidence. There was a unimodal peak prevalence in the fifth decade of life with women more affected. Europeans formed the largest group affected, with Asians showing the highest rate of increased incidence. CONCLUSION: There is an increasing incidence of patients with symptomatic haemorrhoids presenting to the New Zealand public healthcare system, with a preponderance in working age adults, especially women.

How to repair a small umbilical hernia laparoscopically.

We describe a step by step technique for repair of a small umbilical hernia laparoscopically that aims to provide an excellent technical and cosmetic result without a significant increase in operative time or cost. Patients report good quality of life post-operatively and appear satisfied with the cosmetic result.

Risk factors for mortality after emergency laparotomy: scoping systematic review.

BACKGROUND: Emergency laparotomy (EL) is a common procedure with high mortality leading to several efforts to record and reduce mortality. Risk scores currently used by quality improvement programmes either require intraoperative data or are not specific to EL. To be of utility to clinicians/patients, estimation of preoperative risk of mortality is important. We aimed to explore individual preoperative risk factors that might be of use in developing a preoperative mortality risk score. METHODS: Two independent reviewers identified relevant articles from searches of MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane databases from January 1980 to January 2018. We selected studies that evaluated only preoperative predictive factors for mortality in EL patients. RESULTS: The search yielded 6648 articles screened, with 22 studies included examining 157 728 patients. The combined post-operative 30-day mortality was 13%. All, but one small study, were at low risk of bias. A meta-analysis of results was not possible due to the heterogeneity of populations and outcomes. Age, American Society of Anesthesiologists, preoperative sepsis, dependency status, current cancer and comorbidities were associated with increased mortality. Acute physiological derangements seen in renal, albumin and complete blood count assays were strongly associated with mortality. Delay to surgery and diabetes did not influence mortality. Higher body mass index was protective. CONCLUSION: Preoperatively, risk factors identified can be used to develop and update risk scores specific for EL mortality. This scoping review focused on the preoperative setting which helps tailor treatment decisions. It highlights the need for further research to test the relevance of newer risk factors such as frailty and nutrition.

Multidisciplinary survey of current and future use of emergency laparotomy risk assessment scores in New Zealand.

Risk prediction is an important part of the management of emergency laparotomy (EL) patients. This study aims to investigate the current use of and future directions for EL risk prediction scores. New Zealand members of the Royal Australasian College of Surgery (RACS), Australian and New Zealand College of Anaesthetists (ANZCA) and College of Intensive Care Medicine (CICM) were invited to participate in an anonymous online survey. Responses were received from 316 clinicians (45 RACS, 253 ANZCA and 19 CICM), with 73% of them having >10 years' experience as a consultant. Risk assessment scores were utilised by respondents for approximately 30% of EL cases. The most common EL risk scores used were Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the Enumeration of Mortality (P-POSSUM) and American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Programs (ACS-NSQIP). When used, respondents used risk assessment mostly preoperatively (RACS 100%, ANZCA 98% and CICM 78%), although P-POSSUM and ACS-NSQIP scores require intraoperative data (which can only be estimated crudely preoperatively by the clinician). Respondents on average 'somewhat agreed' that risk assessment scores should only include preoperative variables. The most common reasons for using P-POSSUM and ACS-NSQIP scores were familiarity and ease of use and availability of online/app calculators. The most important outcomes that the respondents would like to predict were quality of life and 30-day mortality rather than long-term impact from EL. These findings suggest that developing a new score may be required to improve utilisation and help in decision-making. This may require tailoring risk scores specifically for EL, and designing them to predict what is preferred by the clinicians making the decisions.

Local Anaesthesia Alone Versus Regional or General Anaesthesia in Excisional Haemorrhoidectomy: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis.

BACKGROUND: Excisional haemorrhoidectomy has been traditionally performed under general or regional anaesthesia. However, these modes are associated with complications such as nausea, urinary retention and motor blockade. Local anaesthesia (LA) alone has been proposed to reduce side effects as well as to expedite ambulatory surgery. This systematic review aims to assess LA versus regional or general anaesthesia for excisional haemorrhoidectomy. METHODS: A systematic review was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. MEDLINE, EMBASE and CENTRAL databases were searched to 13 January 2020. All randomised controlled trials comparing LA only versus regional or general anaesthesia in patients who received excisional haemorrhoidectomy were included. The main outcomes included pain, adverse effects and length of stay. RESULTS: Nine trials, consisting of six studies comparing local versus regional anaesthesia and three comparing LA versus general anaesthesia, were included. Meta-analysis showed a significantly lower relative risk for need of rescue analgesia (RR 0.32 [95% CI 0.16-0.62]), intra-operative hypotension (RR 0.17 [95% CI 0.04-0.76]), headache (RR 0.13 [0.02-0.67]) and urinary retention (RR 0.17 [95% CI 0.09-0.29]) for LA when compared with regional anaesthesia. There was mixed evidence for both regional and general anaesthesia in regard to post-operative pain. CONCLUSIONS: LA alone may be considered as an alternative to regional anaesthesia for excisional haemorrhoidectomy with reduced complications and reduction in the amount of post-operative analgesia required. The evidence for LA compared to general anaesthesia for haemorrhoidectomy is low grade and mixed.

Evaluating and improving current risk prediction tools in emergency laparotomy.

PURPOSE: Emergency laparotomy (EL) encompasses a high-risk group of operations, which are increasingly performed on a heterogeneous population of patients, making preoperative risk assessment potentially difficult. The UK National Emergency Laparotomy Audit (NELA) recently produced a risk predictive tool for EL that has not yet been externally validated. We aimed to externally validate and potentially improve the NELA tool for mortality prediction after EL. METHODOLOGY: We reviewed computer and paper records of EL patients from May 2012 to June 2017 at Middlemore Hospital (New Zealand). The inclusion criteria mirrored the UK NELA. We examined the NELA, Portsmouth Physiological and Operative Severity Score for the enUmeration of Mortality (P-POSSUM), Acute Physiology and Chronic Health Evaluation II (APACHE-II), and American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Programs risk predictive tools for 30-day mortality. The Hosmer-Lemeshow test was used to assess calibration, and the c statistic, to evaluate discrimination (accuracy) of the tools. We added the modified frailty index (mFI) and nutrition to improve the accuracy of risk predictive tools. RESULTS: A total of 758 patients met the inclusion criteria, with an observed 30-day mortality of 7.9%. The NELA was the only well calibrated tool, with predicted 30-day mortality of 7.4% (p = 0.22). When combined with mFI and nutritional status, the c statistic for NELA improved from 0.83 to 0.88. American College of Surgeons National Surgical Quality Improvement Programs, APACHE-II, and P-POSSUM had lower c statistics, albeit also showing an improvement (0.84, 0.81, and 0.74, respectively). CONCLUSION: We have demonstrated the NELA tool to be most predictive of mortality after EL. The NELA tool would therefore facilitate preoperative risk assessment and operative decision making most precisely in EL. Future research should consider adding mFI and nutritional status to the NELA tool. LEVEL OF EVIDENCE: Level IV; Retrospective observational cohort study.

Association between perioperative intraperitoneal local anaesthetic infusion and long-term survival and cancer recurrence after colectomy: follow-up analysis of a previous randomized controlled trial.

BACKGROUND: High concentrations of local anaesthetic have an anti-proliferative effect on colonic cancer in vitro. Intraperitoneal local anaesthetic (IPLA) has shown analgesic benefit and improved recovery in the perioperative setting. The long-term effects of IPLA in colon cancer resection have not been examined. This study aims to review the survival and oncological outcomes of a previously conducted trial that compared perioperative IPLA with placebo. METHODS: Sixty patients underwent colonic resection for benign and malignant disease as part of a double-blinded, randomized, placebo-controlled study between September 2008 and November 2009. The IPLA group received instillation of intraperitoneal ropivacaine before dissection followed by a 3-day infusion. The placebo group was treated identically but with 0.9% saline solution. A follow-up analysis was conducted to evaluate overall survival, disease-free survival and recurrence specifically for patients undergoing resection for stages I-III colon cancer. Kaplan-Meier analysis was performed, and the log-rank test was used to evaluate difference in survival between groups. RESULTS: Thirty-seven of the 60 patients had stages I-III colon cancer and were included in this analysis. Nineteen patients were in the placebo group. There was no significant difference in overall survival or all-cause mortality. There was a higher incidence of cancer-specific mortality in the local anaesthetic group (P < 0.046). CONCLUSION: It does not appear that IPLA is associated with a significant survival benefit in patients with colonic malignancy undergoing colectomy. Other studies are needed to analyse the long-term outcomes.

Topical analgesia following excisional haemorrhoidectomy: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomised controlled trials.

PURPOSE: Post-operative pain following excisional haemorrhoidectomy poses a particular challenge for patient recovery, as well as a burden on hospital resources. There appears to be an increasing role for topical agents to improve this pain, but their efficacy and safety have not been fully assessed. This systematic review aims to assess all topical agents used for pain following excisional haemorrhoidectomy. METHODS: The study was conducted according to the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses (PRISMA) guidelines. Two authors independently assessed MEDLINE, EMBASE, and CENTRAL databases to 27 June 2019. All randomised controlled trials (RCTs) in English that investigated topical agents following excisional haemorrhoidectomy were included. Meta-analysis was performed using Review Manager, version 5.3. RESULTS: A total of 3639 records were identified. A final 32 RCTs were included in the qualitative analysis. Meta-analysis was performed on 9 RCTs that investigated glyceryl trinitrate (GTN) (5 for diltiazem, 2 for metronidazole and 2 for sucralfate). There were mixed significant changes in pain for GTN compared with placebo. Diltiazem resulted in significant reduction of pain on post-operative days 1, 2, 3 and 7 (p < 0.00001). Metronidazole resulted in significant reduction of pain on days 1 (p = 0.009), 7 (p = 0.002) and 14 (p < 0.00001). Sucralfate resulted in signification reduction of pain on days 7 and 14 (both p < 0.00001). CONCLUSION: Topical diltiazem, metronidazole and sucralfate appear to significantly reduce pain at various timepoints following excisional haemorrhoidectomy. GTN had mixed evidence. Several single trials identified other promising topical analgesics.

Diagnostic accuracy of procalcitonin for the early diagnosis of anastomotic leakage after colorectal surgery: a meta-analysis.

BACKGROUND: Anastomotic leakage (AL) is a dreaded complication following colorectal surgery. Procalcitonin is one of many biomarkers studied and research has suggested that it has improved accuracy for the diagnosis of AL compared with other inflammatory biomarkers such as C-reactive protein. This meta-analysis was conducted to evaluate the accuracy of procalcitonin in the early diagnosis of AL following colorectal surgery. METHODS: MEDLINE, Embase and PubMed were searched for studies evaluating procalcitonin in the context of AL following colorectal surgery in the elective setting. The literature was reviewed using the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis (PRISMA) statement. Quality of the studies was assessed using the Quality Assessment Diagnostic Accuracy Studies (QUADAS)-2 tool. Meta analyses were conducted using area under the receiver operating characteristic curves for day 3, 4 and 5 post-surgery as a diagnostic test to detect AL. RESULTS: A total of eight studies were analysed. Results showed that the highest diagnostic accuracy for procalcitonin is on day 5 post surgery. The reported optimal cut-off values ranged from 0.25 to 680 ng/mL from postoperative day 3 to 5, with reported negative predictive values ranging from 95% to 100%, and positive predictive values of up to 34%. The highest area under the receiver operating characteristic curve was 0.88 on postoperative day 5. CONCLUSION: Procalcitonin is a useful negative test for AL following elective colorectal surgery. However, as an isolated test, it is not useful in detecting AL.

Intraperitoneal Tramadol in Abdominal Surgery: A Systematic Review.

BACKGROUND: Multimodal analgesic regimes are required to treat pain. Intraperitoneal (IP) agents, such as local anesthetics (LAs), have been shown to reduce pain after abdominal surgery. Other IP analgesics have been tested in several randomized control trials (RCTs), but no reviews or guidelines have evaluated their use. Tramadol is an effective oral and intravenous analgesia with recent evidence supporting the use of IP tramadol (IPT). We aimed to review the efficacy of IPT as an adjunct to intraperitoneal local anesthetics (IPLAs) for pain relief after abdominal surgery. MATERIALS AND METHODS: Relevant articles were identified by two independent reviewers from MEDLINE, EMBASE and PubMed using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines up to January 2019. Only RCT comparing IPT + IPLA with IPLA alone were included. Outcomes recorded were the postoperative analgesic requirement, pain scores at 4 h and 24 h and adverse events. Data were analyzed with Review Manager, version 5.3. RESULTS: A total of five RCTs (4× laparoscopic cholecystectomy and 1× abdominal hysterectomy) were included in this review from 419 studies screened. All doses were given as a single bolus. Pain relief requirements over the first 24 h weres less in the IPT + IPLA groups when compared with those in IPLA alone. Pain scores were less for IPT + IPLA groups at 4 h and 24 h. There were no significant differences in adverse events between groups. CONCLUSIONS: In summary, IPT, in combination with IPLA, is effective in the management of acute postoperative pain and reduces the total amount of pain relief consumed in the first 24 h after surgery. Studies reporting the use of IPT + IPLA reported no toxicity or systemic adverse events. Further research into standardizing the dosing of IPT to optimize its effectiveness and further reduce the additional analgesic requirement is indicated.