Adding regional analgesia to general anaesthesia: increase of risk or improved outcome?

Although it is clear that regional analgesia in association with general anaesthesia substantially reduces postoperative pain, the benefits in terms of overall perioperative outcome are less evident. The aim of this nonsystematic review was to evaluate the effect on middle and long-term postoperative outcomes of adding regional perioperative analgesia to general anaesthesia. This study is based mostly on systematic reviews, large epidemiological studies and large or high-quality randomized controlled trials that were selected and evaluated by the author. The endpoints that are discussed are perioperative morbidity, cancer recurrence, chronic postoperative pain, postoperative rehabilitation and risk of neurologic damage. Epidural analgesia may have a favourable but very small effect on perioperative morbidity. The influence of other regional anaesthetic techniques on perioperative morbidity is unclear. Preliminary data suggest that regional analgesia might reduce the incidence of cancer recurrence. However, adequately powered randomized controlled trials are lacking. The sparse literature available suggests that regional analgesia may prevent the development of chronic postoperative pain. Rehabilitation in the immediate postoperative period is possibly improved, but the advantages in the long term remain unclear. Permanent neurological damage is extremely rare. In conclusion, while the risk of permanent neurologic damage remains extremely low, evidence suggests that regional analgesia may improve relevant outcomes in the long term. The effect size is mostly small or the number-needed-to-treat is high. However, considering the importance of the outcomes of interest, even minor improvement probably has substantial clinical relevance.

Current approach to the haemodynamic management of septic shock patients in European intensive care units: a cross-sectional, self-reported questionnaire-based survey

The aim of this survey was to investigate clinicians' current approach to the haemodynamic management and resuscitation endpoints in septic shock.

No benefit from perioperative intravenous lidocaine in laparoscopic renal surgery: a randomised, placebo-controlled study

There is evidence that perioperative intravenous lidocaine administration can reduce analgesic requirement, improve recovery of bowel function and shorten the length of hospital stay. Its effect in laparoscopic renal surgery has not been investigated.

Point-of-care prothrombin time testing in paediatric intensive care: an observational study of the ease of use of two devices

Two major difficulties arise when taking blood samples in children: the challenge of venous access and the comparatively large amount of blood required.

Perioperative anaesthetic management of mediastinal mass in adults

Mediastinal mass syndrome remains an anaesthetic challenge that cannot be underestimated. Depending on the localization and the size of the mediastinal tumour, the clinical presentation is variable ranging from a complete lack of symptoms to severe cardiorespiratory problems. The administration of general anaesthesia can be associated with acute intraoperative or postoperative cardiorespiratory decompensation that may result in death due to tumour-related compression syndromes. The role of the anaesthesiologist, as a part of the interdisciplinary treatment team, is to ensure a safe perioperative period. However, there is still no structured protocol available for perioperative anaesthesiological procedure. The aim of this article is to summarize the genesis of and the diagnostic options for mediastinal mass syndrome and to provide a solid detailed methodology for its safe perioperative management based on a review of the latest literature and our own clinical experiences. Proper anaesthetic management of patients with mediastinal mass syndrome begins with an assessment of the preoperative status, directed foremost at establishing the localization of the tumour and on the basis of the clinical and radiological findings, discerning whether any vital mediastinal structures are affected. We have found it helpful to assign 'severity grade' (using a three-grade clinical classification scale: 'safe', 'uncertain', 'unsafe'), whereby each stage triggers appropriate action in terms of staffing and apparatus, such as the provision of alternatives for airway management, cardiopulmonary bypass and additional specialists. During the preoperative period, we are guided by a 12-point plan that also takes into account the special features of transportation into the operating theatre and patient monitoring. Tumour compression on the airways or the great vessels may create a critical respiratory and/or haemodynamic situation, and therefore the standard of intraoperative management includes induction of anaesthesia in the operating theatre on an adjustable surgical table, the use of short-acting anaesthetics, avoidance of muscle relaxants and maintenance of spontaneous respiration. In the case of severe clinical symptoms and large mediastinal tumours, we consider it absolutely essential to cannulate the femoral vessels preoperatively under local anaesthesia and to provide for the availability of cardiopulmonary bypass in the operating theatre, should extracorporeal circulation become necessary. The benefits of establishing vascular access under local anaesthesia clearly outweigh any associated degree of patient discomfort. In the case of patients classified as 'safe' or 'uncertain', a preoperative consensus with the surgeons should be reached as to the anaesthetic approach and the management of possible complications.

Evaluation of physical and mental recovery status after elective liver resection

BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVE: This prospective, clinical pilot trial compared the Short Form 36 Health Survey (SF-36) and a nine-item quality of recovery [Quality of Recovery 9 (QoR-9)] survey to assess the 1-week outcome after liver resection and prediction of postoperative complications from baseline values before liver resection. METHODS: In 19 patients, the SF-36 was recorded preoperatively (baseline) and on postoperative day (POD) 7. SF-36 z-values (means +/- SD) for the physical component summary (PCS) and mental component summary (MCS) were calculated. QoR-9 (score 0-18) was performed at baseline, POD1, POD3, POD5 and POD7. Descriptive analysis and effect sizes (d) were calculated. RESULTS: From baseline to POD7, PCS decreased from -0.38 +/- 1.30 to -2.10 +/- 0.76 (P = 0.002, d = -1.57) and MCS from -0.71 +/- 1.50 to -1.33 +/- 1.11 (P = 0.061, d = -0.46). QoR-9 was significantly lower at POD1, POD3 and POD5 compared with baseline (P < 0.050, d < -2.0), but not at POD7 (P = 0.060, d = -1.08). Baseline PCS was significantly lower with a high effect size in patients with complications (n = 12) compared with patients without complications (n = 7) (-0.76 +/- 1.46 vs. 0.27 +/- 0.56; P = 0.044, d = -0.84) but not baseline MCS (P = 0.831, d = -0.10) or baseline QoR-9 (P = 0.384, d = -0.44). CONCLUSIONS: The SF-36 indicates that liver resection surgery has a higher impact on physical health than on mental health. QoR-9 determines the feasible time course of recovery with a 1-week return to baseline. Preoperative impaired physical health might predict postoperative complications.

Etomidate for critically ill patients. Con: do you really want to weaken the frail?

Etomidate is an imidazole-derived hypnotic agent preferentially used for rapid sequence induction of anaesthesia because of its favourable haemodynamic profile. However, 11β-hydroxylase inhibition causes adrenal insufficiency with potentially fatal consequences in specific populations. We review the arguments against the liberal administration of etomidate in critically ill, and especially septic, patients. This review considered only high-quality and prospective studies with a low risk of bias. Three major effects have been observed with the clinical use of a single dose of etomidate. First, independent of the clinical setting, etomidate causes adrenal dysfunction via 11β-hydroxylase inhibition ranging from 12 to 48 h, making the drug unsuitable for use in elective interventions. Second, in a systematic review with meta-analyses, including 3715 septic patients, the relative risk of death with etomidate was 1.22 (95% confidence interval 1.11 to 1.35). Based on this statistically significant and clinically relevant increase in mortality, a single dose of etomidate has to be avoided in patients with septic shock. Third, in small randomised controlled trials, a single dose of etomidate in trauma patients was associated with an increased incidence of pneumonia (56.7 vs. 25.9% in controls), prolonged intensive care stay (6.3 vs. 1.5 days) and prolonged hospital stay (11.6 vs. 6.4 days). Based on these randomised controlled trials, the use of etomidate should be avoided in unstable trauma patients. Midazolam and ketamine are two valid alternatives with similar intubation and haemodynamic conditions as etomidate but without its adverse effects. Therefore, for safety reasons, etomidate should be avoided in the critical conditions of sepsis and trauma

Blind intubation of anaesthetised children with supraglottic airway devices AmbuAura-i and Air-Q cannot be recommended: A randomised controlled trial.

BACKGROUND Paediatric supraglottic airway devices AmbuAura-i and Air-Q were designed as conduits for tracheal intubation. Although fibreoptic-guided intubation has proved successful, blind intubation as a rescue technique has never been evaluated. OBJECTIVE Evaluation of blind intubation through AmbuAura-i and Air-Q. On the basis of fibreoptic view data, we hypothesised that the success rate with the AmbuAura-i would be higher than with the Air-Q. DESIGN A prospective, randomised controlled trial with institutional review board (IRB) approval and written informed consent. SETTING University Childrens' Hospital; September 2012 to July 2014. PATIENTS Eighty children, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) class I to III, weight 5 to 50 kg. INTERVENTIONS Tracheal intubation was performed through the randomised device with the tip of a fibrescope placed inside and proximal to the tip of the tracheal tube. This permitted sight of tube advancement, but without fibreoptic guidance (visualised blind intubation). MAIN OUTCOME MEASURES Primary outcome was successfully visualised blind intubation; secondary outcomes included supraglottic airway device success, insertion times, airway leak pressure, fibreoptic view and adverse events. RESULTS Personal data did not differ between groups. In contrast to our hypothesis, blind intubation was possible in 15% with the Air-Q and in 3% with the AmbuAura-i [95% confidence interval (95% CI) 6 to 31 vs. 0 to 13%; P = 0.057]. First attempt supraglottic airway device insertion success rates were 95% (Air-Q) and 100% (AmbuAura-i; 95% CI 83 to 99 vs. 91 to 100; P = 0.49). Median leak pressures were 18 cmH2O (Air-Q) and 17 cmH2O [AmbuAura-i; interquartile range (IQR) 14 to 18 vs. 14 to 19 cmH2O; P = 0.66]. Air-Q insertion was slower (27 vs. 19 s, P < 0.001). There was no difference in fibreoptic view, or adverse events (P > 0.05). In one child (Air-Q size 1.5, tube size 3.5), the tube dislocated during device removal. CONCLUSION Ventilation with both devices is reliable, but success of blind intubation is unacceptably low and cannot be recommended for elective or rescue purposes. If intubation through a paediatric supraglottic airway device is desired, we suggest that fibreoptic guidance is used. TRIAL REGISTRATION Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01692522.

Ethical procedures and patient consent differ in Europe.

BACKGROUND Research ethics approvals, procedures and requirements for institutional research ethics committees vary considerably by country and by type of organisation. OBJECTIVE To evaluate the requirements and procedures of research ethics committees, details of patient information and informed consent based on a multicentre European trial. DESIGN Survey of European hospitals participating in the prospective observational study on chronic postsurgical pain (euCPSP) using electronic questionnaires. SETTING Twenty-four hospitals in 11 European countries. PARTICIPANTS From the 24 hospitals, 23 local investigators responded; 23 answers were analysed. OUTCOME MEASURES Comparison of research ethics procedures and committee requirements from the perspective of clinical researchers. Comparison of the institutions' procedures regarding patient information and consent. Description of further details such as costs and the duration of the approval process. RESULTS The approval process lasted from less than 2 weeks up to more than 2 months with financial fees varying between 0 and 575 &OV0556;. In 20 hospitals, a patient information sheet of variable length (half page up to two pages) was provided. Requirements for patients' informed consent differed. Written informed consent was mandatory at 12, oral at 10 and no form of consent at one hospital. Details such as enough time for consideration, possibility for withdrawal and risks/benefits of participation were provided in 25 to 30% of the institutions. CONCLUSION There is a considerable variation in the administrative requirements for approval procedures by research ethics committees in Europe. This results in variation of the extent of information and consent procedures for the patients involved. TRIAL REGISTRATION euCPSP in Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT01467102; PAIN-OUT in Clinicaltrials.gov identifier: NCT02083835.