Project description:ImportanceIn minimally invasive thoracic surgery, paravertebral block (PVB) using ultrasound (US)-guided technique is an efficient postoperative analgesia. However, it is an operator-dependent process depending on experience and local resources. Because pain-control failure is highly detrimental, surgeons may consider other locoregional analgesic options.ObjectiveTo demonstrate the noninferiority of PVB performed by surgeons under video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS), hereafter referred to as PVB-VATS, as the experimental group compared with PVB performed by anesthesiologists using US-guided technique (PVB-US) as the control group.Design, setting, and participantsIn this single-center, noninferiority, patient-blinded, randomized clinical trial conducted from September 8, 2020, to December 8, 2021, patients older than 18 years who were undergoing a scheduled minimally invasive thoracic surgery with lung resection including video-assisted or robotic approaches were included. Exclusion criteria included scheduled open surgery, any antalgic World Health Organization level greater than 2 before surgery, or a medical history of homolateral thoracic surgery. Patients were randomly assigned (1:1) to an intervention group after general anesthesia. They received single-injection PVB before the first incision was made in the control group (PVB-US) or after 1 incision was made under thoracoscopic vision in the experimental group (PVB-VATS).InterventionsPVB-VATS or PVB-US.Main outcomes and measuresThe primary end point was mean 48-hour post-PVB opioid consumption considering a noninferiority range of less than 7.5 mg of opioid consumption between groups. Secondary outcomes included time of anesthesia, surgery, and operating room occupancy; 48-hour pain visual analog scale score at rest and while coughing; and 30-day postoperative complications.ResultsA total of 196 patients were randomly assigned to intervention groups: 98 in the PVB-VATS group (mean [SD] age, 64.6 [9.5] years; 53 female [54.1%]) and 98 in the PVB-US group (mean [SD] age, 65.8 [11.5] years; 62 male [63.3%]). The mean (SD) of 48-hour opioid consumption in the PVB-VATS group (33.9 [19.8] mg; 95% CI, 30.0-37.9 mg) was noninferior to that measured in the PVB-US group (28.5 [18.2] mg; 95% CI, 24.8-32.2 mg; difference: -5.4 mg; 95% CI, -∞ to -0.93; noninferiority Welsh test, P ≤ .001). Pain score at rest and while coughing after surgery, overall time, and postoperative complications did not differ between groups.Conclusions and relevancePVB placed by a surgeon during thoracoscopy was noninferior to PVB placed by an anesthesiologist using ultrasonography before incision in terms of opioid consumption during the first 48 hours.Trial registrationClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04579276.

Project description:BackgroundThe effect of marginal lung function on outcomes after lung resection has traditionally been studied in the context of open thoracic surgery. Its impact on postoperative outcomes in the era of minimally invasive lung resection is unclear.MethodsIn this retrospective cohort study, we included adult patients who underwent minimally invasive lung resection at our institution between January 2017 and May 2020 for known malignancy or lung nodule. Marginal lung function was defined as pre-operative forced expiratory volume in 1 second (FEV1) and/or diffusion lung capacity of carbon monoxide <60% of predicted. Our outcomes included a composite outcome of pulmonary morbidity and/or 30- and 90-day mortality, and hospital length of stay. We used multivariable logistic and Poisson regression models to identify associations with outcomes, and Kaplan-Meier and Cox models to estimate survival.ResultsOf 300 patients, 88 (29%) had marginal lung function. Patients in the marginal group were more likely to be female (69% vs. 56%; P=0.028), and more likely to have: hypertension (HTN) (83% vs. 71%; P=0.028), chronic obstructive pulmonary disease (COPD) (38% vs. 12%; P<0.001), interstitial lung disease (ILD) (9% vs. 3%; P<0.019), and ischemic heart disease (28% vs. 18%; P=0.033). Patients were similar in terms of age (68±8 vs. 68±10 years; P=0.932), and other comorbidities. Anatomic lung resection comprised 56.8% of the marginal group vs. 74% in the non-marginal group (P=0.003). The most common complication was prolonged air leak (18.2% vs. 11.8%; P=0.479). Marginal lung function had a trend toward increased composite respiratory complications (22.7% vs. 15.1%; P=0.112) and 90-day mortality (5.7% vs. 4.2%; P=0.591), although they did not reach statistical significance. There was a statistically significant 1-day average increase in length of stay in the marginal lung function cohort (4.6 vs. 3.4 days; P<0.015) with a stronger association with diffusion lung capacity of carbon monoxide than FEV1. Survival was similar (marginal function HR =1.0; P=0.994).ConclusionsIn the era of minimally invasive thoracic surgery, lung resection in patients with marginal lung function may be considered in select patients. These findings aid in the selection consideration and counseling of this patient population.

Project description:BackgroundRectus 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.MethodsPatients 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.ResultsA 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.ConclusionsTEA 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.

Dataset Information

Do we still need thoracic epidural analgesia in minimally invasive lung surgery?

Similar Datasets

OmicsDI is part of the ELIXIR infrastructure

Tweets