Category Archives: Hepato-Biliary-Pancreatic

Perioperative fluid management: restrictive vs liberal regimens

Posted on by
Reply

One discussion this week included restrictive vs liberal perioperative fluid management on the development of perioperative acute kidney injury.

References: Brandstrup B, et al. Effects of intravenous fluid restriction on postoperative complications: comparison of two perioperative fluid regimens: a randomized assessor-blinded multicenter trial. Annals of Surgery. 2003 Nov;238(5):641-648.

Myles PS, et al. Restrictive versus liberal fluid therapy for major abdominal surgery. NEJM. 2018 Jun 14;378:2263-2274. doi:10.1056/NEJMoa1801601

Summary: Traditional intravenous-fluid regimens administered during abdominal surgery deliver up to 7 liters of fluid on the day of surgery. Some small trials have shown that a more restrictive fluid regimen led to fewer complications and a shorter hospital stay. However, the evidence for fluid restriction during and immediately after abdominal surgery is inconclusive. Fluid restriction could increase the risk of hypotension and decrease perfusion in the kidney and other vital organs, leading to organ dysfunction, but excessive intravenous-fluid infusion may increase the risk of pulmonary complications, acute kidney injury, sepsis, and poor wound healing (Myles 2018).

Each of the RCTs below compare restrictive vs liberal fluid management, with conflicting conclusions.

BRANDSTRUB ET AL (2003)

This multicenter RCT involved 172 patients allocated to either a restricted or a standard intraoperative and postoperative intravenous fluid regimen. The restricted regimen aimed at maintaining preoperative body weight; the standard regimen resembled everyday practice. The primary outcome measures were complications; the secondary measures were death and adverse effects.

Results: The restricted intravenous fluid regimen significantly reduced postoperative complications both by intention-to-treat (33% versus 51%, P = 0.013) and per-protocol (30% versus 56%, P = 0.003) analyses. The numbers of both cardiopulmonary (7% versus 24%, P = 0.007) and tissue-healing complications (16% versus 31%, P = 0.04) were significantly reduced. No patients died in the restricted group compared with 4 deaths in the standard group (0% versus 4.7%, P = 0.12). No harmful adverse effects were observed.

Conclusion: The restricted perioperative intravenous fluid regimen aiming at unchanged body weight reduces complications after elective colorectal resection.

MYLES ET AL (2018)

This international trial randomly assigned 3000 patients who had an increased risk of complications while undergoing major abdominal surgery to receive a restrictive or liberal intravenous-fluid regimen during and up to 24 hours after surgery. The primary outcome was disability-free survival at 1 year. Key secondary outcomes were acute kidney injury at 30 days, renal-replacement therapy at 90 days, and a composite of septic complications, surgical-site infection, or death.

Results: Up to 24 hours after surgery, 1490 patients in the restrictive fluid group had a median intravenous-fluid intake of 3.7 liters, as compared with 6.1 liters in 1493 patients in the liberal fluid group. The rate of disability-free survival at 1 year was 81.9% in the restrictive fluid group and 82.3% in the liberal fluid group. The rate of AKI was 8.6% in the restrictive fluid group and 5.0% in the liberal fluid group. The rate of septic complications or death was 21.8% in the restrictive fluid group and 19.8% in the liberal fluid group; rates of surgical-site infection (16.5% vs. 13.6%) and renal-replacement therapy (0.9% vs. 0.3%) were higher in the restrictive fluid group, but the between-group difference was not significant after adjustment for multiple testing.

Conclusion: Among patients at increased risk for complications during major abdominal surgery, a restrictive fluid regimen was not associated with a higher rate of disability-free survival than a liberal fluid regimen and was associated with a higher rate of acute kidney injury.

Additional Reading: Romagnoli S, Ricci Z, Ronco C. Perioperative acute kidney injury: prevention, early recognition, and supportive measures. Nephron. 2018;140(2):105-110.

Salmasi V, et al. Relationship between intraoperative hypotension, defined by either reduction from baseline or absolute thresholds, and acute kidney and myocardial injury after noncardiac surgery: a retrospective cohort analysis. Anesthesiology. 2017;126:47-65. doi:10.1097/ALN.0000000000001432

OpenAnesthesia. Encyclopedia: Fluid Management. OpenAnesthesia. 2019. International Anesthesia Research Society. Retrieved from: http://www.openanesthesia.org/fluid-management/

EAST guidelines on the use of antibiotics in thoracostomy

Posted on by
Reply

One discussion this week involved the use of antibiotics in thoracostomy.

Reference: Moore FO et al. Presumptive antibiotic use in tube thoracostomy for traumatic hemopneumothorax: An Eastern Association for the Surgery of Trauma practice management guideline. 2012. Retrieved from: https://www.east.org/education/practice-management-guidelines/tube-thoracostomy-presumptive-antibiotics-in

Summary:  A systematic review was done by 10 acute care surgeons and one statistician to update the 1998 guidelines for EAST. Routine presumptive antibiotic use to reduce the incidence of empyema and pneumonia in tube thoracostomy (TT) for traumatic hemopneumothorax is controversial. Moore et al (2012) conclude that there is insufficient published evidence to support any recommendation either for or against this practice. The authors further state that “until a large and likely multicenter, randomized, controlled trial can be performed, the routine practice of presumptive antibiotics in TT for chest trauma will remain controversial.”

Additionally, the authors are unable to recommend an optimal duration of antibiotic prophylaxis when antibiotics are administered for traumatic hemopneumothorax because there are insufficient published data to support the routine use of antibiotics.

Additional Reading: Department of Surgical Education, Orlando Regional Medical Center. Chest Tube Management. 2016 Sept 8. Retrieved from http://www.surgicalcriticalcare.net/Guidelines/Chest%20tube%20management%202016.pdf

Prophylactic Flomax for prevention of postoperative urinary retention

Posted on by
Reply

One discussion this week involved the use of prophylactic flomax in preventing postoperatuve urinary retention (POUR).

Reference: Ghuman A, et al. Prophylactic use of alpha-1 adrenergic blocking agents for prevention of postoperative urinary retention: A review & meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials. American Journal of Surgery. 2018 May;215(5):973-979. doi: 10.1016/j.amjsurg.2018.01.015. Epub 2018 Feb 3.

Summary: With an increase in outpatient and fast-track surgical procedures, urethral catheterization is used less commonly thus increasing the likelihood of POUR. Urethral catheterization, a mainstay of initial management for patients with POUR, can
be associated with prolonged length of hospital stay and complications, such as urinary tract infections that may increase cost of care.

Continue reading →

Use of DOTATATE in the surgical management of small bowel neuroendocrine tumors

Posted on by
Reply

A discussion this week included the use of DOTATATE in the surgical management of small bowel neuroendocrine tumors.

Reference: Howe JR et al. The surgical management of small bowel neuroendocrine tumors: consensus guidelines of the North American Neuroendocrine Tumor Society (NANTES). Pancreas. 2017 Jul;46(6):715-731. doi:10.1097/MPA.0000000000000846

Summary: The three most commonly used 68Ga-labeled somatostatin receptor PET imaging agents are 68Ga-DOTATATE, 68Ga-DOTATOC and 68Ga-DOTANOC. Despite the slight variation of the somatostatin receptor affinity of these agents, all of them have shown excellent sensitivity in detection of NETs. At this time, there is no evidence of significant diagnostic superiority of one agent over the others.

Continue reading →

Simultaneous vs staged colorectal and hepatic resections

Posted on by
1

One discussion this week involved the comparison of simultaneous and staged resections of colorectal cancer and synchronous colorectal liver metastases (SCRLM).

Reference: Reddy SK, et al. Simultaneous resections of colorectal cancer and synchronous liver metastases: a multi-institutional analysis. Annals of Surgical Oncology. 2007 Dec;14(12):3481-3491. doi:10.1245/s10434-007-9522-5

Summary: In a retrospective study of 610 patients at three institutions between 1985 and 2006, the authors compared postoperative morbidity and mortality after simultaneous and staged resections of colorectal cancer and SCRLM.

Continue reading →

Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for initially unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma

Posted on by
1

One discussion this week included using chemotherapy to enable initially unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma (ICC) to be resectable.

Reference: Le Roy B, et al. Neoadjuvant chemotherapy for initially unresectable intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma. The British Journal of Surgery. 2018 Jun;105(7):839-847. doi: 10.1002/bjs.10641

Summary: Surgical resection is the standard treatment for ICC, with a 5-year survival rate of 25-35% for those presenting with potentially resectable disease. Those with initially unresectable ICC are treated with chemotherapy alone and have a poor prognosis (p.839). The strategy of conversion to secondary resectability through chemotherapy regimens has resulted in good long-term survival for other tumors (colorectal liver and neuroendocrine liver metastases).  The authors state there is no published data on the use of neoadjuvant chemotherapy to achieve secondary resectability in locally advanced ICC.

Continue reading →