Search

Abstract Background Despite guideline recommendations, few institutions have implemented clinical pathways that incorporate frailty into routine decision‐making for patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). This paper presents an integrated clinical pathway designed to address the needs of frail patients undergoing RC. The purpose of the study is to determine whether a multifaceted prevention programme that tailors interventions to the syndromic components of frailty can improve postoperative morbidity and recovery time for patients. New insights will be gained into how to optimize the physical and mental status and quality of life of patients before and after surgery, up to 1 year later. Study design The Global RAdical Cystectomy Evaluation and Management (GRACEM) study is a prospective, observational, single‐centre, 2‐year cohort study. Patient enrolment began on 27 April 2023, and results are pending. Endpoints The primary endpoints are postoperative morbidity and the in‐hospital postoperative care burden. Postoperative morbidity is measured by the number of early (up to 1 month) and late (over 1 month and up to 12 months) complications, graded by severity according to the Clavien–Dindo classification. In‐hospital postoperative care burden is measured by the number and duration of key care processes as recorded by the Care Process Monitoring Chart, a tool developed for this study. Secondary endpoints are changes in frailty and health‐related quality of life (HRQoL) from pre‐intervention to planned follow‐up up to 1 year. Frailty is assessed with the Functional Limitations and Geriatric Syndromes Frailty Questionnaire (FLIGS‐FQ), another ad hoc tool. HRQoL is assessed using the EQ‐5D‐5L questionnaire combined with the cystectomy‐specific FACT‐Bl‐cys index from the first month of follow‐up. Patients and methods The GRACEM study includes patients with non‐metastatic, histologically confirmed, muscle‐infiltrating bladder cancer who underwent RC surgery with curative intent. This study is unique in that the GRACEM Core Team shares decision‐making throughout the pathway, from before the intervention to the end of the patient's follow‐up. The pathway involves the patient, family members and community services.

Abstract Background Value-based healthcare (VBHC) is an approach that focuses on delivering the highest possible value for patients while driving cost efficiency in health services. It emphasizes improving patient outcomes and experiences while optimizing the use of resources, shifting the healthcare system’s focus from the volume of services to the value delivered. Our study assessed the effectiveness of implementing a VBHC-principled, tailored preoperative evaluation in enhancing patient care and outcomes, as well as reducing healthcare costs. Methods We employed a quality improvement, before-and-after approach to assessing the effects of implementing VBHC strategies on the restructuring of the preoperative evaluation clinics at Humanitas Research Hospital. The intervention introduced a VBHC-tailored risk matrix during the postintervention phase (year 2021), and the results were compared with those of the preintervention phase (2019). The primary study outcome was the difference in the number of preoperative tests and visits at baseline and after the VBHC approach. Secondary outcomes were patient outcomes and costs. Results A total of 9722 patients were included: 5242 during 2019 (baseline) and 4,480 during 2021 (VBHC approach). The median age of the population was 63 (IQR 51–72), 23% of patients were classified as ASA 3 and 4, and 26.8% (2,955 cases) were day surgery cases. We found a considerable decrease in the number of preoperative tests ordered for each patient [6.2 (2.5) vs 5.3 (2.6) tests, p

Abstract Background Thoracic surgery is a high-risk surgery especially for the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Postoperative residual paralysis has been shown to be a risk factor for pulmonary complications. Nevertheless, there are few data in the literature concerning the use of neuromuscular blocking agent antagonists in patients undergoing lung surgery. Methods Seventy patients were randomized in three Italian centers to receive sugammadex or neostigmine at the end of thoracic surgery according to the depth of the residual neuromuscular block. The primary outcome was the time from reversal administration to a train-of-four ratio (TOFR) of 0.9. Secondary outcomes were the time to TOFR of 1.0, to extubation, to postanesthesia unit (PACU) discharge, postoperative complications until 30 days after surgery, and length of hospital stay. Results Median time to recovery to a TOFR of 0.9 was significantly shorter in the sugammadex group compared to the neostigmine one (88 vs. 278 s — P

Abstract Background The intraoperative period is often characterized by hemodynamic instability, and intraoperative hypotension is a common complication. The optimal mean arterial pressure (MAP) target in hypertensive patients is still not clear. We hereby describe the protocol and detailed statistical analysis plan for the high versus standard blood pressure target in hypertensive high-risk patients undergoing elective major abdominal surgery: the HISTAP randomized clinical trial. The HISTAP trial aims at addressing whether the use of a higher intraoperative MAP target in high-risk hypertensive surgical patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgery would improve postoperative outcomes, as compared to the standard and recommended perioperative MAP, by using a composite outcome including a 30-day mortality from surgical intervention and at least one major organ dysfunction or new onset of sepsis and septic shock occurring 7 days after surgery. Methods The HISTAP trial is an investigator-initiated, pragmatic, parallel-grouped, randomized, stratified, analyst-blinded trial with adequate allocation sequence generation, and allocation concealment. We will allocate 636 patients to a MAP target ≥ 80 mmHg (treatment group) or to a MAP target ≥65 mmHg (control group). The primary outcome is a composite outcome including a 30-day mortality from the operation and major organ complications. Secondary outcomes are mortality at 30 days, intensive care unit (ICU) length of stay, ICU readmission, Sequential Organ Failure Assessment (SOFA) scores recorded up to postoperative day 7, overall intraoperative fluid balance, vasopressors use, and the need for reoperation. An unadjusted χ 2 test will be used for the primary outcome analysis. A Cox proportional hazards model will be used to adjust the association between the primary outcome and baseline covariates. Conclusions The HISTAP trial results will provide important evidence to guide clinicians’ choice regarding the intraoperative MAP target in high-risk hypertensive patients scheduled for elective abdominal surgery.

Dunbar syndrome is caused by the compression of the celiac artery by the median arcuate ligament (MAL) and the diaphragmatic crura, presenting with abdominal pain. The treatment is surgical, with the aim of dissecting and separating the diaphragmatic crura from the celiac axis, restoring blood flow in the celiac trunk. We propose the use of transesophageal echocardiography to measure the peak systolic velocity in the celiac trunk and to evaluate, in real time, the efficacy of the surgery during MAL resection. Two clinical cases with practical implications are reported. In one of these, the ultrasound exam was useful in providing an intraoperative confirmation of the outcome of the resection.

For a long time, non-small cell lung cancer (NSCLC) arising less than 2 cm distal to the carina has been usually considered unresectable and incurable with a radical or extended resection because of surgical technical difficulty and airway management. Recently, the introduction of more advanced surgical techniques, often including the use of extracorporeal life support (ECLS), has allowed us to extend the limits of conventional surgery, increasing the rate of complete surgical resection. ECLS also overcomes the limitation of conventional ventilation during complex tracheo-bronchial reconstruction, avoiding the presence of disturbing lines or tubes that obstruct the operative field during a challenging surgery. In this article, we share our experience in performing right tracheal sleeve pneumonectomy with veno-venous extracorporeal membrane oxygenation (VV-ECMO) in three cases by anterior right thoracotomy, reporting our tips and tricks.

Abstract Background Non-Intubated Thoracic Surgery (NITS) is becoming increasingly adopted all over the world. Although it is mainly used for pleural operations,, non-intubated parenchymal lung surgery has been less frequently reported. Recently, NITS utilization seems to be increased also in Italy, albeit there are no multi-center studies confirming this finding. The objective of this survey is to assess quantitatively and qualitatively the performance of NITS in Italy. Methods In 2018 a web-based national survey on Non-Intubated management including both thoracic surgeons and anesthesiologists was carried out. Reference centers have been asked to answer 32 questions. Replies were collected from June 26 to November 31, 2019. Results We raised feedbacks from 95% (55/58) of Italian centers. Seventy-eight percent of the respondents perform NITS but only 38% of them used this strategy for parenchymal surgery. These procedures are more frequently carried out in patients with severe comorbidities and/or with poor lung function. Several issues as obesity, previous non-invasive ventilation and/or oxygen therapy are considered contraindications to NITS. The regional anesthesia technique most used to provide intra- and postoperative analgesia was the paravertebral block (37%). Conversion to general anesthesia is not anecdotal (31% of answerers). More than half of the centers believed that NITS may reduce postoperative intensive care unit admissions. Approximately a quarter of the centers are conducting trials on NITS and, three quarters of the respondent suppose that the number of these procedures will increase in the future. Conclusions There is a growing interest in Italy for NITS and this survey provides a clear view of the national management framework of these procedures.

Abstract Background Airway management for thoracic surgery represents a high risk setting for SARS-CoV-2 infection diffusion due to complex and invasive airway instrumentation and techniques. Results An 18-item questionnaire was submitted to the 56 members of the Thoracic subcommittee of the SIAARTI Cardio-Thoraco-Vascular Research Group to provide a snapshot of current situation and national variability of devices and procedures for airway management during the COVID-19 pandemic. The response rate was 64%. Eighty-three percent of anesthetists declared that they modified their airway management strategies. The Hospital Management considered necessary to provide a complete level 3 personal protective equipment for thoracic anesthetists only in 47% of cases. Double-lumen tube and bronchial blocker were preferred by 53% and 22% of responders to achieve one-lung ventilation respectively. Over 90% of responders considered the videolaryngoscope with separate screen and rapid sequence induction/intubation useful to minimize the infection risk. Thirty-nine percent of participants considered mandatory the bronchoscopic check of airway devices. Vivasight-DL was considered comfortable by more than 50% of responders while protective box and plastic drape were judged as uncomfortable by most of anesthetists. Conclusions The survey reveals many changes in the clinical practice due to SARS-CoV-2 outbreak. A certain diffusion of new devices such as the VivaSight-DL and barrier enclosure systems emerged too. Finally, we found that most of Italian hospitals did not recognize thoracic anesthesia as a high-risk specialty for risk of virus diffusion.

Objectives. During coronavirus disease (COVID-19) pandemic, preoperative screening before thoracic surgery is paramount in order to protect patients and staff from undetected infections. This study aimed to determine which preoperative COVID-19 screening tool was the most effective strategy before thoracic surgery. Methods. This retrospective cohort multicenter study was performed at 3 Italian thoracic surgery centers. All adult patients scheduled for thoracic surgery procedures from 4th March until 24th April, 2020, and submitted to COVID-19 preoperative screenings were included. The primary outcome was the yield of screening of the different strategies. Results. A total of 430 screenings were performed on 275 patients; 275 anamnestic questionnaires were administered. 77 patients were screened by an anamnestic questionnaire and reverse transcriptase polymerase chain reaction (RT-PCR). 78 patients were selected to combine screening with anamnestic questionnaire and chest computed tomography (CT). The positive yield of screening using a combination of anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR was 7.8% (95% CI: 2.6–14.3), while using a combination of anamnestic questionnaire and chest CT was 3.8% (95% CI: 0–9). Individual yields were 1.1% (95% CI: 0–2.5) for anamnestic questionnaire, 5.2% (95% CI: 1.3–11.7) for RT-PCR, and 3.8% (95% CI: 0–9). Conclusions. The association of anamnestic questionnaire and RT-PCR is able to detect around 8 positives in 100 asymptomatic patients. This combined strategy could be a valuable preoperative SARS-CoV-2 screening tool before thoracic surgery.

Abstract Introduction Anesthetic care in patients undergoing thoracic surgery presents specific challenges that necessitate standardized, multidisciplionary, and continuously updated guidelines for perioperative care. Methods A multidisciplinary expert group, the Perioperative Anesthesia in Thoracic Surgery (PACTS) group, comprising 24 members from 19 Italian centers, was established to develop recommendations for anesthesia practice in patients undergoing thoracic surgery (specifically lung resection for cancer). The project focused on preoperative patient assessment and preparation, intraoperative management (surgical and anesthesiologic care), and postoperative care and discharge. A series of clinical questions was developed, and PubMed and Embase literature searches were performed to inform discussions around these areas, leading to the development of 69 recommendations. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were graded using the United States Preventative Services Task Force criteria. Results Recommendations for preoperative care focus on risk assessment, patient preparation (prehabilitation), and the choice of procedure (open thoracotomy vs. video-assisted thoracic surgery). Conclusions These recommendations should help pulmonologists to improve preoperative management in thoracic surgery patients. Further refinement of the recommendations can be anticipated as the literature continues to evolve.

Abstract Introduction Anesthetic care in patients undergoing thoracic surgery presents specific challenges that require a multidisciplinary approach to management. There remains a need for standardized, evidence-based, continuously updated guidelines for perioperative care in these patients. Methods A multidisciplinary expert group, the Perioperative Anesthesia in Thoracic Surgery (PACTS) group, was established to develop recommendations for anesthesia practice in patients undergoing elective lung resection for lung cancer. The project addressed three key areas: preoperative patient assessment and preparation, intraoperative management (surgical and anesthesiologic care), and postoperative care and discharge. A series of clinical questions was developed, and literature searches were performed to inform discussions around these areas, leading to the development of 69 recommendations. The quality of evidence and strength of recommendations were graded using the United States Preventive Services Task Force criteria. Results Recommendations for intraoperative care focus on airway management, and monitoring of vital signs, hemodynamics, blood gases, neuromuscular blockade, and depth of anesthesia. Recommendations for postoperative care focus on the provision of multimodal analgesia, intensive care unit (ICU) care, and specific measures such as chest drainage, mobilization, noninvasive ventilation, and atrial fibrillation prophylaxis. Conclusions These recommendations should help clinicians to improve intraoperative and postoperative management, and thereby achieve better postoperative outcomes in thoracic surgery patients. Further refinement of the recommendations can be anticipated as the literature continues to evolve.

Non-intubated thoracic surgery (NITS) is a growing practice, alongside minimally invasive thoracic surgery. To date, only a consensus of experts provided opinions on NITS leaving a number of questions unresolved. We then conducted a scoping review to clarify the state of the art regarding NITS. The systematic review of all randomized and non-randomized clinical trials dealing with NITS, based on Pubmed, EMBASE, and Scopus, retrieved 665 articles. After the exclusion of ineligible studies, 53 were assessed examining: study type, Country of origin, surgical procedure, age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologist's physical status, airway management device, conversion to orotracheal intubation and pulmonary complications rates and length of hospital stay. It emerged that NITS is a procedure performed predominantly in Asia, and certain European Countries. In China, NITS is more frequently performed for parenchymal resection surgery, whereas in Europe, it is mainly employed for pleural pathologies. The most commonly used device for airway management is the laryngeal mask. The conversion rate to orotracheal intubation is a~3%. The results of the scoping review seem to suggest that NITS procedures are becoming increasingly popular, but its role needs to be better defined. Further randomized clinical trials are needed to better define the role of the clinical variables possibly impacting on the technique effectiveness.Systematic Review Registrationhttps://osf.io/mfvp3/, identifier: 10.17605/OSF.IO/MFVP3.

Preoperative identification of high-risk groups has been extensively studied to improve patients’ outcomes. Wearable devices, which can track heart rate and physical activity data, are starting to be evaluated for patients’ management. We hypothesized that commercial wearable devices (WD) may provide data associated with preoperative evaluation scales and tests, to identify patients with poor functional capacity at increased risk for complications. We conducted a prospective observational study including seventy-year-old patients undergoing two-hour surgeries under general anesthesia. Patients were asked to wear a WD for 7 days before surgery. WD data were compared to preoperatory clinical evaluation scales and with a 6-min walking test (6MWT). We enrolled 31 patients, with a mean age of 76.1 (SD ± 4.9) years. There were 11 (35%) ASA 3–4 patients. 6MWT results averaged 328.9 (SD ± 99.5) m. Daily steps and 𝑉𝑂2𝑚𝑎𝑥 as recorded using WD and were associated with 6MWT performance (R = 0.56, p = 0.001 and r = 0.58, p = 0.006, respectively) and clinical evaluation scales. This is the first study to evaluate WD as preoperative evaluation tools; we found a strong association between 6MWT, preoperative scales, and WD data. Low-cost wearable devices are a promising tool for the evaluation of cardiopulmonary fitness. Further research is needed to validate WD in this setting.

BackgroundPatient-controlled analgesia (PCA) is used to manage postoperative pain. Postoperatively, some patients need to be re-instructed on its correct use. This study explores the efficacy of re-instruction and illustrates a comprehensive version of the Silverman integrated approach (C-SIA), based on the integration of static and dynamic pain scores, morphine consumption, and the ratio between demanded and delivered PCA boluses (the DD ratio).MethodsIn total, 50 patients operated on for colorectal surgery were studied retrospectively. The change in DD ratio after re-instruction was analyzed as the primary endpoint. Re-instructed and not re-instructed subjects were compared according to DD ratio, pain scores, and morphine consumption. A secondary comparison was performed using the SIA and C-SIA scores, to illustrate the reliability of the latter tool. Agreement between C-SIA and SIA score was assessed using a Bland-Altman analysis.ResultsIn re-instructed patients, the DD ratio decreased after re-education (P = 0.011). Re-instructed patients had higher DD ratios (P = 0.018) and pain scores at rest (P = 0.024) and movement (P = 0.012) at 24 h after surgery than not re-instructed subjects. These differences disappeared at the 48 h visit. Both the SIA and C-SIA scores reflected these findings. C-SIA scores showed a higher coefficient of correlation with the DD ratio (r = 0.815; P < 0.001) than SIA scores (r = 0.663; P < 0.001). The C-SIA scores, in absolute values, being based on more variables, were, on average, 2.5 times the SIA score.ConclusionsRe-instruction is effective for optimizing PCA therapy. The C-SIA is an alternative to the SIA score that gives an overall measure of PCA therapy efficacy.