Search

Federico Piccioni,1 Andrea Poli,1 Leah Carol Templeton,2 T Wesley Templeton,2 Marco Rispoli,3 Luigi Vetrugno,4 Domenico Santonastaso,5 Franco Valenza1,6 1Department of Critical and Supportive Care, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Milan, Italy; 2Department of Anesthesiology, Wake Forest University, Winston-Salem, NC, USA; 3Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, V. Monaldi Hospital, Naples, Italy; 4Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, Santa Maria della Misericordia University Hospital, Udine, Italy; 5Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, M. Bufalini Hospital, Cesena, Italy; 6Department of Oncology and Onco-Hematology, University of Milan, Milan, ItalyCorrespondence: Federico PiccioniDepartment of Critical and Supportive Care, Fondazione IRCCS Istituto Nazionale dei Tumori, Via Venezian 1, Milan 20133, ItalyTel +39 2 23902282Fax +39 2 23903366Email federico.piccioni@istitutotumori.mi.itAbstract: Percutaneous radiofrequency ablation (PRFA) of solid tumors is a minimally invasive procedure used to treat primary or metastatic cancer lesions via needle targeted thermal energy transfer. Some of the most common tumor lesions treated using PRFA include those within the liver, lungs and kidneys. Additionally, bone, thyroid, and breast lesions can also be treated. In most cases, this procedure is performed outside of the operating room in a specialized radiology suite. As a result, the clinician must adapt in many cases to the specific environmental issues attendant to providing anesthesia outside the operating room, including the lack of availability of an anesthesia machine in some cases, and frequently a lack of adequate scavenging and other specialized monitoring and equipment. At this time, routine practice and anesthetic prescriptions for PRFA can vary widely, ranging from patients receiving local anesthesia alone, to monitored anesthesia care, to regional anesthesia, to combined regional and general anesthesia. The choice of anesthetic technique will depend on tumor location and practitioner experience. This review aims to summarize the current state of the art in terms of anesthetic techniques for patients undergoing PRFA of solid tumors.Keywords: anesthesia, conduction, deep sedation, conscious sedation, neoplasms, radiofrequency ablation, radiography, interventional

Domenico P Santonastaso,1 Annabella de Chiara,1 Emanuele Russo,1 Giovanni Musetti,1 Leonardo Lucchi,2 Andrea Sibilio,3 Roberta Maltoni,4 Emiliano Gamberini,1 Maurizio Fusari,5 Vanni Agnoletti1 1Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AUSL Romagna, M. Bufalini Hospital, Cesena 47521, Italy; 2Day Surgery – Breast Unit, AUSL Romagna, M. Bufalini Hospital, Cesena 47521, Italy; 3General Surgery Unit, AUSL Romagna, Santa Maria delle Croci Hospital, Ravenna 48121, Italy; 4Breast Cancer Unit, Department of Medical Oncology, Istituto Scientifico Romagnolo per lo Studio e la Cura dei Tumori (IRST) IRCCS, Meldola 47014, Italy; 5Anesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AUSL Romagna, Santa Maria delle Croci Hospital, Ravenna 48121, ItalyCorrespondence: Domenico P SantonastasoAnesthesia and Intensive Care Unit, AUSL Romagna, M. Bufalini Hospital, Viale Ghirotti 286, Cesena, FC 47521, Italy Tel +39 349 258 5491Fax +39 54 735 2813Email domenicopietro.santonastaso@auslromagna.itBackground: General anesthesia (GA) is the most commonly used anesthesiological technique for radical mastectomy operations and can be associated with loco-regional anesthesia techniques. The aim of our study, carried out on 51 patients, was to assess the effectiveness of thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) associated with GA, or as a sole anesthesiological technique for postoperative pain control and for the reduction of intra and postoperative opioids consumption.Materials and methods: Fifty-one patients with neoplastic breast disease and elected as candidates for radical mastectomy were included in the study. The primary outcomes for this study were intra and postoperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain intensity. In 37 patients, TPVB was associated with GA while in 14 patients it was used as the sole anesthesiological technique. Data are reported as mean with standard deviation median with interquartile range, number, and percentage, depending on the underlying distribution.Results: We did not use intra or postoperative opioids for any patient and the Numeric Rate Scale, assessed at time 0, at the end of the surgery, and 2, 6, 12, and 24 hrs after surgery, was >3 in seven patients only.Conclusions: This study aims to show how TPVB can be used to carry out radical mastectomy procedures so that intra and postoperative opioids use can be avoided. In our study, TPVB was used in total mastectomy procedures in association with GA or as the sole anesthesiological technique, without the intra and postoperative use of opioids and with a significant reduction of local anesthetic dosages compared to those reported in the existing literature.Keywords: thoracic paravertebral block, mastectomy, opioids free anesthesia, awake breast surgery

Background: Rib fractures are one of the most common traumatic injuries and may result in significant morbidity and mortality. Despite growing evidence, technological advances and increasing acceptance, surgical stabilization of rib fractures (SSRF) remains not uniformly considered in trauma centers. Indications, contraindications, appropriate timing, surgical approaches and utilized implants are part of an ongoing debate. The present position paper, which is endorsed by the World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), and supported by the Chest Wall Injury Society, aims to provide a review of the literature investigating the use of SSRF in rib fracture management to develop graded position statements, providing an updated guide and reference for SSRF., Methods: This position paper was developed according to the WSES methodology. A steering committee performed the literature review and drafted the position paper. An international panel of experts then critically revised the manuscript and discussed it in detail, to develop a consensus on the position statements., Results: A total of 287 studies (systematic reviews, randomized clinical trial, prospective and retrospective comparative studies, case series, original articles) have been selected from an initial pool of 9928 studies. Thirty-nine graded position statements were put forward to address eight crucial aspects of SSRF: surgical indications, contraindications, optimal timing of surgery, preoperative imaging evaluation, rib fracture sites for surgical fixation, management of concurrent thoracic injuries, surgical approach, stabilization methods and material selection., Conclusion: This consensus document addresses the key focus questions on surgical treatment of rib fractures. The expert recommendations clarify current evidences on SSRF indications, timing, operative planning, approaches and techniques, with the aim to guide clinicians in optimizing the management of rib fractures, to improve patient outcomes and direct future research., (© 2024. The Author(s).)

Introduction: The management of thoracic paravertebral block (TPVB) and erector spine plane block (ESPB) in patients treated with anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy is based on limited clinical data, mostly from single case reports. Scientific societies and organizations do not provide strong detailed indications about the limitations of these regional anesthesia techniques in patients receiving antithrombotic therapy. This review summarizes evidence regarding TPVB and ESPB in patients under antithrombotic therapy., Evidence Acqusition: A literature review from PubMed/MEDLINE, EMBASE, Cochrane, Google Scholar and Web of Science databases was conducted from 1999 to 2022 to identify articles concerning TPVB and ESPB for cardio-thoracic surgery or thoracic procedures in patients under anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy., Evidence Synthesis: A total of 1704 articles were identified from the initial search. After removing duplicates and not-pertinent articles, 15 articles were analyzed. The results demonstrated a low risk of bleeding for TPVB and minimal or absent risk for ESPB. Ultrasound guidance was extensively used to perform ESPB, but not for TPVB., Conclusions: Although the low level of evidence available, TPVB and ESPB are reasonably safe options in patients ineligible for epidural anesthesia due to antithrombotic therapy. The few published studies suggest that ESPB offers a risk profile safer than TPVB and the use of ultrasound guidance minimizes any complication. Since the literature available does not allow us to draw definitive conclusions, future adequately-powered trials are warranted to determine the indications and the safety of TPVB and ESPB in patients receiving anticoagulant or antiplatelet therapy.

Background: Non-traumatic emergency general surgery involves a heterogeneous population that may present with several underlying diseases. Timeous emergency surgical treatment should be supplemented with high-quality perioperative care, ideally performed by multidisciplinary teams trained to identify and handle complex postoperative courses. Uncontrolled or poorly controlled acute postoperative pain may result in significant complications. While pain management after elective surgery has been standardized in perioperative pathways, the traditional perioperative treatment of patients undergoing emergency surgery is often a haphazard practice. The present recommended pain management guidelines are for pain management after non-traumatic emergency surgical intervention. It is meant to provide clinicians a list of indications to prescribe the optimal analgesics even in the absence of a multidisciplinary pain team., Material and Methods: An international expert panel discussed the different issues in subsequent rounds. Four international recognized scientific societies: World Society of Emergency Surgery (WSES), Global Alliance for Infection in Surgery (GAIS), Italian Society of Anesthesia, Analgesia Intensive Care (SIAARTI), and American Association for the Surgery of Trauma (AAST), endorsed the project and approved the final manuscript., Conclusion: Dealing with acute postoperative pain in the emergency abdominal surgery setting is complex, requires special attention, and should be multidisciplinary. Several tools are available, and their combination is mandatory whenever is possible. Analgesic approach to the various situations and conditions should be patient based and tailored according to procedure, pathology, age, response, and available expertise. A better understanding of the patho-mechanisms of postoperative pain for short- and long-term outcomes is necessary to improve prophylactic and treatment strategies., (© 2022. The Author(s).)