Search

Application of the enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) to the bariatric surgical procedures is at its early stages with little consolidated evidence. This meta-analysis evaluates present literature and indicates pathways for development of evidence-based standardized ERAS protocols for bariatric surgery. Comparative trials between ERAS and conventional bariatric surgery published till June 2016 were searched in the medical database. Comparisons were made for length of stay (LOS), readmission, complications (major/minor), and reoperation rates. Trial sequential analysis (TSA) for the strength of meta-analysis was performed for the primary outcome LOS. Five subgroups with a total of 394 and 471 patients in ERAS and conventional group respectively were included. LOS was shorter in ERAS group by 1.56 ± 0.18 days (random-effects, p

Prophylactic continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) can prevent pulmonary adverse events following upper abdominal surgeries. The present meta-regression evaluates and quantifies the effect of degree/duration of (CPAP) on the incidence of postoperative pulmonary events. Medical databases were searched for randomized controlled trials involving adult patients, comparing the outcome in those receiving prophylactic postoperative CPAP versus no CPAP, undergoing high-risk abdominal surgeries. Our meta-analysis evaluated the relationship between the postoperative pulmonary complications and the use of CPAP. Furthermore, meta-regression was used to quantify the effect of cumulative duration and degree of CPAP on the measured outcomes. Seventy-three potentially relevant studies were identified, of which 11 had appropriate data, allowing us to compare a total of 362 and 363 patients in CPAP and control groups, respectively. Qualitatively, Odds ratio for CPAP showed protective effect for pneumonia [0.39 (0.19–0.78)], atelectasis [0.51 (0.32–0.80)] and pulmonary complications [0.37 (0.24–0.56)] with zero heterogeneity. For prevention of pulmonary complications, odds ratio was better for continuous than intermittent CPAP. Meta-regression demonstrated a positive correlation between the degree of CPAP and the incidence of pneumonia with a regression coefficient of +0.61 (95 % CI 0.02–1.21, P = 0.048, τ 2 = 0.078, r 2 = 7.87 %). Overall, adverse effects were similar with or without the use of CPAP. Prophylactic postoperative use of continuous CPAP significantly reduces the incidence of postoperative pneumonia, atelectasis and pulmonary complications in patients undergoing high-risk abdominal surgeries. Quantitatively, increasing the CPAP levels does not necessarily enhance the protective effect against pneumonia. Instead, protective effect diminishes with increasing degree of CPAP.

Present guidelines recommend bariatric surgery at BMI ≥40 kg/m2 or BMI ≥35 kg/m2 with obesity-related morbidity. Evidence for cost and mortality/morbidity risk of bariatric surgery and obesity-related diseases was evaluated determining equivalency point of absolute incremental mortality risk by BMI and risks associated with bariatric surgery. A stochastic model was developed evaluating costs related to surgical procedure at a given BMI. Bariatric surgery produces significant lifetime cost savings associated with diabetes, gallstones, hypertension, high cholesterol, colon cancer, heart disease, and stroke in men at BMI 30 kg/m2 for laparoscopic gastric bypass. For women, laparoscopic gastric bypass saves cost at BMI 32 kg/m2 and laparoscopic gastric banding at BMI 37 kg/m2. In white men, relative to single-year mortality risks by BMI, surgical intervention becomes risk-beneficial at BMI 25 kg/m2 for laparoscopic gastric banding, BMI 27 kg/m2 for laparoscopic gastric bypass procedure and open gastric banding, and BMI 37 kg/m2 for open gastric bypass. Risk benefit for African-American men by procedure occurs at BMI

Over the last four decades, as the rates of obesity have increased, so have the challenges associated with its anesthetic management. In the present review, we discuss perioperative anesthesia management issues that are modifiable by the early involvement of the surgical team. We sum up available evidence or expert opinion on issues like patient positioning, postoperative analgesia, and the effect of continuous positive airway pressure (CPAP) ventilation on surgical anastomosis. We also address established predictors of higher perioperative risk and suggest possible management strategies and concerns of obese patients undergoing same day procedures. Finally, a generalized pharmacological model relevant to altered pharmacokinetics in these patients is presented.

Postoperative nausea and vomiting is a major cause of patient dissatisfaction towards surgery. For bariatric surgery, increased vomiting/retching is detrimental to surgical anastomosis. The present study evaluated the efficacy of aprepitant (neurokinin-1 inhibitor) as a prophylactic antiemetic in morbidly obese patients for laparoscopic bariatric surgery. After institutional review board approval, 125 morbidly obese patients were recruited into this double-blind placebo-controlled trial. On random division, the patients received a tablet of aprepitant (80 mg) in group A, or a similar-appearing placebo in group P, an hour prior to surgery. All patients received intravenous ondansetron (4 mg) intraoperatively. Postoperatively, the patients were evaluated for nausea and vomiting by a blinded evaluator at 30 min, 1, 2, 6, 24, 48, and 72 h. Both groups were evenly distributed for age, body mass index, type, and length of surgery. Cumulative incidence of vomiting at 72 h was significantly lower in group A (3 %) compared to group P (15 %; p = 0.021). Odds ratio for vomiting in group P compared to group A was 5.47 times. On Kaplan–Meier plot, time to first vomiting was also significantly delayed in group A (p = 0.019). A higher number of patients showed complete absence of nausea or vomiting in group A compared to group P (42.18 vs. 36.67 %). On the other hand, nausea scores were unaffected by aprepitant, and no significant difference between groups was found at any of the measured time points. In morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery, addition of aprepitant to ondansetron can significantly delay vomiting episodes simultaneously lowering the incidence of postoperative vomiting.

To compare the efficacy and adverse effects of aerosolized L-epinephrine vs budesonide in the treatment of post-extubation stridor.Randomized controlled trial.Pediatric intensive care unit (PICU) of a tertiary teaching and referral hospital.Sixty two patients with a stridor score ?4 following extubation.Patients were randomized to receive either aerosolized L-epinephrine (n=32) or budesonide (n =30). Respiratory rate, heart rate, stridor score, blood pressure and oxygen saturation were recorded from 0 min to 24 hours.Stridor score remaining at4, need for renebulization and reintubation between 20 min to 24 hours were primary outcome measures. Tachycardia (HRnormal for age), hypertension (BP95th centile for age) and hypoxia (SpO292% for 5 min) were secondary outcome measures.Both drugs showed a significant and comparable decline in the median (95% CI) stridor scores from baseline to 60 min [4 (4.10-4.50) to 2.00 (1.46-2.67) for budesonide vs 4 (4.12-5.00) to 2.00 (1.31 -2.75) for epinephrine]. At 2 hours, the stridor scores were significantly lower in the epinephrine as compared to budesonide group [0.00 (0.69-1.81) vs 3.00(1.75-3.32); P =0.02)]. However, the proportion of patients with stridor score4 at any time between 20 min to 24 hrs (53.3% vs 53.1%; P=0.99), need for renebulization (40% vs 43.8%; P=0.76) and reintubation (20% vs 25%, P=0.638), and adverse effects were similar in both groups.Both aerosolized L-epinephrine and budesonide were equally effective in their initial therapeutic response in post-extubation stridor. However, epinephrine showed a more sustained effect.