Search

Background Pain management after surgery is crucial to decrease perioperative morbidity and mortality. Acute pain services (APS) are multidisciplinary teams that represent a modern strategy to address pain inside hospitals. The APS defines and applies pain treatment protocols specific for each surgery. To evaluate the performance of the APS at our institute, we performed a large retrospective cohort study focusing on complications of epidural analgesia and IV opiates. Methods Data from the 10 years of activity of the APS were collected. Pain was assessed using the VAS at rest (VASr) and during movement (VASm) at each daily visit; the presence of side effects and complications was also assessed. Results A total of 17,913 adult patients were followed by APS during the study period. Epidural analgesia was used in 7,776 cases (43%), while 9,239 (52%) patients used IV patient-controlled analgesia (PCA). A combination of the 2 was used in 87 patients (0.5%). A total of 456 perineural catheters (2.6%) were placed, while 442 patients(2.5%) used other analgesic techniques. We recorded 163 dural punctures during catheter placement, with no epidural hematoma, epidural abscess, or meningitis, and no permanent modification in sensitive or motor functions. Conclusions In our large case series, APS was confirmed safe and effective in treating postoperative pain, using both epidural analgesia and IV PCA with morphine.

Aim of the study was to assess the impact of ERAS approach ("fluid restrictive and drainless") on open liver resections for HCC comparing their outcome with open resections in pre-ERAS period and with laparoscopic surgery.207 patients undergoing minor liver resection for HCC were divided into three groups: Group A, open minor resections in pre-ERAS period (95 patients); Group B, laparoscopic ERAS resections (55 patients); Group C, open ERAS resections (57 patients).Blood loss was lower in group C and B compared with group A. Postoperative morbidity was 26.5% in group A, 16.3% in group B and 12.1% in group C (p0.05). Ascites was less frequent in group B (7.5%) and C (6.2%) compared with group A (12%). Median time for functional recovery in group B (3 days) and C (3 days) was shorter compared with group A (5 days).Laparoscopic approach confirms to be associated with reduced blood loss and postoperative morbidity. In patients who cannot be candidates to minimally-invasive approach, ERAS management seems to allow blood loss and postoperative morbidity reduction: indeed, results achieved in this group of patients are more similar to those of laparoscopy than to pre-ERAS open surgery.

Background The aim of this study was to evaluate the impact of the fast-track approach in patients undergoing complex liver procedures and to analyse factors that influence morbidity and functional recovery. Methods Hepatic resections (2014–2016) were stratified according to difficulty score, obtaining a group of 215 complex resections (102 laparoscopic, 163 open). The laparoscopic group was matched by propensity score with open patients to obtain the minimally invasive liver surgery group (n = 102) and the open group (n = 102). Results Groups were similar in terms of patient and disease characteristics. The postoperative morbidity was 31.4% in the minimally invasive liver surgery and 38.2% in the open group (P = .05), and functional recovery was shorter in the minimally invasive liver surgery (respectively 4 versus 6 days, P = .041). The adherence to fast-track was high in both groups, with several items with higher penetrance in the minimally invasive liver surgery group. Among factors associated with morbidity and functional recovery, a laparoscopic approach and strict adherence to a fast-track protocol resulted in protective factors. Conclusion The combination of minimally invasive approaches and fast-track protocols allows a reduced rate of postoperative morbidity and satisfactory functional recovery even in the setting of complex liver resections. When the laparoscopic approach is not feasible, strict adherence to a fast-track program is associated with the achievement of adequate results and should be implemented.

Introduction. Post-operative pain con-trol improves surgical outcome and many hospitals created multidisciplinary teams, called “Acute Pain Services” (APS). We col-lected APS data on 10,760 adult patients over a five year period, including compli-cations, side effects and patient satisfac-tion.Methods. Data on patients managed by APS in a high surgical-volume university hospital over a 5-year period were col-lected and analyzed. Data included demo-graphic characteristics, primary analgesic modality, adjuvant analgesic treatment, type of surgical procedure, Visual Ana-logue Scale, and analgesia-related side-effects and complications.Results. Patient controlled analgesia with morphine was used in 4,992 surgical pa-tients while epidural analgesia was used in 3,687 surgical patients and 1,670 pregnant women for delivery analgesia. A total of 411 patients received other forms of analgesia. No epidural haematoma was observed. A single case of respiratory depression oc-curred in an elderly patient using the pa-tient controlled analgesia system. Acetami-nophen was the most frequently adjuvant drug prescribed. Postoperative nausea and vomiting was the most frequent analgesia-related side effect. Visual Analogue Scale at rest and on movement was low on day one (0.84±1.15 and 2.05±1.67) and decreased thereafter with epidural analgesia associ-ated with better pain control following hip and liver surgery, and with less postop-erative nausea and vomiting (5.0%) when compared to morphine patient controlled analgesia (7.2%).Conclusions. An APS, with daily postop-erative visits, permits adequate post-oper-ative pain control without serious adverse events. Epidural analgesia was associated with less postoperative nausea and vom-iting and had at least similar pain control than morphine patient controlled analge-sia.

Background Left lateral sectionectomy is one of the most commonly performed laparoscopic liver resections, but limited clinical data are actually available to support the advantage of laparoscopic versus open-liver surgery. The present study compared the short-term outcomes of laparoscopic versus open surgery in a case-matched analysis. Materials and Methods Surgical outcome of 20 patients who underwent left lateral sectionectomy by laparoscopic approach (LHR group) from September 2005 to January 2007 were compared in a case-control analysis with those of 20 patients who underwent open left lateral sectionectomy (OHR group). Both groups were similar for: tumor size, preoperative laboratory data, presence of cirrhosis, and histology of the lesion. Surgical procedures were performed in both groups combining the ultrasonic dissector and the ultrasonic coagulating cutter without portal clamping. Results Compared with OHR, the LHR group had a decreased blood loss (165 mL versus 214 mL, P=0.001), and earlier postoperative recovery (4.5 versus 5.8 days, P=0.003). There were no significant differences in terms of surgical margin and operative time. Morbidity was comparable between the two groups, but two cases of postoperative ascites were recorded in two cirrhotic patients in the OHR. Major complications were not observed in either groups. Conclusions Laparoscopic resection results in reduced operative blood loss and earlier recovery with oncologic clearance and operative time comparable with open surgery. Laparoscopic liver surgery may be considered the approach of choice for tumors located in the left hepatic lobe.

Central venous pressure (CVP) is used as a marker of cardiac preload to control intraoperative blood loss in open hepatectomies, while its reliability in laparoscopy is less certain. The aim of this randomized prospective trial was to evaluate the outcome of laparoscopic resections performed with stroke volume variation (SVV) or CVP monitoring.All candidates for laparoscopic liver resection were assigned randomly to SVV or to CVP groups. Outcome was evaluated included conversion rate, cause of conversion, intraoperative blood loss, need for transfusions, length of surgery and postoperative results.Ninety consecutive patients were enrolled: both SVV and CVP groups included 45 patients each and were comparable in terms of patient and disease characteristics. A reduced rate of conversion was recorded in the SVV compared to the CVP group (6.7% and 17.8% respectively, p = 0.02). Blood loss was lower in the SVV group (150 mL), compared to the CVP group (300 mL, p = 0.04). Morbidity, mortality, length of stay and functional recovery were comparable. On multivariate analysis, lesion location, extent of hepatectomy and type of cardiac preload monitoring were associated significantly to risk of conversion.SVV monitoring in laparoscopic liver surgery improves intraoperative outcome, thus enhancing the benefits of the minimally-invasive approach and fast-track protocols.

Hepatic injury secondary to warm ischemia-reperfusion (I/R) injury and alterations in haemostatic parameters are often unavoidable events after major hepatic resection. The release of inflammatory mediator is believed to play a significant role in the genesis of these events. It has been suggested that preoperative steroid administration may reduce I/R injury and improve several aspects of the surgical stress response. The aim of this prospective randomized study was to investigate the clinical benefits on I/R injury and systemic responses of preoperatively administered corticosteroids. Seventy-six patients undergoing liver resection were randomized either to a steroid group or to a control group. Patients in the steroid group received preoperatively 500 mg of methylprednisolone. Serum levels of alanine aminotransferase (ALT), aspartate aminotransferase (AST), total bilirubin, coagulation parameters, and inflammatory mediators, interleukin 6 and tumor necrosis factor alpha were compared between the 2 groups. Length of stay, and type and number of complications were recorded as well. Postoperative serum levels of ALT, AST, total bilirubin, and inflammatory cytokines were significantly lower in the steroid than in the control group at postoperative days 1 and 2. Changes in hemostatic parameters were also significantly attenuated in the steroid group. In conclusion, the incidence of postoperative complications in the steroid group tended to be significantly lower than the control group. It is of clinical interest that preoperative steroids administration before major surgery may reduce I/R injury, maintain coagulant/anticoagulant homeostasis, and reduce postoperative complications by modulating the inflammatory response.

Background Previous comparative studies have demonstrated that laparoscopic liver resection is associated with more frequent use and longer duration of portal camping than open liver resection, a fact that may partially explain the improvement in operative blood loss reported by most series of laparoscopic liver resection. The aim of this prospective study was to evaluate the real need for portal clamping in laparoscopic liver surgery. Study design Surgical outcomes of 40 consecutive patients who underwent laparoscopic liver resection for benign and malignant lesions from September 2005 to August 2007 were evaluate. Portal clamping was not systematically used. Results No patient required blood transfusion and median blood loss was 160 ml (range 100-340 ml). Mean operating time was 267 min (range 220-370 min) and portal clamping was necessary in only one patient. Surgical complications included two grade I complication, three grade II, and one case of postoperative hemorrhage (grade III). Conclusions Laparoscopic liver surgery without clamping can be performed safely with low blood loss.

Alterations in hemostatic parameters are a common finding after major hepatic resection. There is growing evidence that inflammation has a significant role in inducing coagulation disarrangement that follows major surgery. To determine whether preoperative methylprednisolone administration has a protective effect against the development of coagulation disorders, we evaluated the effect of preoperative steroids administration on changes in hemostatic parameters and plasma levels of inflammatory cytokines in patients undergoing liver surgery. Seventy-three patients undergoing liver resection were randomized to a steroid group or to a control group. Patients in the steroid group received 500 mg of methylprednisolone preoperatively. Serum levels of coagulation parameters (prothrombin time, platelets, fibrinogen, plasma fibrin degradation products [D-dimer], antithrombin III) and inflammatory mediators (IL-6 and TNF-alpha) were measured before and immediately after the operation and on postoperative days 1, 2, and 5. Multivariate analysis was performed to identify factors related to the characteristics of the patients and surgery affecting coagulation parameters between the two groups. Decreases in antithrombin III, platelet count and fibrinogen levels, prolongation of prothrombin time, and increases in the plasma fibrin degradation products were significantly suppressed by the administration of methylprednisolone. Cytokines production was also significantly suppressed by the administration of methylprednisolone, and there was significant correlation between plasma levels of cytokines and coagulation alterations. These findings suggest that preoperative methylprednisolone administration inhibits the development of coagulation disarrangements in patients undergoing liver resection, possibly through suppressing the production of inflammatory cytokines.

The purpose of this study was to evaluate the influence of age on the outcome of liver resections. One hundred five consecutive hepatic resections were divided into two groups: ≥65 years old [old group (O-group)] and

The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate the influence of age on the outcome of liver resection. A total of 129 consecutive liver resections were divided into two groups: greater than or equal to 70 years old [old group (O-group)] and < 70 years old [young group (Y-group)]. The two groups were first compared for the variables potentially affecting the postoperative course, including diagnosis, concomitant diseases, previous abdominal surgery, type of operation (major or minor resection), associated procedures, presence and length of portal clamping, intraoperative blood losses and transfusions, and length of operation. The outcome of liver resections was evaluated in terms of postoperative mortality, morbidity, transfusions, and length of hospitalization. The Y-group included 97 resections in 95 patients, aged 55.9 +/- 10.5 years (mean +/- SD; range: 23-69 years), and the O-group included 32 resections in 32 patients, aged 73.7 +/- 3.2 years (mean +/- SD; range: 70-82 years. The O-group included more hepatocellular carcinomas (46.9% versus 20.6%, p = 0.002) and cardiovascular diseases (15.2% versus 1.0%,p = 0.004). The two groups were comparable (p > 0.05) when evaluated for all other listed variables. As regards the postoperative outcome, the length of hospitalization was similar (median, range: 9.5 days, 5-60 days in the Y-group and 9 days, 5-48 days in the O-group) and the need for postoperative transfusions were not statistically different. Mortality included one case among young patients, while no deaths were recorded among elderly patients. Postoperative morbidity was higher in Y-group than in O-group (21.6% versus 9.4%, p = 0.2). In conclusion, the age factor does not negatively affect the outcome of liver resections.