Enhanced recovery protocol in laparoscopic liver surgery

Impact of Primary Tumor Location on Demographics, Resectability, Outcomes, and Quality of Life in Finnish Metastatic Colorectal Cancer Patients (Subgroup Analysis of the RAXO Study)

The primary tumor location (PTL) is associated with the phenotype, metastatic sites, mutations, and outcomes of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients, but this has mostly been studied according to sidedness (right vs. left sided). We studied right colon vs. left colon vs. rectal PTL in a real-life study population (n = 1080). Health-related quality of life (HRQoL) was assessed multi-cross-sectionally with QLQ-C30, QLQ-CR29, EQ-5D, and 15D. A chi-square, Kaplan-Meier, and Cox regression were used to compare the groups. The PTL was in the right colon in 310 patients (29%), the left colon in 396 patients (37%), and the rectum in 375 patients (35%). The PTL was associated with distinct differences in metastatic sites during the disease trajectory. The resectability, conversion, and resection rates were lowest in the right colon, followed by the rectum, and were highest in the left colon. Overall survival was shortest for right colon compared with left colon or rectal PTL (median 21 vs. 35 vs. 36 months), with the same trends after metastasectomy or systemic therapy only. PTL also remained statistically significant in a multivariable model. The distribution of symptoms varied according to PTL, especially between the right colon (with general symptoms of metastases) and rectal PTL (with sexual- and bowel-related symptoms). mCRC, according to PTL, behaves differently regarding metastatic sites, resectability of the metastases, outcomes of treatment, and HRQoL.

Comparison of intrathecal morphine and low-dose bupivacaine with intravenous morphine for postoperative analgesia in laparoscopic liver resection: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Laparoscopic liver surgery has undergone substantial advancements over the past few decades, and the key to this improvement has been an improved understanding of liver anatomy, radiologic imaging, and advancements in anesthesia and postoperative care. This study aimed to compare postoperative opioid consumption in patients receiving intrathecal morphine plus low-dose bupivacaine versus those receiving intravenous morphine.

METHODS

In this randomized controlled trial, 40 patients were enrolled and randomly assigned to two groups, of which one received 0.2 mg intrathecal morphine plus 0.25% Marcaine in a total volume of 4 mL and the other received intravenous morphine intraoperatively. Pain relief and patient satisfaction were evaluated using the visual analog scale. Intraoperative blood loss was measured at the end of the surgery while morphine consumption was measured by monitoring intravenous patient-controlled morphine at 12, 24, 36, and 48 h postoperatively. Treatment efficacy and complications were documented.

RESULTS

Morphine consumption was significantly different in both groups at all time points, although the pain score did not show any difference. Shoulder pain, a common adverse effect of laparoscopic surgery, was significantly lower in the intrathecal group (25% vs. 75%). Blood loss and patient satisfaction were not different between the groups. However, the intrathecal group showed a significantly higher incidence of intraoperative hypotension.

CONCLUSION

Intrathecal morphine with bupivacaine can be used effectively for managing acute post-LLR pain.

THAI CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRY

TCTR20211015004.

A chronological review of 500 minimally invasive liver resections in a North American institution: overcoming stagnation and toward consolidation

BACKGROUND

Although interest in expanding the application of minimally invasive liver resection (MILR) is high the world over, most of the extensive experience in MILR has been reported from Far East Asia and Europe and its adoption in North America is limited. The aim of this study was to review the experience of MILR in a single North American institute over a 15-year period, highlighting both the obstacles encountered and strategies adopted to overcome the stagnation in its uptake.

METHODS

This study included 500 MILR cases between 2006 and 2020. Patient demographics, disease characteristics, surgical technique, and perioperative outcomes are summarized. The major hepatectomy rate and conversion rate were assessed according to case numbers (first 100, 101-300, and 301-500 cases) to assess chronological trends.

RESULTS

Of 500, 402 MILRs were done by pure laparoscopic (80.4%), 67 were hand assisted (13.4%), and 31 were robotic (6.2%). The majority (64%) of cases were performed for malignancy (n = 320; 100 Hepatocellular carcinoma, 153 Colorectal metastases, 27 Intrahepatic cholangiocarcinoma, and others, 40, 64%). A total of 71 cases were converted to open (14.2%). The annual case number gradually increased over the first few years; however, case numbers stayed around 30 between 2009 and 2017. In this period, despite accumulating MILR experience, open conversion rates increased despite no change in major hepatectomy rate. After this period of long-term stagnation, we introduced crucial changes in team composition and laparoscopic instrumentation. Our MILR case number and major hepatectomy rate thereafter increased significantly without increasing conversion or complication rates.

CONCLUSION

Our recovery from long-term stagnation by instituting key changes as detailed in this study could be used as a guidepost for programs that are contemplating transitioning their MILR program from minor to advanced resections. Establishing a formal MILR training model through proper mentorship/proctorship and building a dedicated MILR team would be imperative to this strategy.

THERE ARE NO ADVANTAGES BETWEEN LAPAROSCOPIC AND OPEN LIVER RESECTIONS WITHIN AN ENHANCED RECOVERY PROGRAM (ERAS)

BACKGROUND

The use of a successful Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) in colorectal surgery favored its application in other organs, and hepatic resections were not excluded from this tendency. Some authors suggest that the laparoscopic approach is a central element to obtain better results.

AIM

To compare the laparoscopic vs. open hepatic resections within an ERAS to evaluate if there are any differences between them.

METHODS

In a descriptive study 80 hepatic resections that were divided into two groups, regarding to whether they were submitted to laparoscopy or open surgery. Demographic data, those referring to the hepatectomy and the ERAS was analyzed.

RESULTS

Forty-seven resections were carried out in open surgery and the rest laparoscopically; in the first group there was only one conversion to open surgery. Of the total, 17 resections were major hepatectomies and in 18 simultaneous resections. There were no differences between procedures regarding hospital stay and number of complications. There was a greater adherence to the ERAS (p=0.046) and a faster ambulation (p=0.001) in the open surgery.

CONCLUSION

The procedure, whether open or laparoscopically done in hepatic resections, does not seem to show differences in an ERAS evaluation.

Supervised Immediate Postoperative Mobilization After Elective Colorectal Surgery: A Feasibility Study

BACKGROUND

Early mobilization is a significant part of the ERAS^® Society guidelines, in which patients are recommended to spend 2 h out of bed on the day of surgery. However, it is not yet known how early patients can safely be mobilized after completion of colorectal surgery. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility, and safety of providing almost immediate structured supervised mobilization starting 30 min post-surgery at the postoperative anesthesia care unit (PACU), and to describe reactions to this approach.

METHODS

This feasibility study includes 42 patients aged ≥18 years who received elective colorectal surgery at Örebro University Hospital. They underwent a structured mobilization performed by a specialized physiotherapist using a modified Surgical ICU Optimal Mobilization Score (SOMS). SOMS determines the level of mobilization at four levels from no activity to ambulating. Mobilization was considered successful at SOMS ≥ 2, corresponding to sitting on the edge of the bed as a proxy of sitting in a chair due to lack of space.

RESULTS

In all, 71% (n = 30) of the patients reached their highest level of mobilization between the second and third hour of arrival in the PACU. Before discharge to the ward, 43% (n = 18) could stand at the edge of the bed and 38% (n = 16) could ambulate. Symptoms that delayed advancement of mobilization were pain, somnolence, hypotension, nausea, and patient refusal. No serious adverse events occurred.

CONCLUSIONS

Supervised mobilization is feasible and can safely be initiated in the immediate postoperative care after colorectal surgery. Trial registration Clinical trials.gov identifier: NTC03357497.