Laparoscopic surgery for benign adnexal conditions under spinal anaesthesia: Towards a multidisciplinary minimally invasive approach

Comparative analysis of spinal anesthesia versus general anesthesia in single-port access laparoscopic adnexal surgery: a propensity score matching study

This study evaluated the safety and efficacy of spinal anesthesia as an alternative to general anesthesia in single-port access (SPA) laparoscopic adnexal surgeries. 110 patients were recruited and, after propensity score matching, 63 (general anesthesia: 42, spinal anesthesia: 21) were analyzed. During surgery, the Trendelenburg position was limited to 15°, and CO2 pressure maintained at 8-12 mmHg. Postoperative pain and nausea/vomiting scores were assessed up to 48 h post-surgery. No significant differences in patient characteristics were noted between groups. Immediately postoperative, the spinal anesthesia group showed significantly lower pain scores (4.74 ± 1.48 in spinal anesthesia vs. 0.67 ± 0.66 in general anesthesia; p <.001) and nausea/vomiting scores (p =.027). Intraoperative hypotension occurred in both groups (28.6% in spinal anesthesia vs. 33.3% in general anesthesia; p =.774) and was managed with ephedrine. No other intraoperative or postoperative complications were noted. Conclusively, spinal anesthesia is a viable and safe option for SPA laparoscopic salpingo-oophorectomy, effectively reducing immediate postoperative pain and nausea/vomiting.

Ultra-low-impact laparoscopy: a new concept for a minimally invasive surgery

INTRODUCTION

Minimally invasive surgery is considered the gold standard for the treatment of gynecological diseases. Our study aims to assess the effectiveness of the new concept of ultra-low-impact laparoscopy as a combination of low-impact laparoscopy, consisting in the use of miniaturized instruments through 3-5mm ports and low-pressure pneumoperitoneum, with regional anesthesia to evaluate the perioperative outcomes.

METHODS

A cross-sectional study was performed from May 2023 to December 2023, to enroll 26 women affected by benign gynecological disease and threated by mini-invasive surgical approach. The surgical procedures were performed following the low-impact laparoscopy protocol and the regional anesthesia protocol. The postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting and the antiemetic/analgesic intake were evaluated. Postoperative surgical and anesthesiological variables were analyzed.

RESULTS

Operative time was within 90 min (41.1 ± 17.1 mean ± standard deviation (SD)) and no conversion to laparotomy or general anesthesia was required. According to VAS score, the postoperative pain during the whole observation time was less than 3 (mean). Faster resumption of bowel motility (6.5 ± 2.1 mean ± SD) and women's mobilization (3.1 ± 0.7 mean ± SD) were observed as well as low incidence of post-operative nausea and vomit. Early discharge and patient's approval were recorded. Intraoperatively pain score was assessed on Likert scale during all stages.

CONCLUSION

Ultra-low-impact laparoscopy showed to provide a satisfying recovery experience for patients in terms of short hospital stays, cosmetic result, and pain relief, without compromising surgical outcomes. The encouraging results lead us to recruit a greater number of patients to validate our technique as a future well-established produce.

Gynecological Laparoscopic Surgeries under Spinal Anesthesia: Benefits and Challenges

OBJECTIVE

This prospective study investigated the feasibility of performing laparoscopic pelvic surgery under spinal anesthesia and analyzed the intraoperative side effects, like pain, nausea, and vomitus, of 915 patients.

METHODS

The implementation and performance of laparoscopic surgery under local anesthesia on 915 patients (out of a total of 3212 who underwent laparoscopic pelvic surgery under spinal anesthesia) were analyzed in relation to BMI (body mass index), obesity, pain during surgery, amount of intraperitoneal mmHg CO2 gas pressure, and surgical complications.

RESULTS

BMI > 30, intra-abdominal adhesions, increased duration of the operation, bleeding, and increased intraperitoneal CO2 pressure were statistically significant as the main causes of pain during laparoscopic surgery under spinal anesthesia. Underweight patients, on the other hand, had less pain when intra-abdominal pressure increased compared to those of normal weight. The appearance of pain, nausea, and vomitus occurred in 10.3% of patients, and these events were easy to manage and treat. They did not affect the surgeon's work or the course of the operation.

CONCLUSIONS

In light of these observations, we are proposing spinal anesthesia for laparoscopic surgery as the first choice in patients who have no contraindications. To the best of our knowledge, this clinical study constitutes the largest clinical observation and dataset concerning spinal anesthesia in laparoscopic pelvic surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ISRCTN38987, 10 December 2019.

Minimally invasive anesthesia for laparoscopic hysterectomy: a case series

PURPOSE

Regional anesthesia (RA) is considered as a "minimally invasive technique" to achieve anesthesia. To assess the feasibility and the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic hysterectomy in regional anesthesia from the point of view of the surgeon, anesthesiologist and patient.

METHODS

A retrospective search was performed to identify patients who underwent laparoscopic hysterectomy under RA from April 2020 to September 2021. Five patients affected by benign gynecological disease (atypical endometrial hyperplasia or uterine leiomyomas) were included.

RESULTS

The postoperative pain, nausea, and vomiting (PONV) and the antiemetic/analgesic intake were evaluated. Postoperative surgical and anesthesiological variables were recorded. Duration of surgery was 84 ± 4.18 and no conversion to GA was required. According to VAS score, the postoperative pain during the whole observation time was less than 4 (median). A faster resumption of bowel motility (≤ 9 h) and patient's mobilization (≤ 4 h) were observed as well as a low incidence of post-operative nausea and vomit. Early discharge and greater patient's satisfaction were recorded. Intraoperatively pain score was assessed on Likert scale during all the stages of laparoscopy in RA, with only 2 patients complaining scarce pain (= 2) at pneumoperitoneum.

CONCLUSION

RA showed to have a great impact on surgical stress and to guarantee a quicker recovery without compromising surgical results. RA technique could be a viable option for patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Laparoscopic gynecological surgery under minimally invasive anesthesia: a prospective cohort study

The purpose of this study is to assess the feasibility and the perioperative outcomes of laparoscopic gynecological surgery in regional anesthesia (RA) from the point of view of the surgeon, anesthesiologist and patient. This is a prospective cohort study comprising sixty-six women planned to undergo gynecologic laparoscopy surgery for benign pathology at tertiary care gynecolgical center of the University Federico II of Naples. Women were assigned, according to their preference, to either RA (Group A) or general anesthesia (GA) (Group B). Surgical, anesthesiologic and postoperative recovery data were recorded. Postoperative pain was considered as the primary outcome. Secondary outcomes included mobilization, length of hospital stay, global surgeons and patient satisfaction, intraoperative pain assessment in Group A. Immediate postoperative pain was significantly lower in Group A 0 vs 2 (p < 0.001), with no significant differences at 24 h. The secondary outcome demonstrated early patient’s mobilization (p < 0.001) as well as early discharge (p < 0.001) and greater patient’s satisfaction for the Group A. In these patients, a maximum pain score of 3 points out of 5 was recorded through the entire surgery. RA showed to decrease the impact of surgical stress and to guarantee a quicker recovery without compromising surgical results. Although several surgical approaches can be employed to treat different conditions, RA technique could be a viable option for well-selected patients affected by gynecological diseases.

Laparoscopy in Gynecologic and Abdominal Surgery in Regional (Spinal, Peridural) Anesthesia, the Utility of the Technique during COVID-19 Pandemic

BACKGROUND

laparoscopic surgery is mainly performed in general anesthesia. Symptomatic patients infected with COVID-19 needing surgery are however at higher risk for COVID-19 complications in general anesthesia than in regional anesthesia. Even so, Covid transfection is a hazard to medical personnel during the intubation procedure and treatment drugs may be in shortage during a pandemic. Recovery and hospital stay are also shorter after laparoscopy. Laparoscopy performed in regional anesthesia may have several advantages in limiting Covid.

METHODS

international literature on the risk of COVID-19 complications development was searched. 3 topics concerning laparoscopic surgery were reviewed: (1) Achievements in laparoscopy; (2) Advantages of regional anesthesia compared to general anesthesia; (3) Feasibility to perform laparoscopy in regional anesthesia in COVID-19 pandemic. The authors reviewed abstracts and full-text articles concerning laparoscopic surgery, gynecology, anesthesia and COVID-19. Studies published in PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and found in Google Scholar before 1st FEB, 2021 were retrieved and analyzed.

RESULTS

a total of 83 studies were found, all of them written in English. 17 studies could be found in gynecology and in general surgery about laparoscopy with regional anesthesia. In Covid time only one study compared laparoscopic surgery in general anesthesia to laparotomy and another study laparotomy in general anesthesia to regional anesthesia. Laparoscopy showed no disadvantage compared to laparotomy in Covid pandemic and in another study laparotomy in general anesthesia was associated with higher mortality and more pulmonary complications. Trendelenburg position can be a threat if used by inexperienced personnel and can induce unintended anesthesia of breathing organs. On the other hand Trendelenburg position has advantages for cardiovascular and pulmonary functions. Pneumoperitoneum of low CO2 pressure is well tolerated by patients.

CONCLUSIONS

elective surgery should be postponed in symptomatic Covid patients. In inevitable emergency surgery intubation anesthesia in COVID-19 pandemic is as far as possible to be avoided. In COVID-19 pandemic, regional anesthesia is the preferred choice. The optimum may be the combination of laparoscopic surgery with regional anesthesia. Reducing the pneumoperitoneum is a good compromise for the comfort of patients and surgeons. A special case is gynecology, which needs to be performed in Trendelenburg position to free pelvic organs.