Prophylaxis of postoperative complications after craniotomy

Fosaprepitant Does Not Interfere With Commonly Used Intraoperative Neuromonitoring Modalities Under General Anesthesia: A Preliminary Study

BACKGROUND

Fosaprepitant [Emend®], a neurokinin type-1 [NK-1] receptor antagonist, is a highly effective for the prophylaxis of postoperative nausea and vomiting [PONV] after general anesthesia; it is particularly effective in patients undergoing neurosurgical procedures. Based on the widespread distribution of NK-1 receptors in the central and peripheral nervous systems, we sought to determine whether fosaprepitant administration would interfere with commonly used intraoperative neurophysiologic monitoring modalities during general anesthesia.

METHODS

Eleven patients having propofol-based general anesthesia for interventional neuroradiology procedures were administered 150 mg fosaprepitant intravenously after baseline electroencephalogram [EEG], transcranial motor evoked potential [TcMEP], and somatosensory evoked potential [SSEP] recordings were obtained. Recordings of these neuromonitoring modalities at 30, 60, and 90 min after fosaprepitant administration were compared to baseline.

RESULTS

Fosaprepitant did not have a significant effect on SSEP/TcMEP amplitudes or latencies, or on TcMEP morphology. There were also no changes in EEG voltage, frequency, or symmetry.

CONCLUSION

Fosaprepitant does not appear to markedly interfere with SSEP, TcMEP, or EEG neuromonitoring modalities during propofol-based general anesthesia.

Intravenous AAV9 administration results in safe and widespread distribution of transgene in the brain of mini-pig

Animal models are important for understanding the pathogenesis of human diseases and for developing and testing new drugs. Pigs have been widely used in the research on the cardiovascular, skin barrier, gastrointestinal, and central nervous systems as well as organ transplantation. Recently, pigs also become an attractive large animal model for the study of neurodegenerative diseases because their brains are very similar to human brains in terms of mass, gully pattern, vascularization, and the proportions of the gray and white matters. Although adeno-associated virus type 9 (AAV9) has been widely used to deliver transgenes in the brain, its utilization in large animal models remains to be fully characterized. Here, we report that intravenous injection of AAV9-GFP can lead to widespread expression of transgene in various organs in the pig. Importantly, GFP was highly expressed in various brain regions, especially the striatum, cortex, cerebellum, hippocampus, without detectable inflammatory responses. These results suggest that intravenous AAV9 administration can be used to establish large animal models of neurodegenerative diseases caused by gene mutations and to treat these animal models as well.

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) for Cranial Tumor Resection: A Review

Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocols describe a standardized method of preoperative, perioperative, and postoperative care to enhance outcomes and minimize complication risks surrounding elective surgical intervention. A growing body of evidence is being generated as we learn to apply principles of ERAS standardization to neurosurgical patients. First applied in spinal surgery, ERAS protocols have been extended to cranial neuro-oncological procedures. This review synthesizes recent findings to generate evidence-based guidelines to manage neurosurgical oncology patients with standardized systems and assess ability of these systems to coordinate multidisciplinary, patient-centric care efforts. Furthermore, we highlight the potential utility of multimedia, app-based communication platforms to facilitate patient education, autonomy, and team communication within each of the three settings.

Enhanced recovery after elective craniotomy: A randomized controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVES

Enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) protocols have been proven to improve outcomes but have not been widely used in neurosurgery. The purpose of this study was to design a multidisciplinary enhanced recovery after elective craniotomy protocol and to evaluate its clinical efficacy and safety after implementation.

DESIGN

A prospective randomized controlled trial.

SETTING

The setting is at an operating room, a post-anesthesia care unit, and a hospital ward.

PATIENTS

This randomized controlled trial (RCT) prospectively analyzed 151 patients who underwent elective craniotomy between January 2019 and June 2020.

INTERVENTIONS

The neurosurgical ERAS group was cared for with evidence-based systematic optimization approaches, while the control group received routine care.

MEASUREMENTS

The primary outcomes were the postoperative length of stay (LOS) and hospitalization costs. The secondary outcomes included 30-day readmission rates, postoperative complications, postoperative pain scores, length of intensive care unit (ICU) stay, duration of the drainage tube, time to oral intake, time to ambulation, and postoperative functional recovery status.

MAIN RESULTS

After ERAS protocol implementation, the median postoperative LOS (4 days to 3 days, difference [95% confidence interval, CI], 2 [1 to 2], P < 0.0001) and hospitalization costs (6266 USD to 5880 USD, difference [95% CI], 427.0 [234.8 to 633.6], P < 0.0001) decreased. Compared to routine perioperative care, the ERAS protocol reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (28.0% to 9.2%, adjusted odds ratio [OR] 0.3, 95% CI 0.1-0.7, P = 0.003), shortened urinary catheter removal time by 24 h (64.0% to 83.0%, adjusted OR 2.9, 95% CI 1.3-6.5, P = 0.031), improved ambulation on postoperative day 1 (POD 1) (30.7% to 75.0%, adjusted OR 7.5, 95% CI 3.6-15.8, P < 0.0001), shortened the time to oral intake (15 h to 13 h, difference [95% CI], 3 [1 to 4], P < 0.001), and improved perioperative pain management.

CONCLUSIONS

Implementation of an enhanced recovery after elective craniotomy protocol had significant benefits over conventional perioperative management. It was associated with a significant reduction in postoperative length of stay, medical cost, and postoperative complications.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting After Craniotomy: An Evidence-based Review of General Considerations, Risk Factors, and Management

One of the most common and distressing symptoms after craniotomy is postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). PONV could generate delayed postanesthesia care and hospitalization discharge, lower patient satisfaction, and an increase in overall hospitalization costs. The incidence of reported PONV after craniotomy is 22% to 70% without prophylaxis, and a multimodal regimen of medication has been recommended. We conducted a comprehensive literature review of the clinical evidence related to PONV prevention and management after craniotomy. All clinical trials in adult populations relevant to PONV after craniotomy available in English language and indexed in PubMed, Google Scholar and Cochrane Library databases from January 1997 up to September 2018 were retrieved using a combination of free-text words related to PONV in craniotomy. After screening manuscripts identified in the initial search, 23 clinical trials investigating systemic pharmacological intervention versus placebo or active control in patients undergoing craniotomy under general anesthesia met the criteria for inclusion in this comprehensive narrative review. The pathophysiology and mechanisms of PONV after craniotomy could be multifactorial in etiology. Therefore, based on current evidence, PONV management after craniotomy should focus on perioperative patient assessment, surgical, and anesthesia-related risk factors and the selection of systemic pharmacological considerations to reduce its incidence and complications. A multimodal regimen of medication targeting different chemoreceptors in the vomiting center is recommended. Ondansetron and dexamethasone, or their combination, are the most frequently used and effective agents. Further randomized clinical trials comparing different regimens that significantly reduce the incidence of PONV in craniotomy would provide relevant evidence-based data for PONV management in this patient population.

Inhaled anesthesia in neurosurgery: Still a role?

In patients undergoing craniotomy, general anesthesia should be addressed to warrant good hypnosis, immobility, and analgesia, to ensure systemic and cerebral physiological status and provide the best possible surgical field. Regarding craniotomies, it is unclear if there are substantial differences in providing general anesthesia using total intravenous anesthesia (TIVA) or balanced anesthesia (BA) accomplished using the third generation halogenates. New evidence highlighted that the last generation of halogenated agents has possible advantages compared with intravenous drugs: rapid induction, minimal absorption and metabolization, reproducible pharmacokinetic, faster recovery, cardioprotective effect, and opioid spare analgesia. This review aims to report evidence related to the use of the latest halogenated agents in patients undergoing craniotomy and to present available clinical evidence on their effects: cerebral and systemic hemodynamic, neurophysiological monitoring, and timing and quality of recovery after anesthesia.

Preoperative Versus Postoperative Scalp Block Combined With Incision Line Infiltration for Pain Control After Supratentorial Craniotomy

OBJECTIVE

Postoperative pain after craniotomy is a significant clinical problem that is sometimes underestimated, although moderate or severe pain in early postoperative period complicates up to 60% of cases. The purpose of this prospective randomized multicenter trial was to determine the optimal timing for selective scalp block in patients undergoing general anesthesia for supratentorial craniotomy.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

After ethics committee approval and informed consent, 56 adult patients were enrolled, and randomly assigned to receive a selective scalp block combined with incision line infiltration preoperatively or postoperatively.

RESULTS

Postoperative pain at 24 hours after the procedure was recorded in all 56 enrolled patients. In patients assigned to receive a scalp block preoperatively, median VAS score at 24 hours after surgery was 0 (0 to 2), and in patients assigned to receive a scalp block postoperatively it was 0 (0 to 3) (P>0.05). There was no difference in severity of pain at 24, 12, 6, and 2 hours after surgery between the 2 study groups, but the amount of fentanyl administered intraoperatively was lower in patients assigned to the preoperative scalp block group (1.6±0.7 vs. 2.4±0.7 mkg/kg/h, P=0.01).

DISCUSSION

This study confirms and extends available clinical evidence on the safety and efficacy of selective scalp blocks for the prevention of postoperative pain. Recorded data suggest that there is no difference in terms of occurrence and severity of postoperative pain regardless of whether the scalp block is performed preoperatively (after general anesthesia induction) or postoperatively (before extubation). Patients assigned to receive a scalp block combined with incision line infiltration preoperatively needed less intraoperative opioids than those assigned to postoperative scalp block.

Neuroanesthesiology Update

We provide a synopsis of innovative research, recurring themes, and novel experimental findings pertinent to the care of neurosurgical patients and critically ill patients with neurological diseases. We cover the following broad topics: general neurosurgery, spine surgery, stroke, traumatic brain injury, monitoring, and anesthetic neurotoxicity.