Factors in perioperative care that determine blood loss in liver surgery

AbstractObjectivesExcessive blood loss during liver surgery contributes to postoperative morbidity and mortality and the minimizing of blood loss improves outcomes. This study examines pre- and intraoperative factors contributing to blood loss and identifies areas for improvement.MethodsAll patients who underwent elective hepatic resection between June 2007 and June 2009 were identified. Detailed information on the pre- and perioperative clinical course was analysed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with intraoperative blood loss.ResultsA total of 175 patients were studied, of whom 95 (54%) underwent resection of three or more segments. Median blood loss was 782ml. Greater blood loss occurred during major resections and prolonged surgery and was associated with an increase in postoperative complications (P= 0.026). Peak central venous pressure (CVP) of >10cm H2O was associated with increased blood loss (P= 0.01). Although no differences in case mix were identified, blood loss varied significantly among anaesthetists, as did intraoperative volumes of i.v. fluids and transfusion practices.ConclusionsThis study confirms a relationship between CVP and blood loss in hepatic resection. Intraoperative CVP values were higher than those described in other studies. There was variation in the intraoperative management of patients. Collaboration between surgical and anaesthesia teams is required to minimize blood loss and the standardization of intraoperative anaesthesia practice may improve outcomes following liver surgery

Distance learning improves attainment of professional milestones in the early years of surgical training

OBJECTIVES: To assess the impact of a surgical sciences e-learning programme in supporting the academic development of surgical trainees during their preparation for professional examination. BACKGROUND: In 2007, a 3-year online part-time Master of Surgical Sciences (MSc) degree programme was launched, utilizing an innovative platform with virtual case scenarios based on common surgical conditions addressed by the curriculum relating to the Membership Examination of the Royal Colleges of Surgeons (MRCS). Multiple-choice questions with feedback and discussion boards facilitated by expert clinical tutors provided formative assessment. Summative assessment comprised written examination at the end of each of the first 2 years (equivalent to MRCS level), culminating in submission of a research dissertation in year 3 toward an MSc. METHODS: Students' age, gender, and level at entry to the programme were documented. Anonymized student feedback from 2008 to 2012 was examined using online questionnaires, and performance in the MSc programme was compared to MRCS examination outcomes for students who had consented to release of their results. RESULTS: A total of 517 surgical trainees from 40 countries were recruited over the 6-year period, and 116 MSc students have graduated to date. Of 368 students, 279 (76%) were foundation doctors (interns) and had not commenced formal surgical training on enrolling in the MSc programme. However, level at entry did not influence performance (P > 0.05 across all 3 years). Average pass rates since the programme launched, for those students completing all of the required assessments, were 84% ± 11% in year 1, 85% ± 10% in year 2, and 88% ± 7% in year 3 of the MSc programme. MSc students had significantly higher MRCS pass rates than nonenrolled trainees (67% vs 51%, P < 0.01, n = 352). There was a significant correlation between MRCS examination performance and overall performance in the MSc (R(2) = 58%; P < 0.01, n = 37). Of 248 respondents, 202 (81%) considered that the MSc would improve their chances of gaining a surgical training post, and 224 (90%) would recommend the programme to their peers. CONCLUSIONS: The online MSc programme supports academic development of trainees in the early years of surgical training, is well received by students, and is associated with improved success in their professional examination

Effectiveness of epidural analgesia following open liver resection

AbstractObjectivesEpidural analgesia is often considered the reference standard for pain relief following major abdominal surgery; however, the provision of analgesia in the context of liver surgery raises unique challenges. This study investigated the effectiveness of analgesia and the postoperative course of patients who did or did not receive epidural analgesia following liver resection.MethodsData were collected retrospectively on 177 patients who underwent open liver resection between June 2007 and June 2009. Patients were divided into two groups consisting, respectively, of those who received epidural analgesia (Epidural group, n= 148) and those who did not (No-Epidural group, n= 29).ResultsIn the Epidural group, 27 patients (18%) required i.v. opiate analgesia on the day of surgery (DoS) or the first postoperative day (POD1). The Epidural group received significantly more i.v. colloid solution on the DoS (median: 1500ml vs. 750ml, range: 0–12000ml vs. 0–3500ml; P= 0.004) and POD1 (median: 0ml vs. 0ml, range: 0–5000ml vs. 0–1000ml; P= 0.018), and total fluid on the DoS and POD1 combined (median: 6522ml vs. 5453ml, range: 2150–21300ml vs. 2875–15886ml; P= 0.032).ConclusionsEpidural analgesia provided inadequate postoperative pain relief in approximately 20% of liver resection patients and was associated with the administration of significantly greater volumes of i.v. colloid solution

Detailed fluid resuscitation profiles in patients with severe acute pancreatitis

AbstractBackground and aimAppropriate and timely initial fluid resuscitation in acute pancreatitis (AP) is critical. The aim of this retrospective study was to evaluate fluid therapy on an hour-by-hour basis in relation to standard indices of adequate resuscitation during AP.MethodsEmergency room shock charts, fluid balance sheets and intensive care (ICU) charts for all patients with AP admitted to ICU in a large acute hospital were examined. Vital signs, clinical course and fluid administered during the first 72h after admission were tabulated against urine output, central venous pressure (CVP) and inotrope/vasopressor therapy.ResultsSixty-three consecutive patients with AP were initially evaluated. Inter-hospital transfers with established organ dysfunction (n= 11) or where records had insufficient detail (n= 22) were excluded. In the remaining 30 patients, in-hospital death occurred in 7. The cumulative volume of crystalloid given was significantly less at 48h in patients who died in hospital (3331 ± 800ml vs. survivors, 7287 ± 544ml; P < 0.001). Non-survivors had a higher CVP, and received more inotropes/vasopressors.ConclusionIn severe AP-associated organ failure, fluid resuscitation profiles differ between survivors and non-survivors. CVP alone as a crude indicator of adequate resuscitation may be unreliable, potentially leading to the use of inotropes/vasopressors in the inadequately filled patient

Factors in perioperative care that determine blood loss in liver surgery

Abstracth pb_433 236..241 Objectives: Excessive blood loss during liver surgery contributes to postoperative morbidity and mortality and the minimizing of blood loss improves outcomes. This study examines pre-and intraoperative factors contributing to blood loss and identifies areas for improvement. were identified. Detailed information on the pre-and perioperative clinical course was analysed. Univariate and multivariate analyses were used to identify factors associated with intraoperative blood loss. Results: A total of 175 patients were studied, of whom 95 (54%) underwent resection of three or more segments. Median blood loss was 782 ml. Greater blood loss occurred during major resections and prolonged surgery and was associated with an increase in postoperative complications (P = 0.026). Peak central venous pressure (CVP) of &gt;10 cm H2O was associated with increased blood loss (P = 0.01). Although no differences in case mix were identified, blood loss varied significantly among anaesthetists, as did intraoperative volumes of i.v. fluids and transfusion practices. Conclusions: This study confirms a relationship between CVP and blood loss in hepatic resection. Intraoperative CVP values were higher than those described in other studies. There was variation in the intraoperative management of patients. Collaboration between surgical and anaesthesia teams is required to minimize blood loss and the standardization of intraoperative anaesthesia practice may improve outcomes following liver surgery