Awake or intubated surgery in diagnosis of interstitial lung diseases? A prospective study

BACKGROUND: Risks associated with video-assisted surgical lung biopsy (VASLB) for interstitial lung disease (ILD) with endotracheal intubation and mechanical ventilation are not nil. Awake video-assisted surgical lung biopsy (Awake-VASLB) has been proposed as a method to obtain a precise diagnosis in several different thoracic diseases. OBJECTIVES: To compare clinical outcomes of Awake-VASLB and Intubated-VASLB in patients with suspected ILDs. METHODS: From June 2016 to February 2020, all patients submitted to elective VASLB for suspected ILD were included. Differences in outcomes between Awake-VASLB and Intubated-VASLB were assessed through univariable, multivariable-adjusted, and a propensity score-matched analysis. RESULTS: Awake-VASLB was performed in 66 out of 100 patients, while 34 underwent Intubated-VASLB. The Awake-VASLB resulted in a lower post-operative morbidity (OR 0.025; 95% CI 0.001–0.35; p=0.006), less unexpected intensive care unit admission, less need for rescue therapy for pain, a reduced surgical and anaesthesiologic time, a reduced chest drain duration, and a lower post-operative length of stay. CONCLUSION: Awake-VASLB in patients affected by ILD is feasible and seems safer than Intubated-VASLB

Decurarization After Thoracic Anesthesia using sugammadex compared to neostigmine (DATA trial): a multicenter randomized double-blinded controlled trial

Abstract Background Thoracic surgery is a high-risk surgery especially for the risk of postoperative pulmonary complications. Postoperative residual paralysis has been shown to be a risk factor for pulmonary complications. Nevertheless, there are few data in the literature concerning the use of neuromuscular blocking agent antagonists in patients undergoing lung surgery. Methods Seventy patients were randomized in three Italian centers to receive sugammadex or neostigmine at the end of thoracic surgery according to the depth of the residual neuromuscular block. The primary outcome was the time from reversal administration to a train-of-four ratio (TOFR) of 0.9. Secondary outcomes were the time to TOFR of 1.0, to extubation, to postanesthesia unit (PACU) discharge, postoperative complications until 30 days after surgery, and length of hospital stay. Results Median time to recovery to a TOFR of 0.9 was significantly shorter in the sugammadex group compared to the neostigmine one (88 vs. 278 s — P < 0.001). The percentage of patients who recovered to a TOFR of 0.9 within 5 min from reversal administration was 94.4% and 58.8% in the sugammadex and neostigmine groups, respectively (P < 0.001). The time to extubation, but not the PACU stay time, was significantly shorter in the sugammadex group. No differences were found between the study groups as regards postoperative complications and length of hospital stay. The superiority of sugammadex in shortening the recovery time was confirmed for both deep/moderate and shallow/minimal neuromuscular block. Conclusions Among patients undergoing thoracic surgery, sugammadex ensures a faster recovery from the neuromuscular block and earlier extubation compared to neostigmine