A comprehensive review on learning curve associated problems in endoscopic vein harvesting and the requirement for a standardised training programme

Endoscopic vein harvesting is becoming one of the most favourable vein harvesting techniques in multiple bypass coronary surgery, due to its short term post-operative benefits with high patient satisfaction. However, long-term graft patency has been both supported and questioned in the literature. Graft failure can be affected by harvesting methods and operator’s experience. Endoscopic vein harvesting is associated with a learning curve period, during which the incidence of vein trauma is high due to unfamiliarity with the surgical technique. There is a paucity of structured learning tools for novice practitioners, meaning that training differs significantly between hospital centres. Inconsistent training methods can lead to poor surgical technique, which can have a significant impact on vein quality and stress level of the practitioner. In turn, this can lead to increased postoperative complications and longer surgical duration. The main aim of this literature review is to understand the impact of the learning curve on the vein conduit and whether there is a requirement for a standardised training programme for the novice practitioners

A Randomized Study Comparing the Incidence of Postoperative Pain After Phrenic Nerve Infiltration Vs Nonphrenic Nerve Infiltration During Thoracotomy.

Contains fulltext : 215252.pdf (publisher's version ) (Closed access)Thoracotomy is a common surgical procedure performed worldwide for lung disease. Despite major advances in analgesia, patients still experience severe shoulder, central back and surgical incision site pain in the postoperative period. This study aimed to assess whether intraoperative phrenic nerve infiltration reduces the incidence of postoperative pain and improves peak flow volume measurements during incentive spirometry. 90 patients undergoing open lobectomy were randomly assigned to have phrenic nerve infiltration (n=46) or not (n=44). The phrenic nerve infiltration group received 10 mL of 0.25% bupivacaine into the periphrenic fat pad. Preoperative assessments of spirometry and pain scores were recorded (at rest and with movement). Postoperative assessments included peak flow and pain measurements at intervals up to 72 hours. Less shoulder pain was experienced with phrenic nerve infiltration up to 6 hours postsurgery at rest (P = 0.005) and up to 12 hours with movement (P < 0.001). Reduced back pain was reported in the phrenic nerve infiltration group up to 6 hours after surgery both at rest (P = 0.001) and with movement (P = 0.00). Phrenic nerve infiltration reduced pain at the incision site for up to 3 hours both at rest (P < 0.001) and with movement (P = 0.001). Spirometry readings dropped in both groups with consistently lower readings at baseline and follow-up in the PNI group (P=0.007). Lower analgesic usage of patient controlled analgesia morphine (P < 0.0001), epipleural bupivacaine (P=0.001), and oramorph/zomorph (P=0.0002) were recorded. Our findings indicate that the use of phrenic nerve infiltration significantly reduced patient pain scores during the early postoperative period, particularly during movement. We believe that each technique has advantages and disadvantages; however, further studies with large sample size are warranted