Search

Background/objectivesThis study aimed to study one-month recovery profile and to identify predictors of Quality of Recovery (QOR) after painful day surgery and investigate the influence of pain therapy on QOR.Methods/designThis is a secondary analysis of a single-centre, randomised controlled trial of 200 patients undergoing ambulatory haemorrhoid surgery, arthroscopic shoulder or knee surgery, or inguinal hernia repair between January 2016 and March 2017. Primary endpoints were one-month recovery profile and prevalence of poor/good QOR measured by the Functional Recovery Index (FRI), the Global Surgical Recovery index and the EuroQol questionnaire at postoperative day (POD) 1 to 4, 7, 14 and 28. Multiple logistic regression analysis was performed to determine predictors of QOR at POD 7, 14, and 28. Differences in QOR between pain treatment groups were analysed using the Mann-Whitney U test.ResultsFour weeks after haemorrhoid surgery, inguinal hernia repair, arthroscopic knee and arthroscopic shoulder surgery, good QOR was present in 71%, 76%, 57% and 24% respectively. Poor QOR was present in 5%, 0%, 7% and 29%, respectively. At POD 7 and POD 28, predictors for poor/intermediate QOR were type of surgery and a high postoperative pain level at POD 4. Male gender was another predictor at POD 7. Female gender and having a paid job were also predictors at POD 28. Type of surgery and long term fear of surgery were predictors at POD 14. No significant differences in total FRI scores were found between the two different pain treatment groups.ConclusionsThe present study shows a procedure-specific variation in recovery profile in the 4-week period after painful day surgery. The best predictors for short-term (POD 7) and long-term (POD 28) poor/intermediate QOR were a high postoperative pain level at POD 4 and type of surgery. Different pain treatment regimens did not result in differences in recovery profile.Trial registrationEuropean Union Clinical Trials Register 2015-003987-35.

Background and objectivesDistal upper extremity surgery is commonly performed under regional anaesthesia, including intravenous regional anaesthesia (IVRA) and ultrasound-guided forearm nerve block. This study aimed to investigate if ultrasound-guided forearm nerve block is superior to forearm IVRA in producing a surgical block in patients undergoing carpal tunnel release.MethodsIn this observer-blinded, randomized controlled superiority trial, 100 patients undergoing carpal tunnel release were randomized to receive ultrasound-guided forearm nerve block (n = 50) or forearm IVRA (n = 50). The primary outcome was anaesthetic efficacy evaluated by classifying the blocks as complete vs incomplete. Complete anaesthesia was defined as total sensory block, incomplete anaesthesia as mild pain requiring more analgesics or need of general anaesthesia. Pain intensity on a numeric rating scale (0-10) was recorded. Surgeon satisfaction with hemostasis, surgical time, and OR stay time were recorded. Patient satisfaction with the quality of the block was assessed at POD 1.ResultsIn total, 43 (86%) of the forearm nerve blocks were evaluated as complete, compared to 33 (66%) of the forearm IVRA (p = 0.019). After the forearm nerve block, pain intensity was lower at discharge (-1.76 points lower, 95% CI (-2.92, -0.59), p = 0.0006) compared to patients treated with forearm IVRA. No differences in pain experienced at the start of the surgery, during surgery, and at POD1, nor in surgical time or total OR stay were observed between groups. Surgeon (p = 0.0016) and patient satisfaction (p = 0.0023) were slightly higher after forearm nerve block.ConclusionAn ultrasound-guided forearm nerve block is superior compared to forearm IVRA in providing a surgical block in patients undergoing carpal tunnel release.Trial registrationThis trial was registered as NCT03411551.

Background/objectivesEndoscopic coronary artery bypass grafting (Endo-CABG) is a minimally invasive CABG procedure with retrograde arterial perfusion. The main objective of this study is to assess neurocognitive outcome after Endo-CABG.Methods/designIn this prospective observational cohort study, patients were categorised into: Endo-CABG (n = 60), a comparative Percutaneous Coronary Intervention (PCI) group (n = 60) and a healthy volunteer group (n = 60). A clinical neurological examination was performed both pre- and postoperatively, delirium was assessed postoperatively. A battery of 6 neurocognitive tests, Quality of life (QoL) and the level of depressive feelings were measured at baseline and after 3 months. Patient Satisfaction after Endo-CABG was assessed at 3-month follow-up. Primary endpoints were incidence of postoperative cognitive dysfunction (POCD), stroke and delirium after Endo-CABG. Secondary endpoints were QOL, patient satisfaction and the incidence of depressive feelings after Endo-CABG.ResultsIn total, 1 patient after Endo-CABG (1.72%) and 1 patient after PCI (1.67%) suffered from stroke during the 3-month follow-up. POCD in a patient is defined as a Reliable Change Index ≤-1.645 or Z-score ≤-1.645 in at least two tests, and was found in respectively 5 and 6 patients 3 months after Endo-CABG and PCI. Total incidence of POCD/stroke was not different (PCI: n= 7 [15.9%]; Endo-CABG: n= 6 [13.0%], p = 0.732). ICU delirium after Endo-CABG was found in 5 (8.6%) patients. QoL increased significantly three months after Endo-CABG and was comparable with QoL level after PCI and in the control group. Patient satisfaction after Endo-CABG and PCI was comparable. At follow-up, the level of depressive feelings was decreased in all groups.ConclusionsThe incidence of poor neurocognitive outcome, including stroke, POCD and postoperative ICU delirium until three months after Endo-CABG is low and comparable with PCI.Trial registrationRegistered on ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT02979782).