Comparative evaluation of the perioperative anesthesia methods for cancer patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy

Yu.S. Zakharenkova, V. Khoronenko, V. Trifanov
{"title":"Comparative evaluation of the perioperative anesthesia methods for cancer patients undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy","authors":"Yu.S. Zakharenkova, V. Khoronenko, V. Trifanov","doi":"10.17816/onco623528","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background. Pancreatoduodenal resections (PDR) are one of the most traumatic and technically complex interventions in abdominal surgery. The correct anesthetic management correct and pain relief allow to substantially reduce the risk of perioperative complications, which remains high even in high-volume oncology centers with extensive experience. Finding new components and methods of anesthesia combined with evaluation of their effectiveness and safety remains actual issue. \nAim. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of using intravenous lidocaine infusion as a component of anesthesia and postoperative analgesia in cancer patients during PDR. \nMaterial and methods. We analyzed the course of anesthesia, operation and postoperative period of 43 patient (mean age 63.2 ± 7.1 years) undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. For the purposes of the study, patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: epidural anesthesia (EA group, n=19) and lidocaine (L group, n=24). For EA group (n=19) we used epidural analgesia as a component of perioperative anesthesia, for L group (n=24) we used prolonged intravenous infusion of lidocaine at an average dose of 1 mg/kg/h. We analyzed the severity of pain syndrome according to NRS in postoperative period, opioid requirement, the time of gastrointestinal function recovery, post-operative complications frequency. In order to prevent systemic toxicity, drug monitoring was carried out - the determination of the plasma concentration of lidocaine. \nResults. Perioperative opioid requirement was comparable between groups, with no statistically significant differences observed. The degree of pain syndrome according to the NRS scale did not differ statistically, except for the number of NRS scores during activation on day 3, which was significantly lower in the lidocaine group: EA 4.00 (95% CI [3.49 - 4.51] and lidocaine 3, 12 (95% CI [2.64 – 3.61], p = 0.014. In the EA group, there was a statistically significant increase in infusion volume (8.83 ml/kg/h [[(Q1) 7.90 – (Q3) 10 .06] and 7.33 [(Q1) 6.28 - (Q3) 8.49], p = 0.034) and the need for intraoperative vasopressor support than in the lidocaine group (15 (78.9%) and 10 (43 .5%), respectively, p = 0.029. In the lidocaine group, the time to onset of peristalsis was significantly shorter than in the EA group (Me 48.0 h [(Q1) 48.00 - (Q3) 72.00] and Me 60 0 h [(Q1) 36.00 - (Q3) 64.50], p=0.042) The frequency of postoperative complications did not differ between the groups. \nConclusions. Based on a comparative analysis of the study results, it can be concluded that prolonged intravenous infusion of lidocaine as a component of perioperative anesthetic protection during pancreatoduodental resections is safe and comparable in terms of analgesic efficacy to epidural blockade.","PeriodicalId":509207,"journal":{"name":"Russian Journal of Oncology","volume":null,"pages":null},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2024-03-20","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Russian Journal of Oncology","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.17816/onco623528","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Background. Pancreatoduodenal resections (PDR) are one of the most traumatic and technically complex interventions in abdominal surgery. The correct anesthetic management correct and pain relief allow to substantially reduce the risk of perioperative complications, which remains high even in high-volume oncology centers with extensive experience. Finding new components and methods of anesthesia combined with evaluation of their effectiveness and safety remains actual issue. Aim. To evaluate the efficacy and safety of using intravenous lidocaine infusion as a component of anesthesia and postoperative analgesia in cancer patients during PDR. Material and methods. We analyzed the course of anesthesia, operation and postoperative period of 43 patient (mean age 63.2 ± 7.1 years) undergoing pancreaticoduodenectomy. For the purposes of the study, patients were randomly divided into 2 groups: epidural anesthesia (EA group, n=19) and lidocaine (L group, n=24). For EA group (n=19) we used epidural analgesia as a component of perioperative anesthesia, for L group (n=24) we used prolonged intravenous infusion of lidocaine at an average dose of 1 mg/kg/h. We analyzed the severity of pain syndrome according to NRS in postoperative period, opioid requirement, the time of gastrointestinal function recovery, post-operative complications frequency. In order to prevent systemic toxicity, drug monitoring was carried out - the determination of the plasma concentration of lidocaine. Results. Perioperative opioid requirement was comparable between groups, with no statistically significant differences observed. The degree of pain syndrome according to the NRS scale did not differ statistically, except for the number of NRS scores during activation on day 3, which was significantly lower in the lidocaine group: EA 4.00 (95% CI [3.49 - 4.51] and lidocaine 3, 12 (95% CI [2.64 – 3.61], p = 0.014. In the EA group, there was a statistically significant increase in infusion volume (8.83 ml/kg/h [[(Q1) 7.90 – (Q3) 10 .06] and 7.33 [(Q1) 6.28 - (Q3) 8.49], p = 0.034) and the need for intraoperative vasopressor support than in the lidocaine group (15 (78.9%) and 10 (43 .5%), respectively, p = 0.029. In the lidocaine group, the time to onset of peristalsis was significantly shorter than in the EA group (Me 48.0 h [(Q1) 48.00 - (Q3) 72.00] and Me 60 0 h [(Q1) 36.00 - (Q3) 64.50], p=0.042) The frequency of postoperative complications did not differ between the groups. Conclusions. Based on a comparative analysis of the study results, it can be concluded that prolonged intravenous infusion of lidocaine as a component of perioperative anesthetic protection during pancreatoduodental resections is safe and comparable in terms of analgesic efficacy to epidural blockade.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
对接受胰十二指肠切除术的癌症患者围手术期麻醉方法的比较评估
背景。胰十二指肠切除术(PDR)是腹部手术中创伤最大、技术最复杂的手术之一。正确的麻醉管理和镇痛可以大大降低围手术期并发症的风险,即使在经验丰富的大容量肿瘤中心,这种风险也仍然很高。寻找新的麻醉成分和方法并对其有效性和安全性进行评估仍然是一个实际问题。目的评估将静脉注射利多卡因作为 PDR 期间癌症患者麻醉和术后镇痛组成部分的有效性和安全性。材料和方法。我们分析了 43 名接受胰十二指肠切除术的患者(平均年龄 63.2 ± 7.1 岁)的麻醉、手术和术后过程。为便于研究,患者被随机分为两组:硬膜外麻醉组(EA 组,19 人)和利多卡因组(L 组,24 人)。硬膜外麻醉组(19 人)采用硬膜外镇痛作为围手术期麻醉的一部分,利多卡因组(24 人)采用长时间静脉输注利多卡因,平均剂量为 1 毫克/千克/小时。我们根据术后 NRS 分析了疼痛综合征的严重程度、阿片类药物需求量、胃肠功能恢复时间、术后并发症发生频率。为了防止全身毒性,我们进行了药物监测--测定利多卡因的血浆浓度。结果显示各组围手术期阿片类药物需求量相当,无统计学差异。根据 NRS 量表得出的疼痛综合征程度没有统计学差异,但第 3 天激活时的 NRS 评分次数在利多卡因组明显较低:EA组为4.00(95% CI [3.49 - 4.51]),利多卡因组为3.12(95% CI [2.64 - 3.61]),P = 0.014。与利多卡因组相比,EA 组的输液量(8.83 ml/kg/h [[(Q1)7.90 - (Q3) 10 .06] 和 7.33 [(Q1)6.28 - (Q3) 8.49],p = 0.034)和术中血管加压支持的需求有显著增加(分别为 15 (78.9%) 和 10 (43.5%),p = 0.029)。利多卡因组的蠕动开始时间明显短于 EA 组(Me 48.0 h [(Q1) 48.00 - (Q3) 72.00] 和 Me 60 0 h [(Q1) 36.00 - (Q3) 64.50],p=0.042)。结论。根据对研究结果的比较分析,可以得出结论:在胰十二指肠切除术中,长时间静脉输注利多卡因作为围手术期麻醉保护的一部分是安全的,其镇痛效果与硬膜外阻滞相当。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Diagnosis of metastatic melanoma by fine-needle aspiration biopsy (FNAB) and primary melanoma using the skin and mucousa imprints The problem of pancreatic fistula development after pancreatic surgery in oncological patients The state of cancer care in Russia: epidemiology and survival in patients with the most common and life-threatening solid malignant tumors. Part 1. (Population study) Роль нейтрофилов опухолевого микроокружения в прогрессии люминального HER2-негативного раннего рака молочной железы Immunophenotype of dendritic cell differentiation markers in breast cancer in in vitro conditions
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1