A bi-directional observational study to find out the efficacy and side effect profile of analgesic modalities in minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) surgeries at a tertiary care cancer centre
SWAPNIL PARAB,Snehal Mahatme,Priya Ranganathan,Madhavi Shetmahajan,Sumitra Bakshi
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1053/j.jvca.2024.09.065
IF: 2.894
2024-10-27
Journal of Cardiothoracic and Vascular Anesthesia
Abstract:Objective Mid-thoracic epidural analgesia is a standard of care for postoperative pain management for transthoracic esophagectomy. The use of minimally invasive techniques reduces the length of incision, postoperative pain, and time for recovery from surgery. The study aims to find out whether epidural analgesia offers any benefit over parenteral analgesics in patients undergoing minimally invasive esophagectomy (MIE) surgeries. Design and method The study is a bi-directional observational study. After Ethics Committee approval, we assessed the data of 116 patients retrospectively (1st Jan 2019- 17th May 2022) and 88 patients prospectively (18th May 2022- 21st November 2023), who underwent minimally invasive esophageal surgery. Those who were inoperable and who were converted to open techniques were excluded from the analysis. Retrospective patients formed a historical control in whom epidural analgesia was used, as an institutional practice, for the management of postoperative pain. For prospectively recruited patients, multimodal parenteral analgesics formed the mainstay of treatment. The institutional 'Acute Pain Service' team managed the postoperative pain in a protocolized manner. Patient-controlled analgesia (PCA) machines filled with fentanyl were used as rescue analgesics in both groups. All the information on postoperative pain [i.e. Numerical Rating Scores (NRS) from day 0 to day 4, worst pain scores in a day and analgesic treatments received on each day] were noted by the study team, by visiting the patient twice a day. All the retrospective data were obtained from electronic medical records. The primary outcome was to compare the NRS pain scores on the first four postoperative days. The secondary outcomes were to measure the incidence of side effects and the effect of analgesic technique on postoperative outcomes. Results and conclusions Mid-thoracic epidural analgesia was used in 96 patients, whereas 97 patients had no epidural. When compared between the epidural and non-epidural groups, static and dynamic pain scores were significantly lower in the epidural group for the first two postoperative days [Day1- Median (IQR) NRS-5 (5,6) versus 6 (5,6), p <0.001, Day 2- 4 (4,5) versus 5 (4,5) p < 0.001)]. However, clinical difference was minimal. Use of Patient Controlled Analgesia with strong opioids was significantly more in the non-epidural group for the first two days. [Day 1- 1% versus 14.4%, p = 0.001; Day 2- 5.5% versus 20.2%, p = 0.002]. However, the intensity of the pain scores and the requirement for opioid analgesics were comparable in both groups from 3rd postoperative day. The incidence of hypotension was significantly higher in the epidural group (12.2% versus 3.0%, p = 0.019). Other side effects of analgesic medications (viz. acute transaminitis, acute kidney injury, vomiting, urinary retention, abdominal distension, pruritus etc.) were comparable in both groups. Postoperative outcomes (viz. length of hospital stay, morbidity- assessed by Clavein-Dindo scores, and mortality) were comparable in both groups. Conclusion NRS pain scores following MIE surgeries were mild to moderate in the first four postoperative days. Epidural analgesia reduced the pain scores significantly; however, the difference was minimal clinically. In the absence of epidural analgesia, multimodal parenteral analgesics are safe and effective means of postoperative pain management following MIE surgeries.
cardiac & cardiovascular systems,peripheral vascular disease,respiratory system,anesthesiology