This is the first updated Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) Society guideline presenting a consensus for optimal perioperative care in gynecologic/oncology surgery.A database search of publications using Embase and PubMed was performed. Studies on each item within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology protocol were selected with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohort studies. These studies were then reviewed and graded according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.All recommendations on ERAS protocol items are based on best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented accordingly.The updated evidence base and recommendation for items within the ERAS gynecologic/oncology perioperative care pathway are presented by the ERAS® Society in this consensus review.© IGCS and ESGO 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Patient education is recommended as an essential component of Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) protocols. However, there are many uncertainties regarding content and methodological criteria, which may have a significant impact on the effectiveness of the intervention. The aim of this review is to assess the effect of preoperative patient education on postoperative recovery in abdominal surgery and to examine different patient education strategies for their effectiveness.We performed a systematic review according to the PRISMA guidelines. PubMed, CINAHL, and Cochrane were searched from 2011 to 2022. All studies investigating the effect of preoperative patient education on postoperative recovery in abdominal surgery were included. A critical quality assessment of all included studies was performed.We identified 826 potentially suitable articles via a database search and included 12 studies in this review. The majority of the included studies reported a reduction in the length of hospital stay (LOS) and even a reduction in postoperative complications and adverse events. Patients with preoperative education seemed to have lower psychological stress and experience less anxiety. However, the contents, delivery, and general conditions were implemented differently, making comparison difficult. Moreover, the majority of the included studies were weak in quality.With this review, we report potential effects, current implementations, and frameworks of patient education. However, the results must be interpreted with caution and are not directly transferable to clinical practice. Further studies in this field are necessary to make concrete recommendations for clinical practice.© 2023. The Author(s).

Gynecologic surgery is very common: hysterectomy alone is one of the most frequently performed operating room procedures each year. It is well known that surgical stress induces a catabolic state that leads to increased cardiac demand, relative tissue hypoxia, increased insulin resistance, impaired coagulation profiles, and altered pulmonary and gastrointestinal function. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) pathways were developed with the goal of maintaining normal physiology in the perioperative period, thus optimizing patient outcomes without increasing postoperative complications or readmissions. The basic principles of ERAS include attention to the following: preoperative counseling and nutritional strategies, including avoidance of prolonged perioperative fasting; perioperative considerations, including a focus on regional anesthetic and nonopioid analgesic approaches, fluid balance, and maintenance of normothermia; and promotion of postoperative recovery strategies, including early mobilization and appropriate thromboprophylaxis. Benefits of ERAS pathways include shorter length of stay, decreased postoperative pain and need for analgesia, more rapid return of bowel function, decreased complication and readmission rates, and increased patient satisfaction. Implementation of ERAS protocols has not been shown to increase readmission, mortality, or reoperation rates. These benefits have been replicated across the spectrum of gynecologic surgeries, including open and minimally invasive approaches and benign and oncologic surgeries. The implementation of the ERAS program requires collaboration from all members of the surgical team. Enhanced Recovery After Surgery is a comprehensive program, and data demonstrate success when multiple components of the ERAS pathway are implemented together. Successful ERAS pathway implementation across the spectrum of gynecologic care has the potential to improve patient care and health care delivery systems.

Perioperative organ injury is among the leading causes of morbidity and mortality of surgical patients. Among different types of perioperative organ injury, acute kidney injury occurs particularly frequently and has an exceptionally detrimental effect on surgical outcomes. Currently, acute kidney injury is most commonly diagnosed by assessing increases in serum creatinine concentration or decreased urine output. Recently, novel biomarkers have become a focus of translational research for improving timely detection and prognosis for acute kidney injury. However, specificity and timing of biomarker release continue to present challenges to their integration into existing diagnostic regimens. Despite many clinical trials using various pharmacologic or nonpharmacologic interventions, reliable means to prevent or reverse acute kidney injury are still lacking. Nevertheless, several recent randomized multicenter trials provide new insights into renal replacement strategies, composition of intravenous fluid replacement, goal-directed fluid therapy, or remote ischemic preconditioning in their impact on perioperative acute kidney injury. This review provides an update on the latest progress toward the understanding of disease mechanism, diagnosis, and managing perioperative acute kidney injury, as well as highlights areas of ongoing research efforts for preventing and treating acute kidney injury in surgical patients.

Surgical treatment is commonly employed to treat patients with gynecologic cancer, although surgery itself may function as a stressor, reducing the patients’ functional capacity and recovery. Prehabilitation programs attempt to improve patients’ overall health and baseline function prior to surgery, thereby enhancing recovery and lowering morbidity. In recent years, prehabilitation has come to primarily refer to multimodal programs that combine physical activity, nutritional support, psychological well-being, and other medical interventions. However, the specific methods of implementing prehabilitation and measuring its effectiveness are heterogeneous. Moreover, high-level evidence regarding prehabilitation in gynecologic cancer surgery is limited. This review provides a summary of multimodal prehabilitation studies in gynecologic oncologic surgery. Enhanced postoperative recovery, lower postoperative complications, lower rate of blood transfusions, and faster gastrointestinal functional recovery have been reported after multimodal prehabilitation interventions. Patients and healthcare professionals should recognize the importance of prehabilitation in the field of gynecologic oncologic treatment, based on the emerging evidence. In addition, there is a need to establish an appropriate target group and construct a well-designed and tailored prehabilitation program.

Patients undergoing major surgery are predisposed to a decrease in functional capacity as a response to surgical stress that can delay post-operative recovery. A prehabilitation program consists of patient preparation strategies before surgery, and include pre-operative measures to improve functional capacity and enhance post-operative recovery. Multimodal prehabilitation may include exercise, nutritional counseling, psychological support, and optimization of underlying medical conditions, as well as cessation of unfavorable health behaviors such as smoking and drinking. Currently, there are no standardized guidelines for prehabilitation, and the existent studies are heterogeneous; however, multimodal approaches are likely to have a greater impact on functional outcomes than single management programs. We have reviewed the literature on prehabilitation in general, and in gynecologic surgery in particular, to identify tools to establish an optimal prehabilitation program within an Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) protocol for gynecologic oncology patients. We suggest a safe, reproducible, functional, and easy-to-apply multimodal prehabilitation program for gynecologic oncology practice based on patient-tailored pre-operative medical optimization, physical training, nutritional counseling, and psychological support. The analysis of the prehabilitation program implementation in an ERAS protocol should undergo further research in order to test the efficacy on surgical outcome and recovery after surgery.© IGCS and ESGO 2019. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Despite evidence supporting its use, many Enhanced Recovery After Surgery (ERAS) recommendations remain poorly adhered to and barriers to ERAS implementation persist. In this second updated ERAS® Society guideline, a consensus for optimal perioperative care in gynecologic oncology surgery is presented, with a specific emphasis on implementation challenges.Based on the gaps identified by clinician stakeholder groups, nine implementation challenge topics were prioritized for review. A database search of publications using Embase and PubMed was performed (2018-2023). Studies on each topic were selected with emphasis on meta-analyses, randomized controlled trials, and large prospective cohort studies. These studies were then reviewed and graded by an international panel according to the Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system.All recommendations on ERAS implementation challenge topics are based on best available evidence. The level of evidence for each item is presented accordingly.The updated evidence base and recommendations for stakeholder derived ERAS implementation challenges in gynecologic oncology are presented by the ERAS® Society in this consensus review.Copyright © 2023 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

This consensus statement presents a comprehensive and evidence-based set of guidelines for the care of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in both adult and pediatric populations. The guidelines are established by an international panel of experts under the auspices of the American Society of Enhanced Recovery and Society for Ambulatory Anesthesia based on a comprehensive search and review of literature up to September 2019. The guidelines provide recommendation on identifying high-risk patients, managing baseline PONV risks, choices for prophylaxis, and rescue treatment of PONV as well as recommendations for the institutional implementation of a PONV protocol. In addition, the current guidelines focus on the evidence for newer drugs (eg, second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 [5-HT3] receptor antagonists, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists, and dopamine antagonists), discussion regarding the use of general multimodal PONV prophylaxis, and PONV management as part of enhanced recovery pathways. This set of guidelines have been endorsed by 23 professional societies and organizations from different disciplines (Appendix 1).Guidelines currently available include the 3 iterations of the consensus guideline we previously published, which was last updated 6 years ago; a guideline published by American Society of Health System Pharmacists in 1999; a brief discussion on PONV management as part of a comprehensive postoperative care guidelines; focused guidelines published by the Society of Obstetricians and Gynecologists of Canada, the Association of Paediatric Anaesthetists of Great Britain & Ireland and the Association of Perianesthesia Nursing; and several guidelines published in other languages.The current guideline was developed to provide perioperative practitioners with a comprehensive and up-to-date, evidence-based guidance on the risk stratification, prevention, and treatment of PONV in both adults and children. The guideline also provides guidance on the management of PONV within enhanced recovery pathways.The previous consensus guideline was published 6 years ago with a literature search updated to October 2011. Several guidelines, which have been published since, are either limited to a specific populations or do not address all aspects of PONV management. The current guideline was developed based on a systematic review of the literature published up through September 2019. This includes recent studies of newer pharmacological agents such as the second-generation 5-hydroxytryptamine 3 (5-HT3) receptor antagonists, a dopamine antagonist, neurokinin 1 (NK1) receptor antagonists as well as several novel combination therapies. In addition, it also contains an evidence-based discussion on the management of PONV in enhanced recovery pathways. We have also discussed the implementation of a general multimodal PONV prophylaxis in all at-risk surgical patients based on the consensus of the expert panel.

Venous thromboembolism (VTE) is a recognized complication of gynecological malignancy and represents a leading cause of morbidity and mortality in these patients. The review aimed to discuss the incidence, risk factors, and clinical presentation of VTE before examining the literature on the diagnosis, prevention, and management in the context of uterine, cervical, ovarian, and vulval cancers.A literature search was performed using Ovid Medline and Embase with the following words: "gynecological malignancy," "pelvic tumor," "venous thromboembolism," "deep vein thrombosis" and "pulmonary embolism."The incidence of VTE in patients with gynecological malignancy ranged between 3% and 25% and was affected by several patient and tumor factors. Duplex ultrasonography is currently the first-line imaging modality for deep venous thrombosis with sensitivity and specificity of up to 95% and 100%, respectively. Low-molecular-weight heparin is currently the VTE prophylaxis and treatment of choice for patients with gynecological malignancy, although warfarin and unfractionated heparin play a role in selected circumstances. The relatively new direct oral anticoagulants including factor Xa inhibitors and direct thrombin inhibitors are increasingly being used, although further evaluations are required, particularly in cancer patients. Catheter-directed thrombolysis and percutaneous mechanical and surgical thrombectomy may have a role in treating patients with severe symptomatic iliocaval or iliofemoral deep venous thrombosis. Overall, VTE is a poor prognosis marker in patients with gynecological malignancy.Gynecological malignancy-associated VTE is associated with significant morbidity, contributing to a large number of life years lost. Although promising new therapies are emerging, a 2-pronged approach is required to simultaneously target cancer-specific management and predict early on those who are likely to be affected. In the meantime, clinicians should continue to combine current guidelines with a multidisciplinary team approach to ensure that these complex patients receive the best evidence-based and compassionate care.

Venous thromboembolism, comprising both deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, is a chronic illness that affects nearly 10 million people every year worldwide. Strong provoking risk factors for venous thromboembolism include major surgery and active cancer, but most events are unprovoked. Diagnosis requires a sequential work-up that combines assessment of clinical pretest probability for venous thromboembolism using a clinical score (eg, Wells score), D-dimer testing, and imaging. Venous thromboembolism can be considered excluded in patients with both a non-high clinical pretest probability and normal D-dimer concentrations. When required, ultrasonography should be done for a suspected deep vein thrombosis and CT or ventilation-perfusion scintigraphy for a suspected pulmonary embolism. Direct oral anticoagulants (DOACs) are the first-line treatment for almost all patients with venous thromboembolism (including those with cancer). After completing 3-6 months of initial treatment, anticoagulation can be discontinued in patients with venous thromboembolism provoked by a major transient risk factor. Patients whose long-term risk of recurrent venous thromboembolism outweighs the long-term risk of major bleeding, such as those with active cancer or men with unprovoked venous thromboembolism, should receive indefinite anticoagulant treatment. Pharmacological venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is generally warranted in patients undergoing major orthopaedic or cancer surgery. Ongoing research is focused on improving diagnostic strategies for suspected deep vein thrombosis, comparing different DOACs, developing safer anticoagulants, and further individualising approaches for the prevention and management of venous thromboembolism.Copyright © 2021 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Deep vein thrombosis and pulmonary embolism, collectively referred to as venous thromboembolism, constitute a major global burden of disease. The diagnostic work-up of suspected deep vein thrombosis or pulmonary embolism includes the sequential application of a clinical decision rule and D-dimer testing. Imaging and anticoagulation can be safely withheld in patients who are unlikely to have venous thromboembolism and have a normal D-dimer. All other patients should undergo ultrasonography in case of suspected deep vein thrombosis and CT in case of suspected pulmonary embolism. Direct oral anticoagulants are first-line treatment options for venous thromboembolism because they are associated with a lower risk of bleeding than vitamin K antagonists and are easier to use. Use of thrombolysis should be limited to pulmonary embolism associated with haemodynamic instability. Anticoagulant treatment should be continued for at least 3 months to prevent early recurrences. When venous thromboembolism is unprovoked or secondary to persistent risk factors, extended treatment beyond this period should be considered when the risk of recurrence outweighs the risk of major bleeding.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Core body temperature is normally tightly regulated to within a few tenths of a degree. The major thermoregulatory defences in humans are sweating, arteriovenous shunt vasoconstriction, and shivering. The core temperature triggering each response defines its activation threshold. General anaesthetics greatly impair thermoregulation, synchronously reducing the thresholds for vasoconstriction and shivering. Neuraxial anaesthesia also impairs central thermoregulatory control, and prevents vasoconstriction and shivering in blocked areas. Consequently, unwarmed anaesthetised patients become hypothermic, typically by 1-2°C. Hypothermia results initially from an internal redistribution of body heat from the core to the periphery, followed by heat loss exceeding metabolic heat production. Complications of perioperative hypothermia include coagulopathy and increased transfusion requirement, surgical site infection, delayed drug metabolism, prolonged recovery, shivering, and thermal discomfort. Body temperature can be reliably measured in the oesophagus, nasopharynx, mouth, and bladder. The standard-of-care is to monitor core temperature and to maintain normothermia during general and neuraxial anaesthesia.Copyright © 2016 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

Postoperative nausea or vomiting occurs in up to 40% in patients with multiple risk factors, despite prophylaxis. Olanzapine is an antipsychotic drug that is used to prevent nausea and vomiting in palliative care and to treat chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting. This study aimed to examine whether pre‐operative olanzapine, as a prophylactic anti‐emetic added to intra‐operative dexamethasone, ondansetron and total intravenous anaesthesia, reduced the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting. We performed a multiply‐blinded randomised controlled trial in patients aged 18–60 years with cancer at high risk of postoperative nausea or vomiting (three or four risk factors according to the Apfel criteria) plus a previous history of chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting. Patients were allocated at random to receive 10 mg olanzapine or placebo orally 1 h before surgery in addition to a two‐drug regimen (dexamethasone and ondansetron) and propofol anaesthesia to prevent postoperative nausea or vomiting. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 h after surgery. In total, 100 patients were enrolled; 47 in the olanzapine group and 49 in the control group completed the study. The baseline characteristics of the groups were similar. The incidence of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 h after surgery was lower in the olanzapine group (12/47, 26%) than in the control group (31/49, 63%) (p = 0.008, RR 0.40 (95%CI 0.21–0.79)). Adding pre‐operative oral olanzapine to intra‐operative dexamethasone and ondansetron was highly effective in reducing the risk of postoperative nausea or vomiting in the first 24 hours after surgery in patients with a previous history of chemotherapy‐induced nausea and vomiting and at least three Apfel risk factors for postoperative nausea or vomiting.

Fluid management during major gynecologic oncology surgeries faces great challenges due to the distinctive characteristics of patients with gynecologic malignancies as well as features of the surgical procedure. Intraoperative goal-directed fluid therapy (GDFT) has been proven to be effective in reducing postoperative complications among major colorectal surgeries; however, the efficacy of GDFT has not been fully studied in gynecologic malignancy surgeries. This study aimed to discuss the influence of GDFT practice in patients undergoing major gynecologic oncology surgery.

Appropriate fluid balance in the perioperative period is important as both hypo- and hypervolemia are associated with increased risk of complications. Women undergoing cytoreductive surgery (CRS) for advanced epithelial ovarian cancer (EOC) may have major fluid shifts. The optimal perioperative fluid balance in these women is yet to be determined. Our objective was to investigate the association between perioperative fluid balance and major postoperative complications.Women with advanced stage EOC who underwent surgery at Karolinska University Hospital, Stockholm, Sweden were identified from the institutional database. Women subjected to surgery with curative intent were included in the analysis. Additional data were retrieved from medical records. The association between perioperative fluid balance and major postoperative complications was investigated by multivariable regression and adjusted for predefined confounders.Of the 270 women identified in the institutional database during 2014-2017, 184 women were included in the analyses. Of these women, 22% (n = 40) experienced a major postoperative complication. The fully adjusted odds of major postoperative complications increased when perioperative fluid balance exceeded >3000 mL, (Odds Ratio (OR) 4.85, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) 1.23-19.2, p = 0.02) and > 5000 mL (OR 33.7, 95% CI 4.13-275, p < 0.01). There was no association between negative fluid balance and major postoperative complications (OR 3.33, 95% CI 0.25-44.1, p = 0.36).Fluid balance >3000 mL perioperatively during surgery for advanced EOC increased the odds of major postoperative complications. Management of perioperative fluid balance in advanced EOC surgery remains a challenge.Copyright © 2021 The Authors. Published by Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Fluid overload and hypovolemia promote postoperative complications in patients undergoing cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer. In the present study, postoperative complications and anastomotic leakage were investigated before and after implementation of pulse pressure variation-guided fluid management (PPVGFM) during ovarian cancer surgery.A total of n = 243 patients with ovarian cancer undergoing cytoreductive surgery at the University Hospital Bonn were retrospectively evaluated. Cohort A (CA; n = 185 patients) was treated before and cohort B (CB; n = 58 patients) after implementation of PPVGFM. Both cohorts were compared regarding postoperative complications.Ultrasevere complications (G4/G5) were exclusively present in CA (p = 0.0025). No difference between cohorts was observed regarding severe complications (G3-G5) (p = 0.062). Median positive fluid excess was lower in CB (p = 0.001). This was independent of tumor load [peritoneal cancer index] (p = 0.001) and FIGO stage (p = 0.001). Time to first postoperative defecation was shorter in CB (CB: d2 median versus CA: d3 median; p = 0.001). CB had a shorter length of hospital stay (p = 0.003), less requirement of intensive medical care (p = 0.001) and postoperative ventilation (p = 0.001). CB received higher doses of noradrenalin (p = 0.001). In the combined study cohort, there were more severe complications (G3-G5) in the case of a PFE ≥ 3000 ml (p = 0.034) and significantly more anastomotic leakage in the case of a PFE ≥ 4000 ml (p = 0.006).Intraoperative fluid reduction in ovarian cancer surgery according to a PPVGFM is safe and significantly reduces ultrasevere postoperative complications. PFEs of ≥ 3000 ml and ≥ 4000 ml were identified as cutoffs for significantly more severe complications and anastomotic leakage, respectively.© 2024. The Author(s).

Anemia is a common problem when patients present with cancer, and it can worsen during treatment. Anemia can directly impact the cognitive and physical quality of life and may impair fitness for oncological therapy. The most common cause of anemia is iron deficiency. Newer intravenous (IV) iron formulations offer a safe and rapidly effective treatment option. We performed a systematic mapping review of randomized controlled trials (RCTs) evaluating intravenous iron therapy in patients with cancer and anemia and their outcomes. A total of 23 RCTs were identified. The median number of patients enrolled was 104 (IQR: 60–134). A total of 5 were focused on surgical outcomes (4 preoperative, 1 postoperative), and 15 were in adjuvant therapies for a variety of tumor types (breast, colorectal, lung, gynecological, myeloid, and lymphomas), 10 of which were in combination with erythropoietin-stimulating agents (ESAs) therapy, 2 in radiotherapy, and 1 in palliative care. Overall, the studies reported that the use of IV iron increased hemoglobin concentration and decreased transfusion rates during different cancer treatment regimes. IV iron can be administered safely throughout the cancer treatment pathway from primary surgery to the palliative setting. More studies are needed to demonstrate net clinical outcomes.

Red blood cell transfusion is a common medical intervention with benefits and harms.

Management of peri-operative bleeding is complex and involves multiple assessment tools and strategies to ensure optimal patient care with the goal of reducing morbidity and mortality. These updated guidelines from the European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care (ESAIC) aim to provide an evidence-based set of recommendations for healthcare professionals to help ensure improved clinical management.A systematic literature search from 2015 to 2021 of several electronic databases was performed without language restrictions. Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) was used to assess the methodological quality of the included studies and to formulate recommendations. A Delphi methodology was used to prepare a clinical practice guideline.These searches identified 137 999 articles. All articles were assessed, and the existing 2017 guidelines were revised to incorporate new evidence. Sixteen recommendations derived from the systematic literature search, and four clinical guidances retained from previous ESAIC guidelines were formulated. Using the Delphi process on 253 sentences of guidance, strong consensus (>90% agreement) was achieved in 97% and consensus (75 to 90% agreement) in 3%.Peri-operative bleeding management encompasses the patient's journey from the pre-operative state through the postoperative period. Along this journey, many features of the patient's pre-operative coagulation status, underlying comorbidities, general health and the procedures that they are undergoing need to be taken into account. Due to the many important aspects in peri-operative nontrauma bleeding management, guidance as to how best approach and treat each individual patient are key. Understanding which therapeutic approaches are most valuable at each timepoint can only enhance patient care, ensuring the best outcomes by reducing blood loss and, therefore, overall morbidity and mortality.All healthcare professionals involved in the management of patients at risk for surgical bleeding should be aware of the current therapeutic options and approaches that are available to them. These guidelines aim to provide specific guidance for bleeding management in a variety of clinical situations.Copyright © 2023 European Society of Anaesthesiology and Intensive Care. Unauthorized reproduction of this article is prohibited.

Platelet transfusion is a frequent procedure with benefits and risks.

Critical bleeding is associated with a high mortality rate in patients with trauma. Hemorrhage is exacerbated by a complex derangement of coagulation, including an acute fibrinogen deficiency. Management is fibrinogen replacement with cryoprecipitate transfusions or fibrinogen concentrate, usually administered relatively late during hemorrhage.To assess whether survival could be improved by administering an early and empirical high dose of cryoprecipitate to all patients with trauma and bleeding that required activation of a major hemorrhage protocol.CRYOSTAT-2 was an interventional, randomized, open-label, parallel-group controlled, international, multicenter study. Patients were enrolled at 26 UK and US major trauma centers from August 2017 to November 2021. Eligible patients were injured adults requiring activation of the hospital's major hemorrhage protocol with evidence of active hemorrhage, systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg at any time, and receiving at least 1 U of a blood component transfusion.Patients were randomly assigned (in a 1:1 ratio) to receive standard care, which was the local major hemorrhage protocol (reviewed for guideline adherence), or cryoprecipitate, in which 3 pools of cryoprecipitate (6-g fibrinogen equivalent) were to be administered in addition to standard care within 90 minutes of randomization and 3 hours of injury.The primary outcome was all-cause mortality at 28 days in the intention-to-treat population.Among 1604 eligible patients, 799 were randomized to the cryoprecipitate group and 805 to the standard care group. Missing primary outcome data occurred in 73 patients (principally due to withdrawal of consent) and 1531 (95%) were included in the primary analysis population. The median (IQR) age of participants was 39 (26-55) years, 1251 (79%) were men, median (IQR) Injury Severity Score was 29 (18-43), 36% had penetrating injury, and 33% had systolic blood pressure less than 90 mm Hg at hospital arrival. All-cause 28-day mortality in the intention-to-treat population was 26.1% in the standard care group vs 25.3% in the cryoprecipitate group (odds ratio, 0.96 [95% CI, 0.75-1.23]; P = .74). There was no difference in safety outcomes or incidence of thrombotic events in the standard care vs cryoprecipitate group (12.9% vs 12.7%).Among patients with trauma and bleeding who required activation of a major hemorrhage protocol, the addition of early and empirical high-dose cryoprecipitate to standard care did not improve all cause 28-day mortality.ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04704869; ISRCTN Identifier: ISRCTN14998314.

The administration of blood components and their alternatives can be lifesaving. Anaemia, bleeding and transfusion are all associated with poor peri‐operative outcomes. Considerable changes in the approaches to optimal use of blood components and their alternatives, driven by the findings of large randomised controlled trials and improved haemovigilance, have become apparent over the past decade. The aim of these updated guidelines is to provide an evidence‐based set of recommendations so that anaesthetists and peri‐operative physicians might provide high‐quality care.

To evaluate whether the timing of postoperative urinary catheter removal is associated with voiding dysfunction after radical hysterectomy for early cervical cancer within contemporary surgical practice.We performed an institutional retrospective cohort study of patients who underwent Piver type II-III open or minimally invasive radical hysterectomy for early-stage cervical cancer (International Federation of Gynecology and Obstetrics (FIGO) 2009 stage IA1 with lymphovascular invasion to stage IIA) between January 2006 and December 2019. We compared voiding dysfunction (inability to spontaneously void with a post-void residual <100 mL after catheter removal) and outcomes based on postoperative timing of urinary catheter removal using univariate and multivariate logistic regressions.Among 234 patients, 86 (36.8%) underwent open surgery and 112 (47.9%) used enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) pathways. 29 (12.4%) patients had urinary catheter removal between 1-5 days postoperatively (group 1), 141 (60.3%) between 6-10 days (group 2), and 64 (27.3%) between 11-15 days (group 3). The overall rate of voiding dysfunction was 11.5%, with no difference between group 1 (17.2%), group 2 (11.3%), and group 3 (9.4%) (p=0.54). Group 1 had a significantly shorter time from surgery to spontaneous voiding (4 days, IQR 3-5 days) compared with group 2 (8 days, IQR 7-10 days) and group 3 (13 days, IQR 11-15 days) (p<0.01). There was no difference in hospital length of stay, urinary tract infection, or re-admission due to a genitourinary complication within 60 days of surgery based on timing of catheter removal. On multivariate analysis, the odds of voiding dysfunction did not differ by tumor size, type of hysterectomy, cancer stage, surgical approach, ERAS timeframe, or timing of catheter removal group.There was no difference in voiding dysfunction or postoperative genitourinary complications based on timing of urinary catheter removal after radical hysterectomy. Early catheter removal should be considered in this population.© IGCS and ESGO 2022. No commercial re-use. See rights and permissions. Published by BMJ.

Assessment of retroperitoneal nodes is an important part of the surgical staging of gynecologic cancers. Although pelvic and paraaortic lymphadenectomy have been widely described by different authors, there is little consensus on the description of the different surgical steps for each procedure. An Intergroup Committee on Onco-Gyn Minimally Invasive Surgery has been established with members of the European Society for Gynecological Endoscopy (ESGE), European Society of Gynaecological Oncology (ESGO) and the Society of European Robotic Gynaecological Surgery (SERGS). The Intergroup Committee has various objectives: writing down a surgical description of the technique, which will be assessed by a group of experts following a formal consensus method and developing a specific Objective Structured Assessment of Technical Skills (OSATS) scale for each procedure.A hierarchical task analysis was conducted by a working group of eight experts from the three societies in order to identify the surgical steps of transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approach in paraaortic lymphadenectomy. The selection of the definitive surgical steps was confirmed by a group of 19 experts from the different societies, following a formal consensus method. Two rounds of Delphi panel rating were considered necessary for achieving an agreement. The consensus agreement identified 29 surgical steps in transperitoneal and 17 surgical steps in extraperitoneal approach to complete a paraaortic lymphadenectomy. Once the description of the procedure and the consensus were established, an Objective specific Scale for the Assessment of Technical Skills for Paraaortic lymphadenectomy (PA-OSATS) in the transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approach was developed.In the first round of rating we found that 28 steps out of 29 in the transperitoneal approach and 13 out of 17 in the extraperitoneal approach did not reach a strong degree of agreement. They were reformulated based on comments made by the experts, and submitted to a second round of rating and this finally achieved an agreement.We defined a list of surgical steps in transperitoneal and extraperitoneal approach in paraaortic lymphadenectomy and a specific PA-OSATS scale for these procedures. This tool will be useful for teaching, assessing and standardizing this surgical procedure.© IGCS and ESGO 2024. Re-use permitted under CC BY-NC. No commercial re-use. Published by BMJ.

Chylous ascites (CA) is a rare yet clinically significant complication following gynecologic cancer surgery, with incidence rates of 0.17 % to 9%. We aimed to describe a case of CA with a delayed clinical presentation nearly 100 days postoperatively in a patient with advanced endometrial cancer and to review the management strategies.

The perioperative use of dexamethasone in diabetic patients remains controversial due to concerns related to infection and adverse events. This study aimed to determine whether clinical evidence supports withholding dexamethasone in diabetic patients due to concern for infection risk. We hypothesized that there is no difference in infectious outcomes between dexamethasone-treated patients and controls.A literature search was performed on November 22, 2022 to identify randomized, placebo-controlled trials investigating short-course (<72 hours), perioperative dexamethasone that explicitly included diabetic patients and measured at least 1 clinical outcome. Pertinent studies were independently searched in PubMed, Embase, and Cochrane. Authors for all identified studies were contacted with the aim of performing quantitative subgroup analyses of diabetic patients. The primary end point was surgical site infection and the secondary end point was a composite of adverse events. Qualitative remarks were reported based on the total available data and a quality assessment tool. Meta-analyses were performed using inverse variance with random effects. Heterogeneity was assessed via standard χ2 and I2 tests.Sixteen unique studies were included, 5 of which were analyzed quantitatively. Of the 2592 diabetic patients, 2344 (1184 randomized to dexamethasone and 1160 to placebo) were analyzed in at least 1 quantitative outcome. Quantitative analysis showed that the use of perioperative dexamethasone had no effect on the risk of surgical site infections (log odds ratio [LOR], -0.10, 95%; 95% confidence interval [CI], -0.64 to 0.44) while significantly reducing the risk of composite adverse events (LOR, -0.33; 95% CI, -0.62 to -0.05). Qualitative analysis reinforced these findings, demonstrating noninferior to superior results across all clinical outcomes. There was high heterogeneity between the included studies.Current evidence suggests perioperative dexamethasone may be given to diabetic patients without increasing the risk of infectious complications. Prospective investigations aimed at optimizing dose, frequency, and timing are needed, as well as studies aimed explicitly at exploring the use of dexamethasone in patients with poorly controlled diabetes.Copyright © 2024 International Anesthesia Research Society.

Basic science studies suggest that perioperative immune impairment may augment the risk of cancer recurrence after otherwise potentially curative surgery. Despite its immunosuppressant properties, dexamethasone is commonly given to oncologic patients in an effort to reduce postoperative nausea and vomiting. We therefore tested the hypothesis that perioperative dexamethasone administration increases the risk of ovarian cancer recurrence.Women who had primary ovarian cytoreductive surgery between January 1997 and October 2007 were identified using a database maintained by the division of Gynecologic Oncology at Northwestern University. Tumor recurrence in women given perioperative systemic dexamethasone (4-10 mg) was compared with those who did not receive dexamethasone. The primary outcome was the propensity-matched time to cancer recurrence. Recurrence was defined by a carcinoantigen 125 >21 U/mL or computerized tomography evidence of the disease followed by tissue confirmation. Median difference and 95% confidence interval between the propensity-matched groups were calculated using a 10,000 sample bootstrap.Among 260 women having primary cytoreductive surgery for ovarian cancer that met our inclusion criteria, 102 subjects were given perioperative systemic dexamethasone. Cancer recurrence was observed in 178 subjects, and the overall unadjusted median (IQR) time to recurrence was 18 (7-50) months. Eighty-seven cases and 87 controls were propensity matched to adjust for confounding covariates. After propensity matching the groups for confounding covariates, the median (IQR) time to recurrence in the dexamethasone group was 23 (6-46) compared with 18 (8-53) months in the control group (P = 0.63) with a median (95% confidence interval) difference of time to recurrence between the dexamethasone and the control group of 5 (-8 to 17) months.We could not find evidence for an association between perioperative systemic dexamethasone administration and ovarian cancer recurrence after primary cytoreductive surgery. Our results do not support avoiding low-dose perioperative dexamethasone for prevention of postoperative nausea, vomiting, and pain in ovarian cancer patients.

Perioperative glucocorticoids have been increasingly used in total knee arthroplasty (TKA) to optimize postoperative recovery, with prior evidence suggesting potential reductions in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in unilateral TKA. However, their safety and efficacy in primary bilateral total knee arthroplasty (BTKA) remain uncertain, particularly regarding pain relief, glycemic control, and PONV, given the greater surgical stress and limited BTKA-specific data. This systematic review and meta-analysis aimed to evaluate the impact of perioperative glucocorticoids on these outcomes in patients undergoing primary BTKA.