Von Frey monofilaments (VFM) and Electronic von Frey are used as quantitative sensory testing to explore mechanical hyperalgesia. The aim of the study was to determine VFM and Electronic von Frey reproducibility and the time required for testing undamaged areas in volunteers and surgical in-hospital patients. Prospective study in 2 groups of individuals without neurological disorders and not receiving treatments that alter sensorial response. Group 1 was formed by 30 healthy volunteers and group 2 by 28 patients after knee arthroplasty who received unilateral femoral block as postoperative analgesia. Testing was performed by 2 trained investigators in the forearm and abdominal wall and repeated 24 hours later. Pain threshold was determined as the VMF or the pressure rate applied with the Electronic von Frey referred to as unpleasant. The time used in each test was measured. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility were analyzed by means of Kappa and Lin coefficients. Intraobserver and interobserver reproducibility for VFM was only fair or moderate in both groups (Kappa0.8). No differences were found between the 2 tested areas. Time used was 6.03 and 3.16 minutes for VFM and Electronic von Frey, respectively. Exploration of mechanical allodynia in postoperative patients requires rapid and reliable quantitative sensory testing. Electronic von Frey was more reliable and rapid than VFM in exploring mechanical pain thresholds in undamaged areas in volunteers and patients. Further studies are required to confirm whether these results can be extrapolated to areas affected by surgery.

Persistent postsurgical pain (PPP) after thoracotomy effect 50% to 80%. Nerve damage and central sensitization involving NDMDAr activation may play an important role. This study evaluates the efficacy of adding intravenous (IV) or epidural ketamine to thoracic epidural analgesia (TEA) after thoracotomy. Double-blind randomized study on patients undergoing thoracotomy allocated to one of the following: group Kiv (IV racemic ketamine 0.5 mg/kg preincisional +0.25 mg/kg/h for 48 h), group Kep (epidural racemic ketamine 0.5 mg/kg preincisional +0.25 mg/kg/h for 48 h), or group S (saline). Postoperative analgesia was ensured by TEA with ropivacaine and fentanyl. Pain visual analog scales (VAS), Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, Catastrophizing Scale, and Quantitative Sensory Testing, measuring both the peri-incisional and distant hyperalgesia area, were conducted preoperatively and postoperatively until 6 months. Plasma ketamine levels and stability of the analgesic solutions were analyzed. A total of 104 patients were included. PPP incidence was 20% at 6 months. Pain scores on coughing were significantly lower in Kiv and Kep than in S at 24 and 72 hours, but there were no differences afterwards. There were no significant differences in pain at rest, Neuropathic Pain Symptom Inventory, and Catastrophizing Scale, or in the area of mechanical allodynia at any time. Adverse effects were mild. Plasma ketamine levels did not differ significantly between groups. Analgesic solutions were stable. Adding epidural or IV racemic ketamine to TEA after thoracotomy did not lead to any reduction in PPP or allodynia. Epidural administration produced similar plasma ketamine levels to the IV route.

Background: In the POISE-2 (PeriOperative ISchemic Evaluation 2) trial, perioperative aspirin did not reduce cardiovascular events, but increased major bleeding. There remains uncertainty regarding the effect of perioperative aspirin in patients undergoing vascular surgery. The aim of this substudy was to determine whether there is a subgroup effect of initiating or continuing aspirin in patients undergoing vascular surgery. Methods: POISE-2 was a blinded, randomized trial of patients having non-cardiac surgery. Patients were assigned to perioperative aspirin or placebo. The primary outcome was a composite of death or myocardial infarction at 30 days. Secondary outcomes included: vascular occlusive complications (a composite of amputation and peripheral arterial thrombosis) and major or life-threatening bleeding. Results: Of 10 010 patients in POISE-2, 603 underwent vascular surgery, 319 in the continuation and 284 in the initiation stratum. Some 272 patients had vascular surgery for occlusive disease and 265 had aneurysm surgery. The primary outcome occurred in 13·7 per cent of patients having aneurysm repair allocated to aspirin and 9·0 per cent who had placebo (hazard ratio (HR) 1·48, 95 per cent c.i. 0·71 to 3·09). Among patients who had surgery for occlusive vascular disease, 15·8 per cent allocated to aspirin and 13·6 per cent on placebo had the primary outcome (HR 1·16, 0·62 to 2·17). There was no interaction with the primary outcome for type of surgery (P = 0·294) or aspirin stratum (P = 0·623). There was no interaction for vascular occlusive complications (P = 0·413) or bleeding (P = 0·900) for vascular compared with non-vascular surgery. Conclusion: This study suggests that the overall POISE-2 results apply to vascular surgery. Perioperative withdrawal of chronic aspirin therapy did not increase cardiovascular or vascular occlusive complications. Registration number: NCT01082874 (http://www.clinicaltrials.gov).

Multimodal preoperative prehabilitation has been shown to be effective in improving the functional capacity of cancer patients, reducing postoperative complications and the length of hospital and ICU stay after surgery. The availability of prehabilitation units that gather all the professionals involved in patient care facilitates the development of integrated and patient-centered multimodal prehabilitation programs, as well as patient adherence. This article describes the process of creating a prehabilitation unit in our center and the role of perioperative nursing. Initially, the project was launched with the performance of a research study on prehabilitation for gastrointestinal cancer surgery. The results of this study encouraged us to continue the implementation of the unit. Progressively, multimodal prehabilitation programs focusing on each type of patient and surgery were developed. Currently, our prehabilitation unit is a care unit that has its own gym, which allows supervised training of cancer patients prior to surgery. Likewise, the evolution of perioperative nursing in the unit is described: from collaboration and assistance in the integral evaluation of the patient at the beginning to current work as a case manager; a task that has proven extremely important for the comprehensive and continuous care of the patient.