Many RCTs have evaluated the influence of intraoperative tidal volume (tV), PEEP, and driving pressure on the occurrence of postoperative pulmonary complications, cardiovascular complications, and mortality in adult patients. Our meta-analysis aimed to investigate the association between tV, PEEP, and driving pressure and the above-mentioned outcomes. We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of RCTs from inception to May 19, 2022. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications; the secondary outcomes were intraoperative cardiovascular complications and 30-day mortality. Primary and secondary outcomes were evaluated stratifying patients in the following groups: (1) low tV (LV, tV 6-8 ml kg^-1 and PEEP ≥5 cm H₂O) vs high tV (HV, tV >8 ml kg^-1 and PEEP=0 cm H₂O); (2) higher PEEP (HP, ≥6 cm H₂O) vs lower PEEP (LP, <6 cm H₂O); and (3) driving pressure-guided PEEP (DP) vs fixed PEEP (FP). We included 16 RCTs with a total sample size of 4993. The incidence of postoperative pulmonary complications was lower in patients treated with LV than with HV (OR=0.402, CI 0.280-0.577, P<0.001) and lower in DP than in FP group (OR=0.358, CI 0.187-0.684, P=0.002). Postoperative pulmonary complications did not differ between HP and LP groups; the incidence of intraoperative cardiovascular complications was higher in HP group (OR=1.385, CI 1.027-1.867, P=0.002). The 30-day mortality was not influenced by the ventilation strategy. Optimal intraoperative mechanical ventilation is unclear; however, our meta-analysis showed that low tidal volume and driving pressure-guided PEEP strategies were associated with a reduction in postoperative pulmonary complications.

Background: The use of robotic surgery is attracting ever-growing interest for its potential advantages such as small incisions, fine movements, and magnification of the operating field. Only a few randomized controlled trials (RCTs) have explored the differences in perioperative outcomes between the two approaches. Methods: We screened the main online databases from inception to May 2023. We included studies in English enrolling adult patients undergoing elective gastrointestinal surgery. We used the following exclusion criteria: surgery with the involvement of thoracic esophagus, and patients affected by severe heart, pulmonary and end-stage renal disease. We compared intra- and post-operative complications, length of hospitalization, and costs between laparoscopic and robotic approaches. Results: A total of 18 RCTs were included. We found no differences in the rate of anastomotic leakage, cardiovascular complications, estimated blood loss, readmission, deep vein thrombosis, length of hospitalization, mortality, and post-operative pain between robotic and laparoscopic surgery; post-operative pneumonia was less frequent in the robotic approach. The conversion to open surgery was less frequent in the robotic approach, which was characterized by shorter time to first flatus but higher operative time and costs. Conclusions: The robotic gastrointestinal surgery has some advantages compared to the laparoscopic technique such as lower conversion rate, faster recovery of bowel movement, but it has higher economic costs.

Electrical impedance tomography (EIT) reconstructs functional lung images and evaluates the variations of impedance during the breathing cycle. The aim of this study was to evaluate the effect of protective mechanical ventilation on ventilation distributions recorded by the EIT during elective robotic-assisted laparoscopy surgery with steep Trendelenburg position. This prospective, randomized single center study included patients with healthy lungs undergoing elective robot-assisted laparoscopic urological surgery in general anesthesia. Patients were randomly assigned to either protective lung ventilation or conventional ventilation. In the protective ventilation group, tidal volume (TV) was set at 6 ml/Kg predicted body weight (PBW), with PEEP 6 cmH₂O, and recruitment maneuvers (RM) as needed. In the conventional ventilation group, TV was set at 9 ml/Kg PBW, with PEEP 2 cmH₂O and RM only as needed. Ventilation distribution was assessed using an EIT device. This study included 40 patients in the functional image analysis. Significant differences were found in ventilation distribution in the region of interest (p < 0.05). Driving pressure was significantly lower in protective ventilation group (p < 0.05). Peak and plateau pressures were not different between the groups while statical significance was found in tidal volume and respiratory rate. EIT may be a valuable tool for monitoring lung function during general anesthesia. During elective robotic-assisted laparoscopy surgery with steep Trendelenburg position, protective mechanical ventilation may have a more homogenous distribution of intraoperative and postoperative ventilation. Larger sample size and long-term evaluation are needed in future studies to assess the benefit of EIT monitoring in operation room.Clinical trial registration ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT04194177 registered at 11th December 2019.

Background and Aim: Ultrasound popliteal sciatic nerve block (UPSNB) is commonly performed in foot and ankle surgery. This study aims to assess the use of dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as adjuvants in UPSNB for hallux valgus (HV) surgery, comparing their efficacy in producing motor and sensory block and controlling postoperative pain. The adverse event rate was also evaluated. Methods: This mono-centric retrospective study included 62 adult patients undergoing HV surgery: 30 patients received lidocaine 2% 200 mg, ropivacaine 0.5% 50 mg and dexamethasone 4 mg (Group 1), whereas 32 patients received lidocaine 2% 200 mg, ropivacaine 0.5% 50 mg, and dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/Kg (Group 2). At first, the visual analogue scale (VAS) was evaluated after 48 hours. The other outcomes were time to motor block regression, evaluation of the first analgesic drug intake, analgesic effect, adverse effects (hemodynamic disorders, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV)) and patient satisfaction. The continuous data were analyzed with student’s t-test and the continuous one with χ². Statistical significance was set at a p-value lower than 0.05. Results: No significant difference was found in VAS after 48 hours (4.5 ± 1.6 vs 4.7 ± 1.7, p = 0.621) to motor block regression (18.9 ± 6.0 vs 18.7 ± 6, p = 0.922). The number of patients that took their first analgesic drug in the first 48 h (p = 0.947 at 6 hours; p = 0.421 at 12 hours; p = 0.122 at 24 hours and p = 0.333 at 48 hours) were not significant. A low and similar incidence of intraoperative hemodynamic disorders was recorded in both groups (hypotension p = 0.593; bradycardia p = 0.881). Neither PONV nor other complication was found. Patients in Group 1 reported a lower degree of interference with sleep (p = 0.001), less interference with daily activities (P = 0.002) and with the affective sphere (P = 0.015) along with a more satisfactory postoperative pain management (p < 0.001) as compared to Group 2. Conclusion: No significant differences were observed in the duration of motor and sensory blockade between patients in both groups. Additionally, both groups showed good pain control with a low rate of adverse effects, even if there was no clinical difference between the groups. However, patients who received dexamethasone reported experiencing less interference with their sleep, daily activities and overall emotional well-being, and overall pain control.

Background: Chronic pain is one of the most challenging diseases for physicians as its etiology and manifestations can be extremely varied. Many guidelines have been published and many therapeutic options are nowadays available for the different types of pain. Given the enormous amount of information that healthcare providers must handle, it is not always simple to keep in mind all the phases and strategies to manage pain. We here present the acronym PATIENT (P: patient’s perception; A: assessment; T: tailored approach; I: iterative evaluation; E: education; N: non-pharmacological approach; T: team), a bundle which can help to summarize all the steps to follow in the management of chronic pain. Methods: We performed a PubMed search with a list of terms specific for every issue of the bundle; only English articles were considered. Results: We analyzed the literature investigating these topics to provide an overview of the available data on each bundle’s issue; their synthesis lead to an algorithm which may allow healthcare providers to undertake every step of a patient’s evaluation and management. Discussion: Pain management is very complex; our PATIENT bundle could be a guide to clinicians to optimize a patient’s evaluation and treatment.

In current practice, single-shot spinal anesthesia has traditionally been performed using the conventional surface-anatomic-Landmark-Guided technique. This “blind” technique has significant critical issues such as a high risk of complications due to the numerous attempts at spinal needle placement and the negative impact on the learning curve of the trainees. Ultrasound-Assisted spinal anesthesia could reduce these critical issues and allow trainees to perform the procedure more easily and with fewer complications for the patient. We performed a before-and-after monocentric retrospective comparative study at the University of Naples “Federico II” (Naples, Italy). Inclusion criteria were as follows: patients aged 18 years or older; ASA physical status between I and IV; and elective orthopedic surgery under single-shot spinal anesthesia performed by supervised trainees between January 2022 and December 2022. In the selected cohort, 88 patients were included in group A (Landmark-Guided spinal anesthesia) and 91 in group B (Ultrasound-Assisted spinal anesthesia). The number of attempts by trainees (p-value < 0.005), procedure performing time (<0.001), and patient discomfort (<0.001) were significantly lower in group B than in group A. Ultrasound-Assisted single-shot spinal anesthesia performed by novice trainees reduces the number of attempts, complication rate, periprocedural pain, and patient discomfort.