Postoperative pain in root canal treatment with ultrasonic versus conventional irrigation: a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized controlled trials

Clinical Oral Investigations - The objective of this systematic review and meta-analysis (SRM) was to answer the question whether the use of ultrasonic irrigation (UI) results in less postoperative...     

A vanguard randomised feasibility trial comparing three regimens of peri-operative oxygen therapy on recovery after major surgery

International recommendations encourage liberal administration of oxygen to patients having surgery under general anaesthesia, ostensibly to reduce surgical site infection. However, the optimal oxygen regimen to minimise postoperative complications and enhance recovery from surgery remains uncertain. The hospital operating theatre randomised oxygen (HOT-ROX) trial is a multicentre, patient- and assessor-blinded, parallel-group, randomised clinical trial designed to assess the effect of a restricted, standard care, or liberal peri-operative oxygen therapy regimen on days alive and at home after surgery in adults undergoing prolonged non-cardiac surgery under general anaesthesia. Here, we report the findings of the internal vanguard feasibility phase of the trial undertaken in four large metropolitan hospitals in Australia and New Zealand that included the first 210 patients of a planned overall 2640 trial sample, with eight pre-specified endpoints evaluating protocol implementation and safety. We screened a total of 956 participants between 1 September 2019 and 26 January 2021, with data from 210 participants included in the analysis. Median (IQR [range]) time-weighted average intra-operative F_iO₂ was 0.30 (0.26–0.35 [0.20–0.59]) and 0.47 (0.44–0.51 [0.37–0.68]) for restricted and standard care, respectively (mean difference (95%CI) 0.17 (0.14–0.20), p < 0.001). Median time-weighted average intra-operative F_iO₂ was 0.83 (0.80–0.85 [0.70–0.91]) for liberal oxygen therapy (mean difference (95%CI) compared with standard care 0.36 (0.33–0.39), p < 0.001). All feasibility endpoints were met. There were no significant patient adverse events. These data support the feasibility of proceeding with the HOT-ROX trial without major protocol modifications.     

Patient characteristics,anaesthetic workload and techniques in the UK: an analysis from the 7th National Audit Project (NAP7) activity survey

Detailed contemporary knowledge of the characteristics of the surgical population, national anaesthetic workload, anaesthetic techniques and behaviours are essential to monitor productivity, inform policy and direct research themes. Every 3–4 years, the Royal College of Anaesthetists, as part of its National Audit Projects (NAP), performs a snapshot activity survey in all UK hospitals delivering anaesthesia, collecting patient-level encounter data from all cases under the care of an anaesthetist. During November 2021, as part of NAP7, anaesthetists recorded details of all cases undertaken over 4 days at their site through an online survey capturing anonymous patient characteristics and anaesthetic details. Of 416 hospital sites invited to participate, 352 (85%) completed the activity survey. From these, 24,177 reports were returned, of which 24,172 (99%) were included in the final dataset. The work patterns by day of the week, time of day and surgical specialty were similar to previous NAP activity surveys. However, in non-obstetric patients, between NAP5 (2013) and NAP7 (2021) activity surveys, the estimated median age of patients increased by 2.3 years from median (IQR) of 50.5 (28.4–69.1) to 52.8 (32.1–69.2) years. The median (IQR) BMI increased from 24.9 (21.5–29.5) to 26.7 (22.3–31.7) kg.m^–2. The proportion of patients who scored as ASA physical status 1 decreased from 37% in NAP5 to 24% in NAP7. The use of total intravenous anaesthesia increased from 8% of general anaesthesia cases to 26% between NAP5 and NAP7. Some changes may reflect the impact of the COVID-19 pandemic on the anaesthetic population, though patients with confirmed COVID-19 accounted for only 149 (1%) cases. These data show a rising burden of age, obesity and comorbidity in patients requiring anaesthesia care, likely to impact UK peri-operative services significantly.     

The magnitude and progress of lean body mass,fat-free mass,and skeletal muscle mass loss following bariatric surgery: A systematic review and meta-analysis

Postbariatric loss of muscle tissue could negatively affect long-term health due to its role in various bodily processes, such as metabolism and functional capacity. This meta-analysis aimed to unravel time-dependent changes in the magnitude and progress of lean body mass (LBM), fat-free mass (FFM), and skeletal muscle mass (SMM) loss following bariatric surgery. A systematic literature search was conducted in Pubmed, Embase, and Web of Science. Fifty-nine studies assessed LBM (n = 37), FFM (n = 20), or SMM (n = 3) preoperatively and ≥1 time points postsurgery. Random-effects meta-analyses were performed to determine pooled loss per outcome parameter and follow-up time point. At 12-month postsurgery, pooled LBM loss was ?8.13 kg [95%CI ?9.01; ?7.26]. FFM loss and SMM loss were ?8.23 kg [95%CI ?10.74; ?5.73] and ?3.18 kg [95%CI ?5.64; ?0.71], respectively. About 55% of 12-month LBM loss occurred within 3-month postsurgery, followed by a more gradual decrease up to 12 months. Similar patterns were seen for FFM and SMM. In conclusion, >8 kg of LBM and FFM loss was observed within 1-year postsurgery. LBM, FFM, and SMM were predominantly lost within 3-month postsurgery, highlighting that interventions to mitigate such losses should be implemented perioperatively.     

Machine learning to predict myocardial injury and death after non-cardiac surgery

Myocardial injury due to ischaemia within 30 days of non-cardiac surgery is prognostically relevant. We aimed to determine the discrimination, calibration, accuracy, sensitivity and specificity of single-layer and multiple-layer neural networks for myocardial injury and death within 30 postoperative days. We analysed data from 24,589 participants in the Vascular Events in Non-cardiac Surgery Patients Cohort Evaluation study. Validation was performed on a randomly selected subset of the study population. Discrimination for myocardial injury by single-layer vs. multiple-layer models generated areas (95%CI) under the receiver operating characteristic curve of: 0.70 (0.69–0.72) vs. 0.71 (0.70–0.73) with variables available before surgical referral, p < 0.001; 0.73 (0.72–0.75) vs. 0.75 (0.74–0.76) with additional variables available on admission, but before surgery, p < 0.001; and 0.76 (0.75–0.77) vs. 0.77 (0.76–0.78) with the addition of subsequent variables, p < 0.001. Discrimination for death by single-layer vs. multiple-layer models generated areas (95%CI) under the receiver operating characteristic curve of: 0.71 (0.66–0.76) vs. 0.74 (0.71–0.77) with variables available before surgical referral, p = 0.04; 0.78 (0.73–0.82) vs. 0.83 (0.79–0.86) with additional variables available on admission but before surgery, p = 0.01; and 0.87 (0.83–0.89) vs. 0.87 (0.85–0.90) with the addition of subsequent variables, p = 0.52. The accuracy of the multiple-layer model for myocardial injury and death with all variables was 70% and 89%, respectively.     

Timing of elective surgery and risk assessment after SARS-CoV-2 infection: an update

The impact of vaccination and new SARS-CoV-2 variants on peri-operative outcomes is unclear. We aimed to update previously published consensus recommendations on timing of elective surgery after SARS-CoV-2 infection to assist policymakers, administrative staff, clinicians and patients. The guidance remains that patients should avoid elective surgery within 7 weeks of infection, unless the benefits of doing so exceed the risk of waiting. We recommend individualised multidisciplinary risk assessment for patients requiring elective surgery within 7 weeks of SARS-CoV-2 infection. This should include baseline mortality risk calculation and assessment of risk modifiers (patient factors; SARS-CoV-2 infection; surgical factors). Asymptomatic SARS-CoV-2 infection with previous variants increased peri-operative mortality risk three-fold throughout the 6 weeks after infection, and assumptions that asymptomatic or mildly symptomatic omicron SARS-CoV-2 infection does not add risk are currently unfounded. Patients with persistent symptoms and those with moderate-to-severe COVID-19 may require a longer delay than 7 weeks. Elective surgery should not take place within 10 days of diagnosis of SARS-CoV-2 infection, predominantly because the patient may be infectious, which is a risk to surgical pathways, staff and other patients. We now emphasise that timing of surgery should include the assessment of baseline and increased risk, optimising vaccination and functional status, and shared decision-making. While these recommendations focus on the omicron variant and current evidence, the principles may also be of relevance to future variants. As further data emerge, these recommendations may be revised.