-
Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery Jan 2017After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Review the appropriate indications and techniques for suction-assisted lipectomy body contouring... (Review)
Review
LEARNING OBJECTIVES
After studying this article, the participant should be able to: 1. Review the appropriate indications and techniques for suction-assisted lipectomy body contouring surgery. 2. Accurately calculate the patient limits of lidocaine for safe dosing during the tumescent infiltration phase of liposuction. 3. Determine preoperatively possible "red flags" or symptoms and signs in the patient history and physical examination that may indicate a heightened risk profile for a liposuction procedure. 4. Provide an introduction to adjunctive techniques to liposuction such as energy-assisted liposuction and to determine whether or not the reader may decide to add them to his or her practice.
SUMMARY
With increased focus on one's aesthetic appearance, liposuction has become the most popular cosmetic procedure in the world since its introduction in the 1980s. As it has become more refined with experience, safety, patient selection, preoperative assessment, fluid management, proper technique, and overall care of the patient have been emphasized and improved. For the present article, a systematic review of the relevant literature regarding patient workup, tumescent fluid techniques, medication overview, and operative technique was conducted with a practical approach that the reader will possibly find clinically applicable. Recent trends regarding energy-assisted liposuction and body contouring local anesthesia use are addressed. Deep venous thromboembolism prophylaxis is mentioned, as are other common and less common possible complications. The article provides a literature-supported overview on liposuction techniques with an emphasis on preoperative assessment, medicines used, operative technique, and outcomes.
Topics: Evidence-Based Medicine; Humans; Lipectomy; Postoperative Care; Preoperative Care
PubMed: 28027260
DOI: 10.1097/PRS.0000000000002859 -
PM & R : the Journal of Injury,... Oct 2023We aimed to identify and describe the current interventions used in preoperative programs ("prehabilitation") for spine surgery. Knowledge gaps in approaches,... (Review)
Review
We aimed to identify and describe the current interventions used in preoperative programs ("prehabilitation") for spine surgery. Knowledge gaps in approaches, feasibility, timing, patient experience, clinical outcomes, and health care costs were explored while describing their potential benefits on physical and psychological outcomes. An electronic search was conducted from January 2004 to February 2022 in Ovid Medline, Embase, EBSCO CINAHL, the Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and PEDro to identify studies in English evaluating adults enrolled in prehabilitation before undergoing elective spine surgeries. Studies were uploaded into DistillerSR for systematic screening after removing duplicates. Four reviewers screened nested references for inclusion based on titles and abstracts, followed by their full-text review. Two reviewers subsequently extracted data and summarized the results. The results were reported using Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic reviews and Meta-Analyses extension for Scoping Reviews guidelines. Studies were rated for quality using National Health and Medical Research Council criteria. Out of 18,879 potential studies, a total of 23 studies (0.12%) met the eligibility criteria and were included in this scoping review. The prehabilitation programs included general education (n = 6, 26%), exercise (n = 6, 26%), cognitive behavioral therapy (n = 3, 13%), pain neuroscience education (n = 3, 13%), health behavior counseling (n = 3, 13%), and mindfulness (n = 2, 9%). Additional studies are needed to identify optimal patient characteristics, intervention dosage, and whether multimodal approaches using a combination of physical and psychological strategies lead to more favorable outcomes. Although studies on prehabilitation for spine surgery are limited, they seem to demonstrate that prehabilitation programs are feasible, reduce medical expenditures, and improve patients' postoperative pain, disability, self-efficacy, psychological behaviors, and satisfaction with surgical outcomes. The available literature suggests there is an opportunity to improve patient experience, clinical outcomes and reduce medical costs with the use of prehabilitation in spine surgery.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Preoperative Exercise; Preoperative Care; Exercise; Pain, Postoperative
PubMed: 36730164
DOI: 10.1002/pmrj.12956 -
AORN Journal Jul 2021Preoperative readiness indicates the patient's capacity to process information, consider possible outcomes, and decide to undergo a surgical procedure. This systematic...
Preoperative readiness indicates the patient's capacity to process information, consider possible outcomes, and decide to undergo a surgical procedure. This systematic review examines how the term "patient readiness" is used in the literature and synthesizes how preoperative interventions address readiness. A medical librarian searched five electronic databases to identify articles published between July 1, 2008, and June 30, 2019, that address studies including adult patients scheduled for surgery who participated in programs designed to foster readiness or studies that explored surgical readiness. After extracting 28 studies, the authors assessed the articles for quality and thematically synthesized them to describe actions and indicators of patient readiness according to the Perioperative Patient Focused Model. Readiness can positively influence surgical outcomes (eg, pain, satisfaction); however, there is a paucity of high-level, quality evidence that discusses surgical readiness for perioperative care. Nurses should use the information in this review to improve patient-centered preoperative care.
Topics: Adult; Humans; Pain; Patient-Centered Care; Preoperative Care
PubMed: 34181266
DOI: 10.1002/aorn.13425 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Sep 2015Aspirin administration before cardiac surgery represents a balance between preventing perioperative thrombotic events and promoting surgical bleeding. Clear evidence to... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
BACKGROUND
Aspirin administration before cardiac surgery represents a balance between preventing perioperative thrombotic events and promoting surgical bleeding. Clear evidence to guide the preoperative use of aspirin in patients undergoing cardiac surgery is lacking.This systematic review and meta-analysis was performed to evaluate the efficacy and safety of preoperative aspirin, in patients undergoing coronary artery surgery.
METHODS
We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized trials involving patients undergoing coronary artery surgery assigned to preoperative aspirin therapy or no aspirin/placebo. The MEDLINE and EMBASE databases and Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials were searched up to March 2014 without language restrictions. Two reviewers performed independent quality review and data extraction. Efficacy outcomes of myocardial infarction (MI) and mortality, and safety outcomes of blood loss, red cell transfusion, and surgical re-exploration were compared.
RESULTS
In 13 trials (n=2399), preoperative aspirin therapy reduced the risk of MI (OR, 0.56; 95% CI, 0.33-0.96; P=0.03), without a reduction in mortality (OR, 1.16; 95% CI, 0.42-3.22; P=0.77). Preoperative aspirin increased postoperative chest tube drainage (mean difference 168 ml; 95% CI, 39-297 ml; P=0.01), red cell transfusion (mean difference 141 ml; 95% CI, 55-226; P=0.001) and need for surgical re-exploration (OR, 1.85, 95% CI, 1.15-2.96; P=0.01). Studies were of low methodological quality, with significant heterogeneity identified.
CONCLUSIONS
In patients undergoing coronary artery surgery, preoperative aspirin reduces perioperative MI, but at a cost of increased bleeding, blood transfusion, and surgical re-exploration.
Topics: Anti-Inflammatory Agents, Non-Steroidal; Aspirin; Blood Loss, Surgical; Blood Transfusion; Cardiac Surgical Procedures; Coronary Vessels; Humans; Myocardial Infarction; Postoperative Hemorrhage; Preoperative Care
PubMed: 26082471
DOI: 10.1093/bja/aev164 -
European Urology Mar 2016Preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise (PFME) is often prescribed to reduce the severity of postprostatectomy incontinence. (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
CONTEXT
Preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise (PFME) is often prescribed to reduce the severity of postprostatectomy incontinence.
OBJECTIVE
Systematic review and meta-analysis of evidence regarding the effect of preoperative PFME on postoperative urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy.
EVIDENCE ACQUISITION
A systematic search was performed of the Cochrane Library, Medline, Embase, and all potential articles from references in relevant articles on 4 October 2014. We followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-analyses (PRISMA) statement. Identified reports were critically appraised for quality and relevance. Only studies of preoperative PFME compared with no preoperative PFME were included.
EVIDENCE SYNTHESIS
Eleven studies were included based on the selection criteria. The total number of patients included in the final analysis was 739. In seven studies, sufficient quantitative data on postoperative incontinence were available for meta-analysis. At 1 mo, there was no difference in continence rates between the groups (odds ratio [OR]: 0.68; 95% confidence interval [CI], 0.45-1.03). At 3 mo, there was 36% improvement in the preoperative PFME group (OR: 0.64; 95% CI, 0.47-0.88). At 6 mo, there was no difference between groups (OR: 0.60; 95% CI, 0.32-1.15). When examining quality of life measures, four of seven studies demonstrated significant improvement in the preoperative PFME group at 3 mo, and two of these studies demonstrated significant differences at 6 mo.
CONCLUSIONS
Preoperative PFME improves postoperative urinary incontinence after radical prostatectomy at 3 mo but not at 6 mo, suggesting it improves early continence but not long-term continence rates.
PATIENT SUMMARY
We reviewed all evidence for preoperative pelvic floor muscle exercise (PFME) in treating urinary incontinence following radical prostatectomy. We found evidence to suggest that preoperative PFME improves early continence rates but not long-term continence rates.
Topics: Chi-Square Distribution; Exercise Therapy; Humans; Male; Odds Ratio; Pelvic Floor; Preoperative Care; Prostatectomy; Quality of Life; Risk Factors; Time Factors; Treatment Outcome; Urinary Incontinence
PubMed: 26610857
DOI: 10.1016/j.eururo.2015.11.004 -
British Journal of Anaesthesia Jul 2021In the general adult population, lymphopaenia is associated with an increased risk for hospitalisation with infection and infection-related death. The quality of... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis
BACKGROUND
In the general adult population, lymphopaenia is associated with an increased risk for hospitalisation with infection and infection-related death. The quality of evidence and strength of association between perioperative lymphopaenia across different surgical procedures and mortality/morbidity has not been examined by systematic review or meta-analysis.
METHODS
We searched MEDLINE, Embase, Web of Science, Google Scholar, and Cochrane databases from their inception to June 29, 2020 for observational studies reporting lymphocyte count and in-hospital mortality rate in adults. We defined preoperative lymphopaenia as a lymphocyte count 1.0-1.5×10 L. Meta-analysis was performed using either fixed or random effects models. Quality was assessed using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. The I index was used to quantify heterogeneity. The primary outcome was in-hospital mortality rate and mortality rate at 30 days.
RESULTS
Eight studies met the inclusion criteria for meta-analysis, comprising 4811 patients (age range, 46-91 yr; female, 20-79%). These studies examined preoperative lymphocyte count exclusively. Studies were of moderate to high quality overall, ranking >7 using the Newcastle-Ottawa Scale. Preoperative lymphopaenia was associated with a threefold increase in mortality rate (risk ratio [RR]=3.22; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.19-4.72; P<0.01, I=0%) and more frequent major postoperative complications (RR=1.33; 95% CI, 1.21-1.45; P<0.01, I=6%), including cardiovascular morbidity (RR=1.77; 95% CI, 1.45-2.15; P<0.01, I=0%), infections (RR=1.45; 95% CI, 1.19-1.76; P<0.01, I=0%), and acute renal dysfunction (RR=2.66; 95% CI, 1.49-4.77; P<0.01, I=1%).
CONCLUSION
Preoperative lymphopaenia is associated with death and complications more frequently, independent of the type of surgery.
PROSPERO REGISTRY NUMBER
CRD42020190702.
Topics: Elective Surgical Procedures; Hospital Mortality; Humans; Lymphopenia; Morbidity; Postoperative Complications; Preoperative Care; Prospective Studies
PubMed: 33795133
DOI: 10.1016/j.bja.2021.02.023 -
BMC Geriatrics Dec 2017Medications are frequently reported as both predisposing factors and inducers of delirium. This review evaluated the available evidence and determined the magnitude of... (Review)
Review
BACKGROUND
Medications are frequently reported as both predisposing factors and inducers of delirium. This review evaluated the available evidence and determined the magnitude of risk of postoperative delirium associated with preoperative medication use.
METHODS
A systematic search in Medline and EMBASE was conducted using MeSH terms and keywords for postoperative delirium and medication. Studies which included patients 18 years and older who underwent major surgery were included. The methodological quality of included studies was assessed independently by two authors using the Newcastle-Ottawa quality assessment scale for cohort studies.
RESULTS
Twenty-nine studies; 25 prospective cohort, three retrospective cohort and one post hoc analysis of RCT data were included. Only four specifically aimed to assess medicines as an independent predictor of delirium, all other studies included medicines among a number of potential predictors of delirium. Of the studies specifically testing the association with a medication class, preoperative use of beta-blockers (OR = 2.06[1.18-3.60]) in vascular surgery and benzodiazepines RR 2.10 (1.23-3.59) prior to orthopedic surgery were significant. However, evidence is from single studies only. Where medicines were included as one possible factor among many, hypnotics had a similar risk estimate to the benzodiazepine study, with one significant and one non-significant result. Nifedipine use prior to cardiac surgery was found to be significantly associated with delirium. The non-specific grouping of psychoactive medication use preoperatively was generally higher with an associated two-to-seven-fold higher risk of postoperative delirium, while only two studies included narcotics without other agents, with one significant and one non-significant result.
CONCLUSIONS
There was a limited number of high quality studies in the literature quantifying the direct association between preoperative medication use and postsurgical delirium. More studies are required to evaluate the association of specific preoperative medications on the risk of postoperative delirium so that comprehensive guidelines for medicine use prior to surgery can be developed to aid delirium prevention.
TRIAL REGISTRATION
This systematic review has been registered on PROSPERO International prospective register of systematic reviews (Registration number: CRD42016051245 ).
Topics: Aged; Benzodiazepines; Delirium; Humans; Postoperative Complications; Premedication; Preoperative Care; Risk Adjustment; Surgical Procedures, Operative
PubMed: 29284416
DOI: 10.1186/s12877-017-0695-x -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Dec 2021Preoperative assessment is a standard evaluation, traditionally done in-person in a preanesthesia clinic, for patients who will be undergoing a procedure involving... (Meta-Analysis)
Meta-Analysis Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
Preoperative assessment is a standard evaluation, traditionally done in-person in a preanesthesia clinic, for patients who will be undergoing a procedure involving anesthesia. Given the increased adoption of virtual care during the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic, the purpose of this systematic review and meta-analysis is to review the effectiveness of virtual preoperative assessment for the evaluation of surgical patients.
DESIGN
Systematic review and meta-analysis.
SETTING
MEDLINE (Ovid), MEDLINE InProcess/ePubs, Embase, Cochrane Central Register of Controlled Trials, Cochrane Database of Systematic Reviews, and ClinicalTrials.gov were searched from the initial coverage of the respective database to May 2021. A manual citation search of Google Scholar and PubMed was conducted to identify missed articles. Continued literature surveillance was done through July 2021.
PATIENTS
Patients aged 18 years and older undergoing virtual preoperative anesthesia assessment.
INTERVENTIONS
Virtual preoperative assessment.
MEASUREMENTS
Surgery cancellation rates, patient experience, resources saved, staff experience, success in using the data collected to diagnose and manage patients.
MAIN RESULTS
Fifteen studies (n = 31,496 patients) were included in this review. The average age of patients was 58 ± 15 years, and 47% were male. Virtual preoperative assessment resulted in similar surgery cancellation rates compared to in-person evaluation, with a pooled cancellation rate of 2% (95% confidence interval [CI]: 1-3%). Most studies reported a positive patient experience, with a pooled estimate of 90% (95% CI, 81-95%). There was a high success rate in using the information collected with virtual care, in the range of 92-100%, to diagnose and manage patients resulting in time and cost savings in the range of 24-137 min and $60-67 per patient.
CONCLUSIONS
This systematic review and meta-analysis demonstrates the utility of virtual care for preoperative assessment of surgical patients. Virtual preanesthesia evaluation had similar surgery cancellation rates, high patient satisfaction, and reduced costs compared to in-person evaluation.
Topics: Adult; Aged; COVID-19; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Pandemics; Patient Satisfaction; Preoperative Care; SARS-CoV-2
PubMed: 34649158
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2021.110540 -
Journal of Clinical Anesthesia Jun 2022The optimal methods of preoperative assessment and prehabilitation specific to patients with obesity undergoing non-bariatric surgery have not been described. We... (Review)
Review
STUDY OBJECTIVE
The optimal methods of preoperative assessment and prehabilitation specific to patients with obesity undergoing non-bariatric surgery have not been described. We investigated two questions: 1) which methods of preoperative assessment in patients with obesity are associated with improved patient management, and 2) which methods of prehabilitation in patients with obesity are associated with improved patient outcomes?
DESIGN
Systematic review.
SETTING
Preoperative assessment and optimisation, and postoperative outcomes.
PATIENTS
Patients with obesity scheduled for surgery of any type.
INTERVENTIONS
We searched six electronic databases for clinical studies addressing either preoperative assessment or preoperative optimisation.
MEASUREMENTS
The primary outcome measure for the assessment review was any impact on preoperative disease diagnosis or progression, or postoperative complications. The primary outcome measure for the prehabilitation review was any postoperative change in disease or health status, or any medical or surgical complications.
MAIN RESULTS
Twenty one papers were included in the assessment review (total of 5090 participants) and twenty five for prehabilitation (30,170 participants). Approximately two thirds of papers reported on bariatric surgery populations. In the assessment review, studies reported on either the preoperative detection of comorbidities or the prediction of postoperative complications. The only assessment tool with any suggestion of benefit was polysomnography. A range of methods of prehabilitation were found for question 2. Forty eight percent of papers reported improvement in some or all study outcomes. The most successful intervention was exercise, with 4 of 5 exercise-based trials showing improvement in either some or all postoperative outcomes.
CONCLUSIONS
There is a limited body of work addressing preoperative assessment and prehabilitation specific to surgical patients with obesity, especially when undergoing non-bariatric surgery. Preoperative polysomnography was shown to improve both the diagnosis of obstructive sleep apnoea and the prediction of postoperative complications. Half of the prehabilitation studies showed evidence of benefit. From this review, we were unable to make strong recommendations as to best practice in patients with obesity presenting for non-bariatric surgery.
Topics: Bariatric Surgery; Exercise; Humans; Obesity; Postoperative Complications; Preoperative Care; Preoperative Exercise
PubMed: 35152081
DOI: 10.1016/j.jclinane.2022.110676 -
Clinical Neurology and Neurosurgery Nov 2016While preoperative embolization is often reserved for large and highly vascular tumors in order to minimize blood loss, its safety and efficacy in the treatment of... (Review)
Review
INTRODUCTION
While preoperative embolization is often reserved for large and highly vascular tumors in order to minimize blood loss, its safety and efficacy in the treatment of hemangioblastomas (HB) is unclear. We present the largest systematic review focusing on the safety and outcome of preoperative embolization of intracranial HB.
MATERIALS AND METHODS
To identify all cases of preoperative embolization for HB, a literature search was conducted via Medline (OVID and PubMed), Scopus, Embase, and Web of Science. Studies that were in English, included intracranial hemangioblastomas treated with preoperative embolization and provided sufficient disaggregated clinical data for each patient were included. Historical control patients with non-embolized intracranial HB undergoing resection were similarly identified.
RESULTS
A total of 111 patients that underwent preoperative embolization of HB prior to planned resection were identified. Patient age ranged from 12 to 72 years, with a cohort of 63% males and 36% females. Nine studies comprising 392 non-embolized patients were included as controls. Gross total resection was achieved in 83.7% of embolized and 95.6% of non-embolized patients. Intraoperative blood transfusion was required in 15.3% of embolized and 0.51% of non-embolized controls, while rates of post-operative hemorrhage were 8.4% and 1.6%, respectively. Complication rates from embolization were 11.7% and following consequent surgery were 20.7%.
DISCUSSION
Embolization did not increase rates of gross total resection, decrease estimated blood loss, or decrease incidence of complications. Not only does embolization fail to mitigate surgical risks, the embolization procedure itself carries significant risk for complications. Embolization should not be standard of care for intracranial HB.
Topics: Adolescent; Adult; Aged; Cerebellar Neoplasms; Child; Embolization, Therapeutic; Female; Hemangioblastoma; Humans; Male; Middle Aged; Neurosurgical Procedures; Preoperative Care; Young Adult
PubMed: 27668858
DOI: 10.1016/j.clineuro.2016.09.008