OBJECTIVES:To evaluate postoperative pain management (POPM) practices by anesthesiologists caring for patients with chronic kidney disease (CKD).DESIGN:Prospective one-time survey endorsed by the French Society of Anesthesia and Intensive Care (SFAR).SETTING:A self-administered online questionnaire was distributed to members of SFAR nationally.PARTICIPANTS:Three hundred seven SFAR members participated in the study.INTERVENTION:Close-ended questions concerned: standard test used to assess renal function, analgesic agent selection and dose adjustment based on the CKD functional stage, and the availability of standard operating procedures.MAIN OUTCOMES MEASURES:The primary end-point was to identify the most frequently prescribed analgesics in case of CKD, variations in practice based on different stages of CKD, and drug dosing adjustments. The secondary end-point was to identify the most commonly used tests to evaluate kidney function.RESULTS:The most commonly used postoperative analgesics were paracetamol (acetaminophen) and morphine. The most commonly used opioid was morphine, relative to oxycodone and sufentanil. Modification of diet in renal disease (MDRD) and Cockcroft equations were used by 39 and 40 percent of anesthesiologists, respectively, to measure kidney function. Six percent of anesthesiologists declared following standard operating procedures for POPM in patients with CKD.CONCLUSIONS:There is considerable variability in POPM practices for patients with all stages of CKD. Morphine is favored even in end-stage renal disease. Departments of anesthesiology are insufficiently involved in drafting standard operating procedures.

The face-grafting techniques are innovative and highly complex, requiring well-defined organization of all the teams involved. Subsequent to the first report in France in 2005, there have been 17 facial allograft transplantations performed worldwide. We describe anaesthesia and postoperative management, and the problems encountered, during the course of seven facial composite tissue grafts performed between 2007 and 2011 in our hospital. The reasons for transplantation were ballistic trauma in four patients, extensive neurofibromatosis in two patients, and severe burns in one patient. Anaesthesia for this long procedure involves advanced planning for airway management, vascular access, technique of anaesthesia, and fluid management. Preparation and grafting phases were highly haemorrhagic (>one blood volume), requiring massive transfusion. Median (range) volumes given for packed red cell (PRC) and fresh-frozen plasma (FFP) were 64.2 ml kg(-1) (35.5-227.5) and 46.2 ml kg(-1) (6.3-173.7), respectively. Blood loss quantification was difficult because of diffuse bleeding to the drapes. The management of patients with neurofibromatosis or burns involving the whole face was more difficult and haemorrhagic than the patients with lower face transplantation. Average surgical duration was 19.1 h (15-28 h). Postoperative severe graft oedema was present in most patients. Most patients encountered complications in ICU, such as renal insufficiency, acute respiratory distress syndrome, and jugular thrombosis. Opportunistic bacterial infections were a feature during the postoperative period in these highly immunosuppressed patients.

INTRODUCTION The treatment of postradical prostatectomy erectile dysfunction (post-RP-ED) and stress urinary incontinence (post-RP-SUI) may require the combined implantation of a penile prosthesis and incontinence surgery. However, there is a lack of consensus regarding which incontinence surgery should be associated with a penile implant. AIMS To evaluate the combined implantation of a penile prosthesis and the adjustable continence therapy ProACT in patients with post-RP-ED and post-RP-SUI. METHODS We implanted the ProACT device and a penile prosthesis synchronously (n = 6) and asynchronously (n = 4) in 10 patients with moderate post-RP-SUI and severe post-RP-ED. We evaluated the effects on urinary incontinence using the ICIQ and PGI-I scores and pad use. We evaluated the effect on sexual function using the EHS and Global Assessment Questionnaire (GAQ), and we evaluated satisfaction with the penile prosthesis on a 5-point scale. Postoperative pain associated with each procedure was evaluated by a numeric rating scale. RESULTS No cases of urinary retention or prosthesis infection were observed. Postoperative pain was mainly related to penile prosthesis implantation. After a mean follow-up of 22.7 ± 20.9 months (range: 6-53), significant improvements of the ICIQ score (15.3 ± 3.7 vs. 4.7 ± 2.3, P < 0.001) and pad use per day (2.8 ± 1.2 vs. 0.3 ± 0.5, P < 0.001) were observed compared with baseline. According to the PGI-I questionnaire, eight patients described a very much improved (n = 6) or much improved (n = 2) urinary condition. All patients declared an EHS = 4 with the use of penile prosthesis; all patients were very satisfied (n = 6) or satisfied (n = 4) with their penile prosthesis. All patients answered the GAQ positively. CONCLUSION The combined implantation of a Pro-ACT device and penile prosthesis represents a feasible therapeutic option in patients with post-RP-SUI and post-RP-ED. The absence of postoperative pain associated with the ProACT procedure may represent the main interest in this therapy.

To evaluate the impact of an adverse event reporting system (Computer Adverse Event Reporting System: CAERS), anonymously accessible to all anesthesia and surgical intensive care medicine department staff members in a large tertiary university hospital. All consecutive adverse events (AE) reported from January 2013 and December 2013 were retrospectively analyzed. The number of report, the type of reporting personal and the severity of the reported adverse events were analyzed. Two hundred and twenty-two AE were recorded on CAERS. Physicians reported 25% AE. These AE concerned 0.7% of the anesthetic activity and 6.4 per 1000 patient days in the surgical intensive care unit. Among AE, 3 were serious adverse events, 19 were near misses, and 200 were incidents. Almost of 80% of incidents were reported by non-medical staff. Only the serious adverse events and the near misses led to corrective action. The easily accessible by all staff CAERS has enabled serious adverse events reporting and near misses mainly related to a lack of equipment or organizational problems. Systemic analysis of the AE was followed by corrective measures. Nevertheless, medical and non-medical staff is still reluctant to systematically use this system to report serious adverse events related to medical malpractice.

Introduction. Intracavernous alprostadil injection (IAI) is a widely used treatment for sexual rehabilitation (SR) after radical prostatectomy (RP). It is unknown whether the continuation of IAI beyond 1 year continues to improve erectile function.Aims. To assess evolution of sexual function in patients using IAI who are nonresponsive to phosphodiesterase type 5 inhibitors (PDE5i) between 12 (M12) and 24 (M24) months after RP.Methods. We retrospectively studied 75 men with a nerve-sparing laparoscopic RP, who had normal preoperative erectile function, and who regularly used IAI for SR for at least 24 months. At M12, no patients had responded to PDE5i. Main Outcome Measures. At 12 and 24 months, sexual function was assessed with the UCLA Prostate Cancer Index (UCLA-PCI), International Index of Erectile Function (IIEF)-15, and erection hardness score (EHS) with and without IAI. We also assessed the satisfaction rate with IAI, injection-related penile pain, and satisfaction of treatment. Statistical analysis was performed by using t-tests for paired data and Spearman's rho correlation coefficients to assess the relationships between scores at M12 and M24.Results. Improvement of nocturnal erection was noted (UCLA-PCI, question 25); however, no significant difference was found for IIEF-erectile function with (19.60 +/- 9.80 vs. 18.07 +/- 10.44) and without IAI (4.63 +/- 2.93 vs. 4.92 +/- 4.15), UCLA-PCI-sexual bother (37.14 +/- 21.45 vs. 37.54 +/- 19.67), nor the EHS score with (2.97 +/- 1.30 vs. 2.57 +/- 1.30) and without IAI (0.67 +/- 1.11 vs. 0.76 +/- 0.10). The rate of satisfaction with treatment decreased over time (66.6% vs. 46.7%, P = 0.013). Improved response to IAI at M12 was not correlated to improvement in spontaneous erections at M24.Conclusion. The response to IAI remained stable after 2 years of treatment, and no significant improvement of spontaneous erections during intercourse attempts was found between M12 and M24. Patients should be informed of the limited effect of IAI on natural erections after 1 year.

Objective. - The European Society for Clinical Nutrition and Metabolism (EPSEN) guidelines on nutrition for liver disease patients has been recently updated. The aim of our study was to evaluate perioperative nutrition in cirrhotic patients waiting for liver transplantation (LT).Study design. - Prospective electronic survey. A standardized questionnaire was sent to the anaesthesiologist of the 18 French adult LT centers. The questionnaire had closed-ended questions to evaluate nutritional practices in cirrhotic patients waiting for a LT.Results. - The response rate was 100%. Nutritional status of the cirrhotic patients waiting for LT was assessed by anaesthesiologists (12 centres) and/or hepatologists (11 centres) and more rarely by nutrition physician, dietetics or liver surgeons. Body mass index (13 centres), weight loss (10 centres), albuminemia (10 centres) were the most frequent items used to assess the nutritional status. Before LT, preoperative oral intakes were administered in undernourished patients in only 55% of the cases. Postoperatively, nutritional support was administered between day 1 and 3 after LT.Conclusion. - Perioperative nutritional practices in cirrhotic patients waiting for LT are heterogeneous between centers, especially about nutrition assessment. Most of the centres did not follow the actual guidelines. (C) 2013 Societe francaise d'anesthesie et de reanimation (Sfar). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

O propósito desta atualização das Recomendações da Sociedade Brasileira de Anestesiologia (SBA) para Segurança em Anestesia Regional foi apresentar novas diretrizes com base na relevância e atualidade clínica nos aspectos de segurança relacionados a analgesia e anestesia regional. Este artigo visa prover uma visão ampla sobre o conhecimento atual no tocante a assepsia e antissepsia pré‐procedimento, fatores de risco, diagnóstico e tratamento das complicações infecciosas decorrentes das técnicas anestésicas. Também visa esclarecer sobre o uso de materiais reprocessados na prática da anestesia regional, estabelecer as implicações no manejo asséptico de frascos e ampolas e elucidar sobre a relação custo‐efetividade no preparo de soluções a serem administradas continuamente em bloqueios regionais. As bases de dados eletrônicas foram pesquisadas entre Janeiro de 2011 (final da pesquisa de literatura das diretrizes anteriores da SBA sobre segurança em anestesia regional) e Setembro de 2019. Um total de 712 artigos foram encontrados, dos quais 201 foram incluídos para análise posterior e 82 novos estudos foram acrescentados nesta revisão. O sistema de Avaliação, Desenvolvimento e Avaliação da Classificação das Recomendações (GRADE) foi utilizado para avaliar a qualidade do estudo individual e classificar a força da evidência. Esta revisão foi elaborada por membros da Comissão de Normas Técnicas da SBA.The purpose of the Brazilian Society of Anesthesiology's (SBA) Regional Anesthesia Safety Recommendations Update is to provide new guidelines based on the current relevant clinical aspects related to safety in regional anesthesia and analgesia. The goal of the present article is to provide a broad overview of the current knowledge regarding pre‐procedure asepsis and antisepsis, risk factors, diagnosis and treatment of infectious complications resulting from anesthetic techniques. It also aims to shed light on the use of reprocessed materials in regional anesthesia practice to establish the effects of aseptic handling of vials and ampoules, and to show cost‐effectiveness in the preparation of solutions to be administered continuously in regional blockades. Electronic databases were searched between January 2011 (final date of the literature search for the past SBA recommendations for safety in regional anesthesia) and September 2019. A total of 712 publications were found, 201 of which were included for further analysis, and 82 new publications were added into the review. The Grading of Recommendations, Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system was used to assess the quality of each study and to classify the strength of evidence. The present review was prepared by members of the SBA Technical Standards Committee.

AIMS:To evaluate pain and embarrassment associated with invasive urodynamics and to determine underlying factors. METHODS:One hundred seventy one consecutive patients referred to our department for invasive urodynamics were evaluated using visual numeric rating scales for sensations of apprehension, pain, and embarrassment during several steps of the procedure (scores ranging from 0 [no symptom] to 10 [worst imaginable symptom]). We also investigated the influence of sex, age, information provided before urodynamics, and medical indication on these sensations. The Spearman correlation, non-parametric test, and logistic regression analysis were performed to determine explicative factors for the most painful sensations. RESULTS:The mean age was 61.0 (standard deviation ± 15 years). The mean (95% confidence interval [CI]) apprehension level was 2.9/10 (2.4; 3.4). The mean (95% CI) pain levels at installation on urodynamic table, transurethral catheter insertion (cystometry), and catheter repositioning (urethral pressure profilometry) were 0.3/10 (0.1; 0.5), 1.9/10 (1.6; 2.3), and 1.3/10 (1.0; 1.7), respectively. At catheter insertion, 25% of patients reported a pain level ≥ 4/10. The mean embarrassment level due to urination in front of the doctor was 1.9/10 (1.4; 2.3). Painful sensations reported during the different steps were strongly correlated with each other and with levels of apprehension and embarrassment. Age <54 years (lower quartile) and apprehension level were the only factors associated with painful sensation. CONCLUSIONS:Our study confirms that invasive urodynamics is a well-tolerated procedure. However, some patients experience high levels of pain and embarrassment throughout the procedure. Younger age and apprehension were the most influential factors.

Background and objective. - Local wound infiltration is a component of multimodal postoperative (p.o.) analgesia. Its implementation in current clinical practice remains unknown. Pain and Regional Anesthesia Committee of the French Anaesthesia and Intensive Care Society (Star) aimed to appraise its practice.Method. - Postal sample survey based on representative sample of national activity were sent to heads of anaesthesiology departments. The questionnaires included 36 items on single-shot and continuous wound infiltrations (CWI) with considerations about modality of administration, drugs and development limitations. Results in mean [CI95 %].Results. - Response rate was 32 % (n = 120). Sample was in accordance with national representation of health institutions. Local infiltration was included in 85 % [79-91] of the p.o. analgesia protocols. Regardless of the surgery, single-shot wound infiltration and CWI were used in more than 50 % of the patients by respectively 58 % [49-67] and 18% [11-25] of the responders. However, a significant part of the surgeons remained reluctant to CWI. Lack of information and fear of septic complications were the most reported barriers. Peritoneal instillation after laparoscopy was rarely performed, in contrast with intra-articular infiltration after knee arthroscopy, performed systematically or very frequently by 60 % [50-70] of the responders.Conclusion. - The practice of local wound infiltration for p.o. analgesia seems presently well established, especially for single-shot injections. CWI is less commonly performed. Several surgical reluctances remain to be overcome. Better information about effectiveness and safety are likely to still improve their practices. (C) 2011 Societe francaise d'anesthesie et de reanimation (Sfar). Published by Elsevier Masson SAS. All rights reserved.

OBJECTIVE:To determine whether maintaining use of low-dose aspirin confers a higher risk of bleeding events in patients undergoing laparoscopic or robot-assisted radical prostatectomy. There is no consensus on maintaining or withdrawing aspirin in these patients. METHODS:Consecutive patients undergoing laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy between January 2009 and December 2010 were included in a prospective cohort study. Among them, 54 aspirin-treated patients were compared with 569 non-aspirin-treated patients. We evaluated the between-group difference in bleeding event: intraoperative blood loss ≥ 700 ml and/or need for transfusion and/or postoperative hemorrhagic complication (symptomatic abdominal wall hematomas, major bleeding requiring reoperation). Differences in each component of the bleeding event, in hemoglobin level changes, and hospital stay length were also evaluated. Patients' data were compared using the χ(2) or Fisher exact test for categorical variables and the Student t test or Mann-Whitney test for continuous variables. RESULTS:A bleeding event occurred in 18 (33.3%) aspirin-treated patients and 176 (32.5%) non-aspirin-treated patients (P = .66). Median blood loss was similar in the 2 groups (aspirin: 450 ml, 50-7100 ml; no aspirin: 450 ml, 100-2800 ml; P = .93). Aspirin was not associated with a significant hemoglobin level variation (median decrease, 2.9 g/dL with aspirin and 3.2 g/dL without aspirin, P = .23). Median hospital length of stay, rates of blood transfusion, and postoperative hemorrhagic complications were similar in the 2 groups. CONCLUSION:Laparoscopic and robot-assisted radical prostatectomy can be performed safely without discontinuing aspirin, as this policy does not increase significantly blood loss, blood transfusion requirements, postoperative hemorrhagic complications. or hospital length of stay.

Objectives. - To evaluate the short medium and long-term impact of a quality-improvement program (QIP) in a university hospital using a validated reference tool.Methods. - Seven surgical departments were audited before and after implementation of a QIP in postoperative pain management. Audits were conducted in 2005, 2007, 2009 and 2012. In each audit, 10 medical charts from each surgical department were analyzed for 9 quality criteria. A surgical department score (SDS) was calculated for each department (maximum score = 90). The surgical departments with a SOS <45 received targeted training sessions.Results. - In 2005, three surgical departments had a SDS < 45. After the first audit, a targeted training sessions was conducted in the three surgical departments, all seven departments improved their scores with a SDS > 45 in 2007. Between 2007 and 2009, all seven departments improved their scores. Conversely, between 2009 and 2012, the SDS diminished in six of the seven surgical departments and four of the nine evaluated quality criteria decreased significantly: right detailed order for postoperative pain analgesia (prescriber identifier, agent used, unit doses, mode of administration; 100% versus 53; P = 0.027), appropriate dosing of steps I and II analgesics (96% versus 80%; P = 0.041), morphine (90% versus 76%; P = 0.039), based on corresponding physician orders and monitor morphine side effects (87% versus 29; P = 0.027).Conclusion. - Audits should be performed regularly (at least every two years) for detecting postoperative pain management degradation. Lack of targeted training sessions can explain partially this degradation. (C) 2012 Published by Elsevier Masson SAS on behalf of the Societe francaise d'anesthesie et de reanimation (Sfar).

Évaluer la faisabilité et l’efficacité de la remise en tension des bandelettes sous-urétrales par une plicature étagée en cas d’incontinence urinaire d’effort persistante ou récidivante après pose d’une bandelette sous-urétrale (BSU).Étude rétrospective monocentrique incluant des patientes ayant un échec ou une récidive après pose d’une BSU. L’éligibilité était faite d’après un bilan clinique et paraclinique complet prouvant le mécanisme et la récidive de l’IUE. La chirurgie a consisté en une plicature en paletot de la bandelette.Dix-neuf patientes ont été incluses. Le délai moyen entre les deux chirurgies était de 23,4 mois (ds = 25,5). Les résultats ont été évalués de façon subjective sur le questionnaire MHU et objectivement avec le bilan urodynamique. Le suivi moyen était de 27,2 mois (ds = 37,3). La durée de l’intervention était de 30 minutes. Selon le MHU, 73,7 % des patientes étaient guéries et 10,3 % étaient améliorées, IC 95 % [0,52–0,95]. La différence entre le score MHU de l’IUE avant et après la plicature était significative (p = 0,0005) et passait de 2,31 (ds = 0,75) à 0,56 (ds = 0,92) en moyenne. Il n’y a eu aucune complication peropératoire. Il y a eu deux rétentions aiguës d’urine postopératoire avec reprise chirurgicale et section d’un fil permettant de détendre la bandelette sous-urétrale sans perdre le bénéfice de la plicature. Il n’y a pas eu d’augmentation significative des urgenturies ou de la dysurie de novo.Les résultats de cette étude ont confirmé la faisabilité, l’efficacité et la morbidité faible de la remise en tension de la BSU.Feasibility and efficiency study of mesh readjustment in suburethral slings by overcoat plication in case of persisting of recurring stress urinary incontinence in patients with suburethral slings.Retrospective and monocentric study including patients that present with a failure or recurring incontinency after suburethral slings surgery. The eligibility was evaluated after a complete clinical and paraclinical statement, proving the recurrence of the incontinence and its mechanism. Surgery consisted in a plication in an overcoat.Nineteen patients were included. The medium delay between initial surgery and the plication was 23.4 months (ds = 25.5). Results were evaluated subjectively by the MHU questionnaire and objectively by the urodynamic appraisal. The medium survey was 27.2 months (ds = 37.3). The procedure lasts about 30 minutes. According to MHU, 73.7% of patients were cured and for 10.3% the symptoms were lessened. The difference in the MHU score of stress urinary incontinence before and after mesh readjustment was significant (P = 0.0005) and get down from 2.31 (ds = 0.75) to 0.56 (ds = 0.92) as an average. There was no complication during surgery. There were two cases of postoperative acute urinary retention which were reoperated by simply cutting a thread allowing the sling to relax without losing the benefit of the plicature. There was no significant increase in urge incontinence or dysuria.The results of this study confirmed the feasibility, the efficiency and the low morbidity of mesh readjustment for the suburethral sling.