Intra-abdominal Fluid Extravasation Research Articles

Calculating Intraoperative Fluid Deficit to Prevent Abdominal Compartment Syndrome in Hip Arthroscopy

Abdominal compartment syndrome (ACS) is a rare but potentially fatal complication that can occur during hip arthroscopy. This usually occurs as a result of arthroscopic fluid passing into the retroperitoneal space through the psoas tunnel. From the retroperitoneal space, the fluid can then enter the intraperitoneal space through defects in the peritoneum. Previous studies have identified female sex, iliopsoas tenotomy, pump pressure, and operative time as potential risk factors for fluid extravasation. We present a method to measure intraoperative fluid deficit during hip arthroscopy to alert surgeons to possible ACS. Our proposed technique requires diligent intraoperative monitoring of fluid output through various suction devices, including suction canisters, puddle vacuums, and suction mats. The difference is then calculated from the fluid intake from the arthroscopic fluid bags. If the difference is greater than 1500 mL, then the anesthesiologist and circulating nurse are instructed to examine the abdomen for distension every 15 minutes. This, combined with other common symptoms such as hypotension and hypothermia, should alert the surgical team to the development of ACS. Despite limitations to this technique, this approach offers an objective method to calculate intra-abdominal fluid extravasation.

Intra-abdominal Fluid Extravasation: Is Endoscopic Deep Gluteal Space Exploration a Risk Factor?

Background:The extravasation of fluid into the intra-abdominal space is recognized as a possible complication of hip arthroscopic surgery/endoscopy. The exposure of anatomic areas to elevated pump pressures and high volumes of irrigation fluid increases the risk of fluid leakage into anatomic spaces around the hip joint, especially to the abdomen and pelvis.Purpose:To estimate the incidence and risk factors related to intra-abdominal fluid extravasation (IAFE) after hip endoscopy or arthroscopic surgery.Study Design:Cohort study; Level of evidence, 2.Methods:A prospective study was carried out between June 2017 and June 2018. A total of 106 hip procedures (endoscopy or arthroscopic surgery) performed for extra- or intra-articular abnormalities were included. Before and after surgery, in the operating room, ultrasound was performed by a trained anesthesiologist to detect IAFE. The hepatorenal (Morison pouch), splenorenal, retroaortic, suprapubic (longitudinal and transverse), and pleural spaces were examined. Patients were monitored for 3 hours after surgery to assess for abdominal pain. The data collected included maximum pump pressure, duration and volume of irrigation fluid (Ringer lactate), total surgical time, and traction time.Results:The incidence of IAFE was 31.1% (33/106; 95% CI, 23.1%-40.5%). The frequency of IAFE was 52.9% (9/17) in cases with isolated extra-articular abnormalities and 15.9% (7/44) in cases with isolated femoroacetabular impingement; in cases with both extra- and intra-articular abnormalities, the frequency was 37.8% (17/45). An intervention in the subgluteal space was identified as a risk factor for IAFE (odds ratio, 3.62 [95% CI, 1.47-8.85]). There was no statistically significant difference between groups (with vs without IAFE) regarding total surgical time, maximum pump pressure, or fluid volume. Postoperative abdominal pain was found in 36.4% (n = 12) of cases with IAFE compared with 2.7% (n = 2) of cases without extravasation (P < .001). No patient with IAFE developed abdominal compartment syndrome.Conclusion:IAFE was a frequent finding after hip arthroscopic surgery/endoscopy in patients with extra-articular abnormalities. Exploration of the subgluteal space may increase the risk of IAFE. Pain and abdominal distension during the immediate postoperative period were early warning signs for IAFE. These results reinforce the need for careful intraoperative and postoperative monitoring by the surgeon and anesthesiologist to identify and avoid complications related to IAFE.

Intraoperative Monitoring and Intra-abdominal Fluid Extravasation During Hip Arthroscopy

To evaluate the relationship between the intraoperative monitoring factors with intra-abdominal fluid extravasation (IAFE) in patients who underwent hip arthroscopy. The secondary purpose was to describe the main intraoperative variables between cases with and without IAFE. We carried out a prospective observational study of 106 hip arthroscopies between June 2017 and June 2018. Within procedures, 54 cases with deep gluteal syndrome (DGS) were included. Ultrasonography was performed by a trained anesthesiologist before and after the surgery to identify the presence of fluid. The hepatorenal (Morison's pouch), splenorenal, retroaortic, suprapubic (longitudinal and transverse), and pleural spaces were examined. During the surgery, the blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, peak inspiratory pressure (PIP), pulmonary compliance, oxygen saturation, and end-tidal carbon dioxide were registered. The incidence of IAFE was 31.1% (33/106; 95% confidence interval 23.0%-40.5%). IAFE in cases with isolated FAI was 15.9% (7/44) in comparison with 52.9% (9/17) of the cases with isolated DGS. Maximum values of PIP greater than 20mm Hg were associated with fluid extravasation (odds ratio 3.22; 95% confidence interval 1.07-9.68). No statistically significant relationship was found in blood pressure, heart rate, temperature, oxygen saturation, end-tidal carbon dioxide, and pulmonary compliance between cases with and without IAFE. Asymptomatic IAFE, as measured by ultrasound, is a frequent event in patients who underwent hip arthroscopy, mainly in cases with DGS. PIP was found to be a useful intraoperative monitoring parameter for the early identification of IAFE in hip arthroscopy. Level II, observational prospective cohort study.

Réduction sous contrôle arthroscopique des luxations postérieures de hanche causées par une rupture du mur périphérique du labrum: résultats cliniques et radiologiques à moyen terme

BackgroundNon-concentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by the acetabular labrum rim fracture is rare. There has been very little study on the feasibility of arthroscopically treatment and medium and mid-term evaluation to this pathology. The objectives of the current study were: (1) Is the arthroscopically-assisted technique feasible to this manage this injury? (2) What is the effectiveness of arthroscopic treatment for nonconcentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by acetabular labrum rim fracture. HypothesisArthroscopically-assisted procedure is an alternative treatment modality for non-concentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by acetabular labrum rim fracture. Patients and methodsThirteen of 257 posterior hip dislocations who were admitted to our hospital from February 2008 to March 2017 were included: 9 males and 4 females, with an average age of 23.7 (15–36) years. All of them underwent hip posterior dislocation and nonconcentric reduction related to acetabular labrum rim fracture. All of them had arthroscopic reduction and fixation of the rim fracture. Visual Analogic Score (VAS) score, modified Harris score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score and the last follow-up radiographs were analyzed respectively. Postoperative complication and the need for secondary operation were recorded during the process. ResultsThe incidence rate of this pathology was nearly 5 %. Twelve out of 13 patients were followed-up for an average of 42 (range, 26–68) months. At the final follow-up, VAS score was decreased from 5.2±0.9 (range, 4.0–6.1) preoperatively to 0.5±0.5 (range, 0.0–1.0) (p<0.0001), modified Harris score and WOMAC score were increased statistically significant from 32±8 (range, 28–40) and 30±5 (range, 25–35) to 94±5 (range, 89–99) and 95±4 (range, 91–99) respectively (p<0.0001). All patients have had completely concentric reduction and returned to activities of daily life. There was not any hip arthroscopic complication such as sciatic nerve injury and intra-abdominal fluid extravasation. Besides, there were no aseptic necrosis and revision case. ConclusionArthroscopically-assisted procedure is an alternative treatment modality for non-concentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by the acetabular labrum rim fracture without surgical dislocation procedure. Good clinical results can be achieved without any complications related to the surgical procedure. Level of evidence: level IV, therapeutic case series.

Arthroscopically assisted treatment for nonconcentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by acetabular labrum rim fracture: Medium-term clinical and radiological outcomes

BackgroundNonconcentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by the acetabular labrum rim fracture is rare. There has been very little study on the feasibility of arthroscopically treatment and medium and mid-term evaluation to this pathology. The objectives of the current study were: (1) Is the arthroscopically assisted technique feasible to this manage this injury? (2) What is the effectiveness of arthroscopic treatment for nonconcentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by acetabular labrum rim fracture. HypothesisArthroscopically assisted procedure is an alternative treatment modality for nonconcentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by acetabular labrum rim fracture. Patients and methodsThirteen of 257 posterior hip dislocations who were admitted to our hospital from February 2008 to March 2017 were included: 9 males and 4 females, with an average age of 23.7 (15–36) years. All of them underwent hip posterior dislocation and nonconcentric reduction related to acetabular labrum rim fracture. All of them had arthroscopic reduction and fixation of the rim fracture. Visual Analogic Score (VAS) score, modified Harris score, Western Ontario and McMaster Universities Osteoarthritis Index (WOMAC) score and the last follow-up radiographs were analyzed respectively. Postoperative complication and the need for secondary operation were recorded during the process. ResultsThe incidence rate of this pathology was nearly 5%. Twelve out of 13 patients were followed up for an average of 42 (range, 26–68) months. At the final follow-up, VAS score was decreased from 5.2±0.9 (range, 4.0–6.1) preoperatively to 0.5±0.5 (range, 0.0–1.0) (p<0.0001), modified Harris score and WOMAC score were increased statistically significant from 32±8 (range, 28–40) and 30±5 (range, 25–35) to 94±5 (range, 89–99) and 95±4 (range, 91–99) respectively (p<0.0001). All patients have had completely concentric reduction and returned to activities of daily life. There was not any hip arthroscopic complication such as sciatic nerve injury and intra-abdominal fluid extravasation. Besides, there were no aseptic necrosis and revision case. ConclusionArthroscopically assisted procedure is an alternative treatment modality for nonconcentric reduction of hip posterior dislocation caused by the acetabular labrum rim fracture without surgical dislocation procedure. Good clinical results can be achieved without any complications related to the surgical procedure. Level of evidenceLevel IV, therapeutic case series.

Diagnosis of Intraabdominal Fluid Extravasation After Hip Arthroscopy With Point-of-Care Ultrasonography Can Identify Patients at an Increased Risk for Postoperative Pain.

Intraabdominal fluid extravasation (IAFE) after hip arthroscopy has historically been diagnosed in catastrophic circumstances with abdominal compartment syndrome requiring diuresis or surgical decompression. A previous retrospective study found the prevalence of symptomatic IAFE requiring diuresis or decompression to be 0.16%, with risk factors including surgical procedure and high pump pressures. IAFE can be diagnosed rapidly by using point-of-care ultrasound (POCUS) via the Focused Assessment With Sonography for Trauma (FAST) examination, which is a well-established means to detect free fluid with high specificity and sensitivity. In this study, we used POCUS to determine the incidence of IAFE in patients undergoing hip arthroscopy. We predicted a higher incidence and that patients with IAFE would have symptoms of peritoneal irritation such as pain and nausea. One hundred patients undergoing ambulatory hip arthroscopy were prospectively enrolled. A FAST examination was performed after induction by a trained anesthesiologist to exclude the preoperative presence of intraperitoneal fluid. Postoperatively, the same anesthesiologist repeated the FAST examination, and patients with new fluid in the abdominal or pelvic peritoneum were diagnosed with IAFE. Patients were followed up in the postanesthesia care unit (PACU) for 6 hours assessing pain, antiemetic and opioid use, and length of stay. Sixteen of 100 patients were found to have IAFE (16.0%; 99% confidence interval [CI], 8.4-28.1). These patients had, on average, a greater increase in pain score from their baseline assessment throughout their entire PACU stay (adjusted difference in means [99% CI]: 2.1 points [0.4-3.9]; P = .002). Patients with IAFE used more opioids, but this difference did not meet statistical significance (adjusted difference in means [99% CI]: 7.8 mg oral morphine equivalents [-2.8 to 18.3]; P = .053). There were no differences in postoperative nausea interventions or length of stay. Our incidence of IAFE was 16%, showing that IAFE occurs quite commonly in hip arthroscopy. Patients with IAFE had a greater increase in pain scores from baseline throughout the PACU stay. None of our patients required interventions. These findings suggest that even a small amount of new fluid in the peritoneum may be associated with a worse postoperative experience. This study brings awareness to a common yet potentially life-threatening complication of hip arthroscopy and highlights a unique and meaningful way that anesthesiologists in the perioperative setting can use POCUS to rapidly identify and guide management of these patients. Further studies with a larger sample size are needed to identify surgical and patient risk factors.

Intra-Abdominal Fluid Extravasation During Hip Arthroscopy: A Survey of the MAHORN Group

The purpose of this study was to survey experts in the field of hip arthroscopy from the Multicenter Arthroscopy of the Hip Outcomes Research Network (MAHORN) group to determine the frequency of symptomatic intra-abdominal fluid extravasation (IAFE) after arthroscopic hip procedures, identify potential risk factors, and develop preventative measures and treatment strategies in the event of symptomatic IAFE. A survey was sent to all members of the MAHORN group. Surveys collected data on general hip arthroscopy settings, including pump pressure and frequency of different hip arthroscopies performed, as well as details on cases of symptomatic IAFE. Responses to the survey were documented and analyzed. Fifteen hip arthroscopists from the MAHORN group were surveyed. A total of 25,648 hip arthroscopies between 1984 and 2010 were reviewed. Arthroscopic procedures included capsulotomies, labral reattachment after acetabuloplasty, peripheral compartment arthroscopy, and osteoplasty of the femoral head-neck junction. Of the arthroscopists, 7 (47%) had 1 or more cases of IAFE (40 cases reported). The prevalence of IAFE in this study was 0.16% (40 of 25,650). Significant risk factors associated with IAFE were higher arthroscopic fluid pump pressure (P = .004) and concomitant iliopsoas tenotomy (P < .001). In all 40 cases, the condition was successfully treated without long-term sequelae. Treatment options included observation, intravenous furosemide, and Foley catheter placement, as well as 1 case of laparotomy. Symptomatic IAFE after hip arthroscopy is a rare occurrence, with an approximate prevalence of 0.16%. Prevention of IAFE should include close intraoperative and postoperative monitoring of abdominal distention, core body temperature, and hemodynamic stability. Concomitant iliopsoas tenotomy and high pump pressures may be risk factors leading to symptomatic IAFE. Level IV, therapeutic case series.

Abdominal Compartment Syndrome Complicating Paediatric Extracorporeal Life Support: Diagnostic and Therapeutic Challenges

We report three paediatric cases, and summarise the reported experience in two others, with cardiorespiratory failure requiring extracorporeal life support for which supportive pump flows could not be maintained due to abdominal compartment syndrome. In two of our patients, the mechanism of abdominal compartment syndrome was massive intra-abdominal fluid extravasation secondary to sepsis, while in the third, the mechanism was post-traumatic intra-abdominal haemorrhage. Although all three children eventually died, decompressive laparotomy and arrest of haemorrhage in the trauma patient restored venous return and enabled technically adequate extracorporeal life support. In two previously reported cases of sepsis with massive fluid resuscitation resulting in abdominal compartment syndrome, one patient died without attempted decompression, while the other patient survived after peritoneal catheter placement restored venous return. Once correctable causes of inadequate venous cannula drainage have been excluded, abdominal compartment syndrome should be considered in any patient on extracorporeal life support with a taut abdomen and reduced venous return. If abdominal compartment syndrome can be proven or is strongly suspected, there may be a role for selective decompressive laparotomy.

Hip arthroscopy in the supine position

Hip arthroscopy by the supine approach has proven to be an effective and reproducible procedure. Patientpositioning is easy and time-efficient. It utilizes standard operating room (OR) equipment. The OR layout is user-friendly, and the orientation is familiar to orthopedic surgeons. Additionally, there may be less concern for intra-abdominal fluid extravasation. Specialized instrumentation facilitates access to the joint. Standard portal placements allow optimal visualization and instrumentation, thus accommodating diagnostic and operative arthroscopy for a variety of conditions. Specific considerations regarding the anatomy of this region include the ball and socket architecture of the joint, the dense surrounding soft tissue envelope, and limits on distractibility. Each of these presents unique challenges to arthroscopy but are overcome by understanding and applying the basic principles necessary for successfully performing this procedure.