Postanesthesia Discharge Scoring System Research Articles

Using Clinical-based Discharge Criteria to Discharge Patients After Endoscopy Procedures Under Drug-induced Intravenous Sedation in the Outpatient Care Unit: An Observational Study

PurposeTo verify the feasibility of clinical-based discharge (CBD) criteria and to find out the reasons for the delayed discharge of outpatients after endoscopy procedures under drug-induced intravenous sedation. DesignA prospectively observational study conducted at a tertiary endoscopy center. MethodsMedical records were collected from outpatients admitted for endoscopy procedures under drug-induced intravenous sedation from June 1, 2021 to December 30, 2021. Patients were scheduled to discharge at least 30 minutes based on the time-based discharge (TBD) method. Postanesthetic discharge scoring system in the outpatient post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) recorded the time of patients discharged home on the CBD criteria. Postoperative complications were recorded in the PACU and within 24 hours after discharge. Multivariate analysis was applied to identify the factors relating to late discharges. Findings10,597 patients were safely and successfully discharged home, and we were informed of no serious emergency or accidental readmissions to the hospital. The mean CBD time (21.77 ± 11.35 minutes) was compared with the TBD time (30 minutes) and actual TBD discharge time (61.56 ± 4.93 minutes), which were statistically significant, without changes in the patient's vital signs (P < .01). Primarily, further univariate and multivariate analyses showed that abdominal pain and fatigue were key factors accountable for delay in PACU discharge (P < .05). ConclusionsThe study concluded that in patients undergoing ambulatory endoscopy procedures with drug-induced intravenous sedation, discharge times based on physiological scoring systems can efficiently and safely guide ambulatory patient discharge as compared to the traditional TBD method. Postoperative fatigue and pain were the main factors affecting patients discharge associated with a relatively long PACU length of stay.

Development and Validation of a Discharge Assessment Scale for Outpatients Undergoing Sedative Anesthesia in the Ambulatory Postanesthesia Care Unit: A Comprehensive Delphi Study

PurposeThe purpose of this study was to develop a discharge assessment scale tailored for outpatients undergoing sedative anesthesia treatment in the ambulatory postanesthesia care unit and validate its agreement with the Post-Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System. DesignThe Delphi method. MethodsA Delphi survey was conducted with 30 experts focusing on the evaluation of outpatient discharges following treatment under ambulatory anesthesia. Subsequently, a cross-sectional observational study employing convenience sampling selected 2,579 outpatients who had undergone painless ambulatory gastrointestinal endoscopy at a tertiary hospital to analyze the level of agreement with the Post-Anesthesia Discharge Scoring System. FindingsThe study conducted three rounds of expert consultations to create the ambulatory discharge assessment scale. Twenty-five experts from 12 provinces and municipalities in our country were interviewed. The discharge assessment form encompassed five aspects: consciousness level, vital signs, directional stability, mobility, and adverse reactions. According to the scale, if the total score exceeded 9 points, with none of the items scoring 0 points, the ambulatory patient could be discharged from the hospital with the accompaniment of family members. Patients assessed using this newly constructed scale were able to leave the hospital earlier compared to those assessed using the comparative scale. No significant differences were observed in vital signs at the time of discharge or the occurrence of adverse events within 24 hours after the procedure. ConclusionsThis assessment tool for discharging ambulatory patients after the ambulatory anesthesia from the postanesthesia outpatient care unit can be considered a valuable addition to formalize the discharge process in outpatient services.

Comparison of Fentanyl, Ketamine, and Lidocaine Combined with Propofol Anesthesia in Patients with Crohn Disease Undergoing Colonoscopy.

BACKGROUND Colonoscopy is the predominant invasive procedure for Crohn disease (CD) patients. Opioids and propofol carry risks of respiratory and cardiovascular complications. This study aimed to evaluate whether substituting fentanyl with ketamine or lidocaine could diminish propofol usage and minimize adverse events. MATERIAL AND METHODS In total, 146 patients with CD scheduled for elective colonoscopy were assigned to anesthesia with fentanyl (n=47), ketamine (n=47), or lidocaine (n=55). Propofol was administered to achieve sufficient anesthesia. Measured outcomes in each group included propofol consumption, hypotension and desaturation incidents, adverse event types, consciousness recovery time, abdominal pain intensity, Aldrete scale, and Post Anaesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS). RESULTS Patients administered fentanyl needed significantly more propofol (P=0.017) than those on ketamine, with lidocaine showing no notable difference (P=0.28). Desaturation was significantly less common in the ketamine and lidocaine groups than fentanyl group (P<0.001). The ketamine group experienced milder reductions in mean arterial (P=0.018) and systolic blood pressure (P<0.001). Recovery metrics (Aldrete and PADSS scores) were lower for fentanyl (P<0.001), although satisfaction and pain levels were consistent across all groups (P=0.797). Dizziness occurred less frequently with lidocaine than fentanyl (17.2%, P=0.018) and ketamine (15.1%, P=0.019), while metallic taste incidents were more prevalent in the lidocaine group (13.5%, P=0.04) than fentanyl group. CONCLUSIONS Using ketamine or lidocaine instead of fentanyl in anesthesia for colonoscopy in patients with CD significantly lowers propofol use, reduces desaturation events, maintains blood pressure more effectively, without increasing hypotension risk, and accelerates recovery, without negatively impacting adverse events or patient satisfaction.

Comparison of Remimazolam and Propofol in Recovery of Elderly Outpatients Undergoing Gastrointestinal Endoscopy: A Randomized, Non-Inferiority Trial.

We designed this trial to compare the recovery time of remimazolam and propofol in elderly patients undergoing painless gastrointestinal endoscopy. In this randomized, non-Inferiority trial, 360 patients aged 65 years or older, scheduled for elective outpatient gastrointestinal endoscopy, were randomly assigned to the remimazolam combined with fentanyl (RF) group or the propofol combined with fentanyl (PF) group. The primary outcome was the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay time, defined as the time from the end of the examination to scoring 9 points using the Modified Post-Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System (MPADSS) criteria. Secondary outcomes included sedation-related adverse events, recall, injection pain, as well as postoperative Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores and Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index (PSQI) scores at 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month postoperatively. A total of 351 patients completed the study, with 174 receiving remimazolam and 177 receiving propofol. The PACU stay time in RF group was non-inferior to that in PF group [14 (11, 18) vs 13 (10, 17), mean difference 1 (95% confidence interval 0, 2), P=0.084 for noninferiority]. However, remimazolam was associated with lower rate of hypoxemia [4.7% (8/180) vs 12.4% (22/180), P=0.011], reduced use of vasoactive drugs [1 (0, 1) vs 1 (1, 2), P<0.001], less injection pain [2 (1.2%) vs 35 (21.3%), P<0.001], and lower recall [20 (11.8%) vs 36 (20.3%), P=0.034]. There were no differences in the QoR-15 scores and PSQI scores at postoperative 1 day, 1 week, and 1 month between groups. This non-inferiority study revealed that in elderly outpatients undergoing gastrointestinal endoscopy, remimazolam achieved recovery times comparable to propofol, with fewer associated complications.

Infusion of propofol with bispectral index monitoring does not reduce the amount of propofol used during transvaginal oocyte retrieval procedure

In our study we aimed to investigate whether the use of bispectral index (BIS) monitoring would decrease total propofol consumption during the transvaginal oocyte retrieval procedure. This was a prospective, randomized, controlled, parallel-group clinical trial. The study was conducted in the operating room, and postoperative recovery room. One hundred and thirty, American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) I–II patients, over age 18, undergoing transvaginal oocyte retrieval were included in this study. All patients were administered 2 μg/kg fentanyl, and 2 mg/kg propofol for the induction of anesthesia. The patients were divided into two groups. Patients in the group bolus were given 0.5 mg/kg of propofol when necessary, according to the observer's range of motion. Patients in the group BIS were given 10 mg/kg/h propofol infusion adjusted to keep the BIS value between 40 and 60. The primary outcome was the total dose of propofol administered per patient. The secondary outcomes were the time to reach the value of 5 on the Modified Observer's Assessment of Alertness Sedation Scale (MOASs), the time to reach Post Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS) ≥ 9 of the patients, satisfaction of the patient, and the gynecologist. The amount of total propofol was higher in the group BIS than in the group bolus administered according to the patient's clinic. There was no difference in the time to reach the value of 5 on the MOASs between the groups. The time to reach PADSS ≥ 9 was longer in the group BIS than in the group bolus. There was no difference between the two groups in terms of the satisfaction of the patient and the gynecologist. Administration of propofol as an infusion with BIS monitoring did not reduce the amount of propofol administered to patients during transvaginal oocyte retrieval.Clinical trial registration number: NCT05631925—30/11/2022.

The Effectiveness of Adductor Canal Block Compared to Femoral Nerve Block on Readiness for Discharge in Patients Undergoing Outpatient Anterior Cruciate Ligament Reconstruction: A Multi-Center Randomized Clinical Trial.

This study evaluated the effect of adductor canal block (ACB) versus femoral nerve block (FNB) on readiness for discharge in patients undergoing outpatient anterior cruciate ligament (ACL) reconstruction. We hypothesized that ACB would provide sufficient pain relief while maintaining motor strength and safety, thus allowing for earlier discharge. This was a randomized, multi-center, superiority trial. From March 2014 to July 2017, patients undergoing ACL reconstruction were enrolled. The primary outcome was the difference in readiness for discharge, defined as Post-Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System score ≥ 9. Twenty-six patients were allocated to FNB and twenty-seven to ACB. No difference in readiness for discharge was found (FNB median 1.8 (95% CI 1.0 to 3.5) vs. ACB 2.9 (1.5 to 4.7) hours, p = 0.3). Motor blocks and (near) falls were more frequently reported in patients with FNB vs. ACB (20 (76.9%) vs. 1 (3.7%), p < 0.001, and 7 (29.2%) vs. 1 (4.0%), p = 0.023. However, less opioids were consumed in the post-anesthesia care unit for FNB (median 3 [0, 21] vs. 15 [12, 42.5] oral morphine milligram equivalents, p = 0.004) for ACB. Between patients with FNB or ACB, no difference concerning readiness for discharge was found. Despite a slight reduction in opioid consumption immediately after surgery, FNB demonstrates a less favorable safety profile compared to ACB, with more motor blocks and (near) falls.

The Difference in Time to Discharge Between Daytime and Nighttime Administration of Ketamine in Children.

The objective of this study was to compare the time to discharge between daytime and nighttime ketamine administration to children undergoing primary facial repair in the emergency department (ED). This retrospective, cross-sectional study was performed in a sample of children aged younger than 18 years and requiring sedation for primary facial repair in 2019. Children who received ketamine for reasons other than facial repair were excluded. All patients were initially injected with 4 mg/kg of ketamine intramuscularly and additionally injected if sedation failed. The time of injection and awakening were recorded in the electronic medical record system by nurses in charge, and the level of wakefulness was determined with a postanesthesia discharge scoring system administered by physicians. A total of 562 cases of ketamine administration were divided into 2 groups: daytime and nighttime. We defined daytime and nighttime as 8 a.m. and 8 p.m./sunrise and sunset, respectively. They found that there were no significant differences between 2 groups in each standard (95% confidence interval, -4.55-4.55; P = 0.877 and 95% confidence interval, -6.41-2.41; P = 0.487, respectively). The findings of the study suggest that the time of ketamine injection has no relationship to duration of sedation for primary facial repair in children.

Patient Comfort During Postop Period in Breast Cancer Surgeries: A Randomized Controlled Trial Comparing Opioid and Opioid-Free Anesthesia.

Anesthetic management practices have advanced to opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) often replacing opioids in oncologic surgeries. The study was conducted to find the quality of recovery (QoR) of patients undergoing breast cancer surgeries receiving OFA. A double-blinded, randomized controlled study was conducted with 60 patients randomized to group OFA and group OA (opioid anesthesia). Group OFA received one-time dosing of ketamine 0.3 mg/kg, lignocaine 1.5 mg/kg, and dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg. Group OA received fentanyl 2mcg/kg. Intraoperatively, Group OFA received dexmedetomidine 0.4 mcg/kg/h and theOA group received fentanyl 0.5 mcg/kg/h infusion.Bispectral index (BIS), hemodynamics, muscle relaxant administration, and sevoflurane concentration were noted. A modified QoR-40 score was used to assess the quality of recovery in the postoperative period. A higher QoR-40 score was found in the OA group (median 182, IQR 178-186) compared to the OFA group (median 180, IQR 178-184). Out of the five components, the patient's emotional state was better in the group OA (39.9±2.77) than in the OFA group (37.9±2.77). The patient's physical comfort was found to be better in the group OFA (52.52±3.23) compared to group OA (50.93±3.23). Physical independence, psychological support, and pain were comparable between the two groups. Patients in group OFA received less sevoflurane, a muscle relaxant, and showed a mild reduction in heart rate and mean arterial pressure (MAP) when compared to group OA. The time taken to reach a Modified Aldrete score of 9 was high in OFA (11.47±2.16) and (9.17±1.09) when compared to group OA. No significant differences were noted with the visual analog score (VAS) score, Ramsay sedation score, and modified post-anesthesia discharge scoring system (PADSS) score. We conclude that the quality of recovery of patients receiving opioid-free methods of anesthesia was not inferior to OA in patients undergoing breast cancer surgeries.

Spinal Anaesthesia for Ambulatory Perianal Surgeries: A Comparison between Short Acting and Long Acting Local Anaesthetics

Introduction: Chloroprocaine (ester group) is a preservativefree local anaesthetic which is available as isobaric solution. It is being recently popularised in spinal anaesthesia for its shorter duration of action which plays a significant role in the early ambulation and voiding functions, which is the primary essence in ambulatory surgery. Intrathecal Bupivacaine is the most commonly used drug for its block characteristics, taking into account not only the fast initiation of sensory and motor blockade but also faster sensory and motor regression. Aim: To compare the block characteristics between 1% Chloroprocaine and 0.5% Bupivacaine in patients undergoing perianal surgeries under spinal anaesthesia. Materials and Methods: This randomised, interventional double blinded study was carried out in Chettinad Hospital and Research Institute, Kelambakkam, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India, from April 2020 to August 2021. The patients were split into two groups of 34 each. Group-1: Patients received 30 mg of 1% Chloroprocaine intrathecally. Group-2: Patients received 10 mg of 0.5% Bupivacaine intrathecally. In both the groups the onset, duration of both sensory and motor blocks, intraoperative haemodynamic, two segment regression time, time to ambulation and micturition, the time to eligibility for discharge from hospital was evaluated. Independent sample t-test, chi-square test and Fisher’s-Exact test were employed to compare the distribution of qualitative variables between the groups. Results: Total of 68 participants 31 (45.6%) males and 37 (54.4%) females), 34 in each group 1 and group 2 were analysed. Both groups contained maximum patients in &gt;45 years age group, 12 (35.2%) in each group. Demographic and anthropometric parameters of patients in both the groups were comparable. Mean time of ambulation after spinal anaesthesia in the Group-1 was 137.65±9.15 minutes and in Group-2 was 193.38±8.14 minutes (p-value &lt;0.05). Mean time taken to return of voiding function the Group-1 was 157.06±16.05 minutes and in Group-2 was 213.53±10.26 minutes (p-value &lt;0.05). Mean time taken for Post-Anaesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS) score &gt;9 in Group-1 was significantly less (165.29±13.59 minutes) than Group-2 (219.41±9.52 minutes). Mean time duration for request of first rescue analgesic in Group-1 was significantly faster (104.71±8.69 minutes) than Group-2 (157.79±8.81 minutes). There was no significant difference in haemodynamic changes between the study groups. Conclusion: Chloroprocaine has proved to be better than bupivacaine. It has proven to provide adequate surgical anaesthesia, it leads to early regression of motor and sensory blocks, faster un-assisted ambulation and micturition. Time to rescue analgesia was earlier in the Group-1 when compared to Group-2.

Remimazolam: Is the quest for the holy grail of sedation during diagnostic or endoscopic interventions over?

Remimazolam: Is the quest for the holy grail of sedation during diagnostic or endoscopic interventions over?

Usefulness of discharge standards in outpatients undergoing sedative endoscopy: a propensity score-matched study of the modified post-anesthetic discharge scoring system and the modified Aldrete score

BackgroundThis study aimed to evaluate the usefulness of discharge standards in outpatients undergoing sedative endoscopy by comparing the modified post-anesthetic discharge scoring system (MPADSS) and the modified Aldrete score.MethodsWe prospectively enrolled 376 outpatients who underwent gastrointestinal endoscopy under midazolam sedation; 181 outpatients were assessed regarding discharge after sedative endoscopy using the MPADSS (group M), and 195 patients were assessed by the modified Aldrete score (group A). The clinical characteristics, types of endoscopy, endoscopic outcomes, and anesthesia outcomes were evaluated between the two groups. We compared discharge score, recovery time, and adverse events using propensity-score matching.ResultsPropensity-score matching created 120 matched pairs. The proportion of patients who had a recovery time within 60 min after endoscopy was significantly higher in group A than that in group M (42.5% versus 25.0%, respectively; P < 0.01). The proportion of patients who required > 120 min of recovery time after endoscopy was significantly lower in group A than that in group M (0.0% versus 5.0%, respectively; P = 0.03). However, significantly more patients had drowsiness at discharge in group A compared with group M (19.1% versus 5.0%, respectively; P < 0.01). There was no significant difference in the adverse event rate within 24 h of discharge between the groups.ConclusionsPatients assessed by the modified Aldrete score were allowed to discharge earlier than those assessed by the MPADSS. However, a patient’s level of consciousness should be assessed carefully, especially in patients who visit the hospital alone.

A Randomized Control Trial of Three Intravenous Dexmedetomidine Doses for Procedural Sedation in Patients Undergoing Minor Gynaecological Surgery.

Background: Minor gynaecological procedures are usually done in outpatient settings. Early discharge with minimal haemodynamic compromise is an essential requirement of these procedures. Many sedative drugs are being used for outpatient surgeries. Of the sedative agents available, dexmedetomidine, which has sedative and analgesic sparing effects, has the best safety profile in the cardiorespiratory system. Therefore, we evaluated the optimum dexmedetomidine dose for providing better procedural sedation.Methodology: This randomized, double-blinded study included 120 ASA grade I and II patients aged 18-45 years who were undergoing short gynaecological procedures in a tertiary care hospital. Patients were randomly allocated into three groups of 40 each. After a loading dose of 1 µg/kg over 10 min, group A received dexmedetomidine infusion at a rate of 0.2 µg/kg/hr, group B at a rate of 0.4 µg/kg/hr, and group C at a rate of 0.6 µg/kg/hr. Perioperative hemodynamic changes, intraoperative adjuvant drug requirements, and postoperative recovery were also compared in the three different dexmedetomidine groups.Results: Heart rate, blood pressure, oxygen saturation, and respiratory rate remained within the normal physiological range in all three groups at most perioperative time points. The time to achieve the Modified Aldrete Score and the post-anesthetic discharge scoring system was maximum in group C and minimum in group A. Ketamine had to be supplemented in almost half of the patients in group A and less than a quarter of the patients in group B. In group C, surgery was completed without any drug supplementation. Two patients in group B and four patients in group C had an episode of bradycardia. Oxygen saturation decreased in one patient in group C, necessitating oxygen supplementation.Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine, at a dose of 0.4 µg/kg/hr with ketamine supplementation, provides the most appropriate procedural sedation and analgesia (PSA) without any significant hemodynamic compromise.

Ultrasound guided rectus sheath and transverse abdominis blocks for robotic urological surgeries – A case series

Background: Robotic surgeries have improved perioperative outcomes. We have combined ultrasound (USG) guided bilateral rectus sheath (RS) block along with transverse abdominis plane (TAP) block to assess perioperative opioid requirement, visual analog scale (VAS) score, and modified Post Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS) criteria for robotic urological surgeries. Ultrasound (USG)-guided blocks were given bilaterally after induction of general anesthesia. Methods: A total of ten patients scheduled for robotic urological surgeries were administered 30 ml of 0.25% bupivacaine (2.5 mg kg-1) with 0.75 mcg kg-1 of clonidine (10 ml of drug was given for TAP block and 5 ml of drug for RS block on each side) after negative aspiration. Results: Supplemental opioid was not required perioperatively, and 9 out of 10 patients were pain free (VAS score <3) for at least 6 h. Ten patients had a modified PADSS score ≥10 after 6 h of surgery. Conclusion: USG combined TAP and RS blocks is a promising technique with low learning curve, excellent analgesia, reduced opioid consumption, and higher PADSS score in the perioperative period.

Effects of remifentanil on the recovery quality among pediatric candidates for dental procedures under general anesthesia.

Background:Remifentanil is a short-acting synthetic opioid, seems to facilitate hospital discharge, induce less agitation and better recovery quality. The aim of this study was to investigate the effects of remifentanil on the quality of recovery among healthy children who were candidate for dental procedures under general anesthesia.Materials and Methods:This study was a double blind randomized controlled clinical trial on healthy children who referred to the Department of Pediatric dentistry, School of Dentistry, Isfahan University of Medical Sciences. Both groups were anaesthetized using 5 mg/kg thiopental sodium, 1 μg/kg fentanyl and 0.6 μg/kg atracurium. The first group received propofol to maintain anesthesia and the second group was given remifentanil along with propofol. Then, the time span to regain consciousness, level of agitation during recovery and time of discharge were monitored and compared between the two groups. Data were analyzed using the Mann-Whitney U-test, and the Kruskal–Wallis test at P < 0.05 level of significance.Results:Findings showed that the propofol + remifentanil group recovered faster than the propofol group. Chi-square test showed a significant difference in recovery time between the two groups (P < 0.05). About 45 min after regaining consciousness, the mean pediatric anesthesia emergence delirium score in the propofol group was 4.02 ± 2.19 and was significantly higher than the propofol + remifentanil group (3.02 ± 2.83) (P < 0.05). In addition, the mean Postanesthetic Discharge Scoring System score in the propofol group was 6.04 ± 1.74 and was significantly higher than the propofol + remifentanil group (7.58 ± 2.14) (P < 0.05).Conclusion:Combination of propofol and remifentanil significantly reduced the time taken for recovery, discharge and agitation level compared to propofol.

Does propofol mode of administration influence psychomotor recovery time after sedation for colonoscopy: A prospective randomized assessor-blinded trial.

Background:Propofol sedation has become increasingly popular for colonoscopy. Different modes of propofol administration have been described, but their influence on psychomotor recovery time remains largely unknown. This prospective randomized assessor-blinded study tested the hypothesis that target-controlled infusion system (TCI) combined with sedation depth monitoring should be associated with a more stable sedation than intermittent bolus application with clinical monitoring of sedation depth, resulting in a faster psychomotor skills recovery.Methods:One hundred sixty-four patients undergoing colonoscopy were randomized to receive propofol with the former (TCI group) or the latter (bolus group) mode of administration. Psychomotor skill recovery was assessed using the Choice Reaction Time (CRT) performed before and every ten minutes after waking up from propofol sedation. Clinical recovery was also assessed using the modified Post-anesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADS).Results:Induction and wake up times were longer in the TCI group, where patients received more propofol than those in the bolus group. Evolution of CRT was similar in both groups. Twenty minutes after arrival in the post-anesthesia care unit, 35 (49%) of patients in the TCI group and 43 (54%) in the bolus group achieved CRT values equal or shorter than their baseline values. Interestingly, according to the PADS score, most of the patients were considered fit for discharge at that moment. Incidence of adverse event was not different between groups.Conclusion:In the conditions of our study characterized by short procedure duration, target-controlled infusion of propofol does not offer any benefit in terms of psychomotor skills recovery over intermittent bolus application.

Risk factors for patient selection in ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy: A Single-centre experience.

Backgrounds:Ambulatory laparoscopic cholecystectomy (LC) reduces healthcare cost and increases hospital bed capacity. Currently, there is no consensus on patient selection for ambulatory LC. Evaluation of risk factors for ambulatory discharge is essential.Materials and Methods:Consecutive patients who underwent LC in our centre throughout 2019 were collected. We evaluated the discharge fitness using the Post-Anaesthetic Discharge Scoring System at 8 h after the operation. The relations between pre-operative variables and dischargeable possibilities were analysed for screening risk factors. Furthermore, we performed a literature review to summarise all published information.Results:Six hundred and forty-one cases were included in this study. American Society of Anaesthesiologist (ASA) grading (odds ratio OR = 0.415, P = 0.001) and leucocytes (OR = 0.80, P < 0.001) significantly predicted the fitness of discharge. ASA contributed to lower activity (P = 0.002) and intake/output (P = 0.006) scores. Leucocytes influence the vital sign (P < 0.001) and pain or post-operative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (P < 0.001) scores. The prolonged operation could predict the inabilities of discharge with a cut-off value of 55 min by dropping vital signs (P = 0.011), activity (P < 0.001) and pain or PONV (P = 0.012) scores. Male sex (OR: 1.702, P = 0.010), body mass index (BMI) (OR: 1.087, P = 0.008), leucocytes (OR: 1.075, P = 0.017) and C-reactive protein (CRP) (OR: 1.018, P = 0.003) were predictors for prolonged operation (>55 min).Conclusions:We suggest that pre-operative ASA grading III and leucocytes are risk factors for the fitness of ambulatory discharge after LC and intraoperative time. Male, BMI and CRP predict complicated surgery, and they should be considered preoperatively.

Outpatient shoulder prostheses: Feasibility, acceptance and safety

IntroductionOutpatient surgery in France is defined by the national authority for health (HAS) as a scheduled surgery enabling same-day discharge without any increased risk to the patient. With the advent of enhanced recovery after surgery, outpatient lower limb arthroplasty has become a common procedure. However, only 1.1% of knee arthroplasties in France were performed on an outpatient basis in 2017. Objectives1) assess early morbidity and mortality after outpatient shoulder arthroplasties to validate eligibility and safety criteria; and 2) assess patient acceptance of outpatient surgery. MethodsA single-center study with the following inclusion criteria: primary shoulder arthroplasty, American Society of Anesthesiology (ASA) score I or II, no cognitive impairment, and no coronary artery or thromboembolic diseases. Analgesia was provided by bupivacaine via a peripheral nerve catheter in the first 72 hours followed by oral analgesics. Patients were discharged if the post-anesthetic discharge scoring system (PADSS) was>9/10 and the visual analog scale (VAS) was<5/10. Postoperative telephone interviews were carried out on D1, D2 and D3 to assess pain with the numerical rating scale and to collect data on their analgesic consumption. All patients were seen by an independent observer at one and six months for a clinical and radiologic follow-up and at 90 days during a consultation with the senior surgeon. The primary endpoint was the 90-day morbidity and mortality rate (readmissions, rehospitalizations, and minor and major complications). A satisfaction questionnaire was collected at one and six months. ResultsThirty-six patients were offered an outpatient shoulder arthroplasty between February 2016 and February 2018: 12 (33%) refused with no valid reasons and 24 patients agreed to the procedure (seven hemiarthroplasties, nine anatomic shoulder arthroplasties and eight reverse shoulder arthroplasties). The mean age at surgery was 70 years (55–82), mean body mass index (BMI) was 26 (21–32) and 14 patients were ASA II (66%). Three patients (12%) refused same-day discharge despite a PADSS score>9/10 and adequate pain management. Two patients (8%) were not discharged home on the same day as the surgery for medical reasons (one for pain and one for high blood pressure). No readmissions or complications were reported for the 19 outpatient arthroplasties. None of the outpatients used opioids. All patients were satisfied with their functional outcome, 84% were satisfied with the outpatient management and 17% felt they were insufficiently monitored and regretted that they were not hospitalized. Conclusions1) outpatient shoulder arthroplasty can be safely proposed to selected patients with low comorbidities, regardless of their age and type of implant; 2) the acceptance rate for outpatient shoulder arthroplasty remained low among our patient population. These results should incite us to better educate patients about outpatient surgery. Level of evidenceIV; retrospective study.

Ambulatory robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with extended recovery by total extraperitoneal approach.

To evaluate the feasibility of performing robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in an ambulatory with extended recovery setting by using a total extraperitoneal approach. Patients with low- to intermediate-risk, prostate cancer were prospectively recruited in the ambulatory robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy with extended recovery by total extraperitoneal approach group (n=30), and a matched-pair inpatient surgery control group by total extraperitoneal approach (n=20). Objective discharge criteria were based on the postanesthesia discharge scoring system. All patients underwent preoperative counseling on preoperative preparation and postoperative care. There were no statistically significant differences between the ambulatory with extended recovery-total extraperitoneal approach and inpatient-total extraperitoneal approach groups in patient factors (age, body mass index, American Society of Anesthesiologists score, Charlson Comorbidity Index), disease factors (prostate-specific antigen, clinical Tstage, biopsy Gleason score, prostate volume) and peri-operative parameters (operative time, blood loss, Trendelenburg angle). All total extraperitoneal robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy patients (ambulatory with extended recovery and inpatient surgery groups) met the postanesthesia discharge scoring system discharge criteria ≤23h from admission. The mean hospital stays for ambulatory with extended recovery-total extraperitoneal and inpatient-total extraperitoneal groups were 20.3 and 52.4h, respectively (P<0.001). A total of 29 of 30 patients (97%) in the ambulatory with extended recovery-total extraperitoneal group were discharged ≤23h of admission. This is the first prospective evaluation of robot-assisted laparoscopic radical prostatectomy by the total extraperitoneal approach, showing that the short-stay ambulatory with extended recovery approach is safe, feasible and with a high success rate. Total extraperitoneal surgical approach is a critical factor for the success of the ambulatory with extended recovery protocol.

Using Clinical-Based Discharge Criteria to Discharge Patients After Ophthalmic Ambulatory Surgery Under General Anesthesia: An Observational Study

PurposeTo verify the feasibility of the clinical-based discharge (CBD) criteria and identify the reasons of long postanesthesia care unit length of stay (PACU-LOS) for ophthalmic ambulatory surgical patients under general anesthesia. DesignA prospectively observational study conducted at a tertiary eye center in China. MethodsMedical records were collected from patients admitted for strabismus ambulatory surgery under general anesthesia from September 2018 to March 2019. The patients were discharged home once met the CBD criteria based on a combination of the modified Aldrete's scoring system and Chung's Post-Anesthetic Discharge Scoring System. Postoperative complications were recorded in the PACU and within 24 hours after discharge. Multivariate logistic regression was applied to identify the factors relating to late discharges. FindingsAll patients (N = 400) were safely and successfully same-day discharged home as none of the patients informed severe emergency events or unanticipated readmission. Nine displayed discharge delays mainly because of mild postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) although met the discharge criteria. About 85.5% of patients were discharged within a PACU-LOS of 150 minutes, 379 (94.8%) were within 180 minutes, and the cutoff time in PACU-LOS was 150 minutes. Multivariable analysis indicated that sevoflurane anesthesia and the presence of PONV were related to late discharges (PACU-LOS of greater than 150 minutes, all P < .05). ConclusionsThe CBD criteria can efficiently and safely guide the ophthalmic ambulatory surgical patients to discharge home on the same-surgery day, whereas sevoflurane anesthesia and the presence of PONV are associated with a relatively long PACU-LOS.

AMeTHYST (AMbulatory HYsterectomy surgery). Feasibility of minimally invasive outpatient hysterectomy, a preliminary study

ObjectivesHysterectomy, one of the most frequent surgical procedures in women, is commonly performed by a minimally-invasive approach (laparoscopic or vaginal) as recommended by the French guidelines. The French authorities aim to have 66 % of all procedures performed as same-day surgery in 2020. The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and identify factors associated with success or failure of same-day surgery for minimally-invasive hysterectomy. Study designWe conducted a prospective double-center observational study at the Caen and Amiens University Hospitals between September 2017 and May 2018 including hospitalized patients managed for a laparoscopic or vaginal hysterectomy. Patients were younger than 70 and have no major medical problems. The patients were placed into a “fit” or “unfit” group according to their Post Anaesthetic Discharge Scoring System (PADSS) score 6 h post-surgery. All the patients were asked to complete an assessment questionnaire during their hospitalization. ResultsOf the 50 included patients, half were placed in the "fit" group. A history of laparotomy was significantly predictive of failure of same-day discharge (p = 0.003) but not uterine size or Body Mass Index (BMI). The main barriers for discharge were pain (p<0.001) and postoperative nausea/vomiting (PONV) (p<0.001). Four patients, all in the “unfit” group, had Clavien-Dindo grade 1 postoperative complications. ConclusionSame-day minimally invasive hysterectomy is a feasible and safe procedure. Factors associated with same-day hysterectomy failure were laparotomy, pain and postoperative nausea/vomiting.