Explore the vast range of titles available.

BackgroundPost-induction anaesthesia often promotes intraoperative hypotension (IOH) that can worsen postoperative outcomes. This study aims to assess the benefit of norepinephrine versus ephedrine at the induction of anaesthesia to prevent postoperative complications following major abdominal surgery by preventing IOH.Methods and analysisThe EPON STUDY is a prospective single-centre randomised controlled trial with the planned inclusion of 500 patients scheduled for major abdominal surgery at the Amiens University Hospital. The inclusion criteria are patients aged over 50 years weighing more than 50 kg with an American Society of Anesthesiologists physical status score of ≥2 undergoing major abdominal surgery under general anaesthesia. Patients are allocated either to the intervention group (n=250) or the standard group (n=250). In the intervention group, the prevention of post-induction IOH is performed with norepinephrine (dilution to 0.016 mg/mL) using an electric syringe pump at a rate of 0.48 mg/h (30 mL/h) from the start of anaesthesia and then titrated to achieve the haemodynamic target. In the control group, the prevention of post-induction IOH is performed with manual titration of ephedrine, with a maximal dose of 30 mg, followed by perfusion with norepinephrine. In both groups, the haemodynamic target to maintain is a mean arterial pressure (MAP) of 65 mm Hg or 70 mm Hg for patients with a medical history of hypertension. An intention-to-treat analysis will be performed. The primary outcome is the Clavien–Dindo score assessed up to 30 days postoperatively. The secondary endpoints are the length of hospital stay and length of stay in an intensive care unit/postoperative care unit; postoperative renal function; postoperative cardiovascular, respiratory, neurological, haematological and infectious complications at 1 month; and volume of intraoperative vascular filling and mortality at 1 month.Ethics and disseminationEthical approval was obtained from the committee of protection of the persons of Ile de France in May 2021 (number 21 05 41). The authors will be involved in disseminating the research findings (through attending conferences and co-authoring papers). The results of the study will be disseminated via peer-reviewed publications and presentations at national and international conferences.Trial registration number NCT05276596.

The usefulness of (1,3)-ß-d-glucan (BDG) detection for the diagnosis of intra-abdominal candidiasis and treatment monitoring is unknown. A prospective, single-center study of consecutive patients admitted to an ICU with complicated intra-abdominal infection (IAI) over a 2-year period was conducted. BDG was measured in the peritoneal fluid and serum between day 1 (D1) and D10. Patients with a positive peritoneal fluid yeast culture (YP) were compared to those with a negative yeast culture (YN). The evolution of serum BDG was compared in the two groups. Seventy patients were included (sixty-five analyzed): YP group (n = 19) and YN group (n = 46). Median peritoneal BDG concentration during surgery was 2890 pg.mL−1 [IQR: 942–12,326] in the YP group vs. 1202 pg.mL−1 [IQR: 317–4223] in the YN group (p = 0.13). Initial serum BDG concentration was 130 pg.mL−1 [IQR: 55–259] in the YP group vs. 88 pg.mL−1 [IQR: 44–296] in the YN group (p = 0.78). No difference in evolution of serum BDG concentrations was observed between the groups (p = 0.18). In conclusion, neither peritoneal BDG nor serum BDG appear to be good discriminating markers for the diagnosis of yeast IAI. In addition, monitoring the evolution of serum BDG in yeast IAI did not appear to be of any diagnostic value.

The usefulness of (1,3)-\\ss -d-glucan (BDG) detection for the diagnosis of intra-abdominal candidiasis and treatment monitoring is unknown. A prospective, single-center study of consecutive patients admitted to an ICU with complicated intra-abdominal infection (IAI) over a 2-year period was conducted. BDG was measured in the peritoneal fluid and serum between day 1 (D1) and D10. Patients with a positive peritoneal fluid yeast culture (YP) were compared to those with a negative yeast culture (YN). The evolution of serum BDG was compared in the two groups. Seventy patients were included (sixty-five analyzed): YP group (n = 19) and YN group (n = 46). Median peritoneal BDG concentration during surgery was 2890 pg.mL(-1) [IQR: 942-12,326] in the YP group vs. 1202 pg.mL(-1) [IQR: 317-4223] in the YN group (p = 0.13). Initial serum BDG concentration was 130 pg.mL(-1) [IQR: 55-259] in the YP group vs. 88 pg.mL(-1) [IQR: 44-296] in the YN group (p = 0.78). No difference in evolution of serum BDG concentrations was observed between the groups (p = 0.18). In conclusion, neither peritoneal BDG nor serum BDG appear to be good discriminating markers for the diagnosis of yeast IAI. In addition, monitoring the evolution of serum BDG in yeast IAI did not appear to be of any diagnostic value.