IntroductionEvaluating the efficacy of a laparoscopically guided, surgical transversus abdominis plane (TAP) and rectus sheath (RS) block in reducing analgesic consumption while improving functional outcomes in patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery.Methods150 patients Living with obesity undergoing elective laparoscopic Roux-En-Y gastric bypass for obesity will be recruited to this double-blinded, placebo-controlled randomised controlled trial from a Bariatric Centre of Excellence over a period of 6 months. Patients will be electronically randomised on a 1:1 basis to either an intervention or placebo group. Those on the intervention arm will receive a total of 60 mL 0.25% ropivacaine, divided into four injections: two for TAP and two for RS block under laparoscopic visualisation. The placebo arm will receive normal saline in the same manner. A standardised surgical and anaesthetic protocol will be followed, with care in adherence to the Enhanced Recovery after Bariatric Surgery guidelines.AnalysisDemographic information and relevant medical history will be collected from the 150 patients enrolled in the study. Our primary efficacy endpoint is cumulative postoperative narcotic use. Secondary outcomes are peak expiratory flow, postoperative pain score and the 6 min walk test. Quality of recovery (QoR) will be assessed using a validated questionnaire (QoR-40). Statistical analysis will be conducted to assess differences within and between the two groups. The repeated measures will be analysed by a mixed modelling approach and results reported through publication.Ethics and disseminationEthics approval was obtained (20170749-01H) through our institutional research ethics board (Ottawa Health Science Network Research Ethics Board) and the study results, regardless of the outcome, will be reported in a manuscript submitted for a medical/surgical journal.Trial registration numberPre-results NCT03367728.

No abstract

No abstract

Background: Laparoscopic surgery has become the preferred management for paraesophageal hernias (PEH); however surgical management versus watchful waiting remains controversial in older patients. Methods: This retrospective study analyzed the outcomes of PEH repair in elderly patients surgically managed at The Ottawa Hospital over a 10-year period. Patients older than 60 years who underwent PEH repair were examined with respect to presentation, technique and associated complications. Results: Despite similar demographics, our study groups showed significantly different characteristics of surgical techniques. Most surgeries were performed laparoscopically; however, patients aged 70 years or older underwent more open and emergency surgeries than the younger group. Despite a 30-day postoperative complication rate of 45 % and 13 % in the older (≥ 70 yr) and younger (60–69 yr) groups, respectively, the rates during elective repair were similar. There were no deaths in the younger group, whereas the 30-day mortality rate was 5 % in patients aged 70 years and older, including a 2-fold increase with emergency repair (4 v. 2 patients). Conclusion: Management of PEH in older adults remains controversial in relation to a surgical versus watchful waiting approach. We found that in patients aged 70 years and older who undergo surgical management of PEH experience more open and emergency procedures, which are associated with higher complication rates. However, in the elective setting older patients had increased laparoscopic repairs and comparable complication rates to younger patients. We found the greatest outcomes with early, elective laparoscopic repair, irrespective of age.