To evaluate the effect of perioperative duloxetine on pain management in patients recovering from laparoscopic hysterectomy. Design: A randomized placebo-controlled trial. Setting: A university hospital. Patients: Of 100 patients enrolled, 80 were randomized 1:1 to receive perioperative duloxetine (n = 40) or placebo (n = 40). Interventions: Patients undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy for benign conditions from November 2017 through March 2018 received 2 doses of 60 mg duloxetine or placebo 2 hours before and 24 hours after surgery. Measurements and Main Results: The Quality of Recovery (QoR)-40 questionnaire was completed by participants after discharge. Study and control groups were compared in terms of questionnaire scores, opioid analgesic use, and hospital length of stay. The baseline characteristics of the groups were comparable; median total QoR-40 scores were 111 of 200 and 112 of 200 for duloxetine and the placebo group, respectively; the difference did not reach statistical significance (p = .91). Although the physical independence subcomponent of the recovery questionnaire was improved in favor of duloxetine, none of the subcomponents reached statistical difference between groups. The groups did not differ in terms of postoperative narcotic analgesic use and hospital length of stay (p >.05). Conclusion: Perioperative duloxetine did not reduce pain, need for narcotic analgesia, or hospital length of stay following laparoscopic hysterectomy.

Background and Aim: Attempting to place an aortic cross-clamp may complicate surgery and postoperative outcomes in patients who have mediastinal adhesions or in those with extensive aortic calcification. Although right-sided cardiac surgery via thoracotomy is not a new technique in these patients, robotic-assisted intracardiac repair without cross-clamping was not reported in a large group of patients previously. In this study, the safety of robotic-assisted cardiac surgery without aortic cross-clamping was examined. Methods: From January 2010 to March 2020, 304 patients underwent roboticassisted cardiac surgery in our center and in 25 of these patients (8.2%) with a mean age of 65.5 ± 20 years myocardial protection was succeeded with moderate hypothermic ventricular fibrillatory arrest. Severe pericardial adhesions or existence of highly calcified ascending aorta were the indications for fibrillatory arrest during robotic assistant surgery. Results: Most patients were in New York Heart Association Class ≥II (88.0%) and the mean logistic Euroscore value was 18.5 ± 22.3. The type of operations were mitral/tricuspid valve repair/replacement, cryoablation, atrial septal defect closure, and pericardiectomy. Cardiopulmonary bypass times were 141.5 ± 47 (minimum 77-maximum 252) min. There was no case of conversion to open thoracotomy or sternotomy. Hemiparesis was observed in one patient. Two patients with 78.2 and 81.9 Euroscore values had mesenteric ischemia and multiorgan failure, respectively, and died at postoperative period. Conclusions: Robotic-assisted cardiac surgery without cross-clamping may provide reasonable outcomes in patients with severe aortic calcification or mediastinal adhesions undergoing intracardiac repair. These acceptable outcomes may encourage surgeons to perform this approach in appropriate group of patients.

Atrial septal defect (ASD) is one of the most common congenital cardiac diseases. This pathology can be treated with percutaneous devices. However, some of the ASDs are not suitable for device closure. Also, there may be device-related late complications of transcatheter ASD closure. Currently, robotic surgical techniques allow surgeons to close ASDs in a totally endoscopic fashion with a high success rate and a low complication rate. This study demonstrates the basic concepts and technique of robotic ASD closure.