Mode
Text Size
Log in / Sign up

Perioperative anesthetic management in 21 patients undergoing resection of giant abdominal masses showed variable outcomes.

Perioperative anesthetic management in 21 patients undergoing resection of giant abdominal masses sh…
Photo by Richard Catabay / Unsplash
Key Takeaway
Note that massive hemorrhage occurred in 57.1% of patients undergoing resection of giant abdominal masses in this retrospective cohort.

This retrospective cohort study evaluated perioperative characteristics and outcomes in 21 patients undergoing resection of giant abdominal masses. The population included cases with tumors originating from the abdominal wall (8 cases, 38.10%), abdominopelvic cavity (6 cases, 28.57%), and retroperitoneum (7 cases, 33.33%). Pathological diagnoses revealed malignant tumors in 11 cases (52.38%) and borderline tumors in 7 cases (33.33%).

All patients received general anesthesia. Single-lumen endotracheal intubation was utilized in 16 cases (76.2%). Intraoperative monitoring included invasive arterial pressure monitoring in 16 cases (76.2%), central venous pressure monitoring in 15 cases (71.4%), and FloTrac-based cardiac output monitoring in 8 cases (38.1%). Operative duration ranged from 110 to 440 minutes.

Safety and tolerability data indicate that massive hemorrhage (≥ 1,000 mL) occurred in 57.1% of patients. Postoperative ICU stay ranged from 0 to 12 days, while postoperative hospital stay ranged from 7 to 58 days. Patients with retroperitoneal masses exhibited higher preoperative ASA physical status classification, larger tumor diameter, and longer ICU and hospital stays compared to others. Similarly, those with malignant tumors were older, had higher ASA classification, experienced longer operative duration, and had prolonged ICU stays.

Limitations include the retrospective design and lack of a comparator group. The practice relevance suggests that anesthetic management requires individualized strategies, preoperative multidisciplinary consultation, and interventional embolization may reduce surgical risk. Intraoperative advanced hemodynamic monitoring and meticulous volume management warrant particular attention.

Study Details

Study typeCohort
EvidenceLevel 3
PublishedApr 2026
View Original Abstract ↓
ObjectiveTo summarize perioperative anesthetic management in patients undergoing resection of giant abdominal masses.MethodsPerioperative data from 21 patients who underwent resection of giant abdominal masses between January 2016 and December 2024 were retrospectively analyzed. Descriptive statistical methods and stratified comparative analyses were applied to evaluate perioperative characteristics and outcomes.ResultsThe maximum tumor diameter ranged from 15 to 50 cm. Tumors originated from the abdominal wall in 8 cases (38.10%), the abdominopelvic cavity in 6 cases (28.57%), and the retroperitoneum in 7 cases (33.33%). Pathological diagnoses predominantly included malignant tumors in 11 cases (52.38%) and borderline tumors in 7 cases (33.33%). General anesthesia was administered to all 21 patients, with single-lumen endotracheal intubation used in 16 cases (76.2%). Intraoperative monitoring consisted of invasive arterial pressure monitoring in 16 cases (76.2%), central venous pressure monitoring in 15 cases (71.4%), and FloTrac-based cardiac output monitoring in 8 cases (38.1%). Operative duration ranged from 110 to 440 min, and massive hemorrhage (≥ 1,000 mL) occurred in 57.1% of patients. Postoperative intensive care unit (ICU) stay ranged from 0 to 12 days, while postoperative hospital stay ranged from 7 to 58 days. Stratified analyses indicated that patients with retroperitoneal masses presented with higher preoperative American Society of Anesthesiologists (ASA) physical status classification, larger tumor diameter, and longer ICU and hospital stays. Patients with malignant tumors were older and demonstrated higher ASA classification, longer operative duration, and prolonged ICU stay.ConclusionAnesthetic management for resection of giant abdominal masses requires individualized strategies. Preoperative multidisciplinary consultation and interventional embolization may reduce surgical risk. Intraoperative advanced hemodynamic monitoring and meticulous volume management warrant particular attention.
Free Newsletter

Clinical research that matters. Delivered to your inbox.

Join thousands of clinicians and researchers. No spam, unsubscribe anytime.