Anestesia venosa total livre de opioides, com infusões de propofol, dexmedetomidina e lidocaína para colecistectomia laparoscópica: estudo prospectivo, randomizado e duplo‐cego

Sex-Related Analgesic Effects of Opioid-Based Anesthesia and Low-Opioid Anesthesia with Non-Opioid Postoperative Analgesia-A Clinical Observational Study

Background/Objectives: Sex is a crucial factor in modulating the perioperative aspects of anesthesia. A growing number of studies demonstrate that women and men experience pain differently and respond differentially to analgesics. Methods: This study evaluated the analgesic trajectory of low-opioid anesthesia (LOA) and opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in women and men after laparoscopic cholecystectomy. The primary objective was to assess pain intensity at various time intervals after surgery (0-2, 2-6, 6-12, and 12-24 h) using the Numerical Rating Scale (NRS). The secondary objective was to assess the difference in mean pain intensity on the first postoperative day between the women and men. Results: The mean pain intensity did not differ significantly for men using LOA and OBA, but the value was significantly lower in the LOA group for women (p = 0.0002). The analgesic trajectory in women and men undergoing LOA presented a negative trend, but the pain intensity at 0-2, 2-6, 6-12, and 12-24 h in women was statistically lower than that of the OBA group (p = 0.01, p = 0.008, p = 0.002, and p = 0.001). Total fentanyl doses of 0.3 mg (sensitivity 44%, specificity 76%, AUC 0.55) and 0.35 mg achieved a mean NRS of <2 for pain intensity in the female and male OBA groups (sensitivity 33%, specificity 100%, AUC 0.53). Conclusions: A model combining low-opioid anesthesia and non-opioid postoperative analgesia presents a favorable therapeutic effect for women. OBA does not provide proper analgesic effects after laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

Safety and effectiveness of multimodal opioid-free anaesthesia for pain and recovery after laparoscopic surgery: a systematic review and meta-analysis

OBJECTIVES

This study aimed to investigate the safety and effectiveness of opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) versus conventional opioid anaesthesia (OA) for postoperative pain management and recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis.

DATA SOURCES

The databases of PubMed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science were searched from inception to August 2023.

ELIGIBILITY CRITERIA FOR SELECTING STUDIES

We included any randomised controlled trial comparing OFA (at least two drugs or two more alternatives to opioids) with OA for laparoscopic surgery. The primary outcomes included postoperative pain scores, measured on a Numerical Rating Scale or Visual Analogue Scale ranging from 0 to 10, at 0-2 hours and 24 hours postoperatively; postoperative analgesic consumption, measured in morphine equivalent doses (mg); and quality of recovery, assessed using the QoR-40 score (ranging from 40 to 200). The secondary outcomes included the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), antiemetic use, extubation time (measured in minutes), post-anaesthesia care unit discharge time (measured in minutes), shivering, bradycardia, hypotension and pruritus.

DATA EXTRACTION AND SYNTHESIS

Meta-analyses were performed using Stata16 software, using the DerSimonian and Laird's method and inverse variance to summarise effect sizes for each outcome under a random effects model for all outcomes. Outcomes were reported as OR for binary outcome indicators and mean difference (MD) for continuous outcome indicators, with corresponding 95% CIs. I² coefficients were used to assess high, medium and low heterogeneity. RoB was used to assess the risk of bias of the included studies. GRADE assessed the certainty of the evidence using a systematic framework for rating the quality of evidence and strength of recommendations.

RESULTS

Ultimately, 12 studies involving 983 patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery were included in this systematic evaluation and meta-analysis. The results of the meta-analysis showed an association of OFA with reduced early postoperative 0-2-hour pain response (MD -1.29; 95% CI -2.23 to -0.36; I²=92%; p<0.001) and the consumption of analgesics (MD -0.43; 95% CI -0.60 to -0.26; I²=1.8%; p=0.405) in patients undergoing laparoscopic compared with OA.The results of the meta-analysis suggest that OFA could improve the quality of early postoperative recovery (MD 1.37; 95% CI 0.36 to 2.39; I²=94.2%; p<0.001) and reduce the incidence of PONV (OR 0.38; 95% CI 0.24 to -0.59; I²=37.6%; p=0.108) and antiemetics (MD 0.29; 95% CI 0.14 to 0.61; I² = 0%; p=0.473) in patients. The other variables presented no significant differences between the groups.

CONCLUSIONS

OFA may be more beneficial for postoperative pain management and recovery in patients undergoing laparoscopic surgery compared with conventional OA. Future studies could further extend these findings to other surgical populations.

PROSPERO REGISTRATION NUMBER

CRD42023414848.

Effectiveness and Safety of Opioid-Free Anaesthesia and Analgesia in pain control and postoperative recovery of patients undergoing gynaecologic oncologic surgery: a retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

Opioids have been essential for the anesthesiologic management of patients undergoing surgical procedures such as gynecologic oncology, but incorrect dosage can lead to unwanted hemodynamic effects. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and multimodal postoperative analgesia techniques can solve this problem as they can restrict the excessive use of opioids.

METHODOLOGY

A retrospective observational cohort study was conducted by reviewing the medical records of patients at the Hernando Moncaleano Perdomo University Hospital. Female patients who underwent gynecologic oncology surgery at the MPUHN and who received OFA, or opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) were identified. Two cohorts were created in which one have all patients (unadjusted cohort) and one with randomly selected patients (adjust cohort). Data on pain were collected using a visual analog pain scale (VAPS), along with hemodynamic variables and adverse events at 7 different times from admission to the operating room until discharge from the hospital. A bivariate analysis was performed between OFA and OBA, comparing frequencies of VAPS and adverse events with chi2, while mean difference for hemodynamic variables with t student. A multivariate analysis was performed with multiple logistic regression to evaluate differences in frequency of VAPS between OFA and OBA.

RESULTS

For unadjusted cohort, difference was identified for greater pain in OFA than in OBA (p < 0.001) for the times before surgery, recovery room, and 24 h after surgery, while differences were only identified at recovery room in the adjusted cohort. The heart rate has significant differences only at pre-surgery, 30 min of induction and admission to the recovery room. Respiratory rate has significant differences at admission to the operating room, 30 min of induction. Mean arterial pressure was significant only in the recovery room and for oxygen saturation at admission to the operating room and discharge from recovery. Higher frequency of requiring antiemetics was only identified in patients with OFA than OBA on the fifth day of surgery. Significance was identified in multivariate analysis between OBA and OFA for at discharge from recovery room.

CONCLUSIONS

The OFA technique for gynecologic oncologic surgery patients has a similar impact on pain control compared to OBA.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Does not apply.

Comparative Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil in Reducing Postoperative Pain and Opioid Use: A Systematic Review

Postoperative pain management is a critical component of patient care following surgical procedures. Opioid analgesics, particularly Remifentanil, have been traditionally used to manage pain, but these drugs come with significant risks, including opioid-induced hyperalgesia (OIH) and the potential for dependence on opioids. Dexmedetomidine, an alpha-2 adrenergic receptor agonist, is a promising non-opioid alternative. This systematic review aims to compare the efficacy of Dexmedetomidine and Remifentanil in reducing postoperative pain and opioid use, as well as to evaluate their safety profiles. A systematic literature review followed the Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analyses guidelines, utilizing PubMed and ClinicalTrials.gov. The findings revealed that both agents provided effective intraoperative analgesia. However, Dexmedetomidine consistently outperformed Remifentanil in reducing postoperative pain and opioid consumption. Additionally, Dexmedetomidine was associated with lower pain scores in the immediate postoperative period, particularly in spinal and gynecological surgeries. Despite its advantages in pain control and opioid-sparing effects, Dexmedetomidine was associated with slower recovery times, such as delayed eye-opening and longer extubation periods. In contrast, Remifentanil, with its rapid onset and offset, facilitated quicker recovery but resulted in increased postoperative opioid requirements and a higher incidence of OIH. Dexmedetomidine's side effects include bradycardia and hypotension, which were generally manageable and less severe than those associated with Remifentanil. Dexmedetomidine represents a promising alternative to Remifentanil for postoperative pain management. Its ability to reduce opioid consumption and mitigate the risk of OIH makes it an attractive option, particularly in patients at risk for opioid misuse or dependency. Nevertheless, further large-scale studies with diverse patient populations are needed to confirm these findings and refine the optimal dosing regimens for Dexmedetomidine.

Effect of intraoperative noise isolation on postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery: protocol for a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common complications following general anesthesia, particularly in gynecological laparoscopic surgeries. This study aims to evaluate the effect of intraoperative noise isolation on PONV incidence.

METHOD

This single-center, prospective, randomized controlled trial will enroll 192 adult patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecological surgery. Patients will be randomly assigned in a 1:1 ratio and stratified by age into either the control group (Group C), without noise-cancelling headphones, or a noise reduction group (Group NR), using noise-cancelling headphones from anesthesia induction until the end of surgery. All patients will receive intraoperative dexamethasone and ondansetron prophylaxis. The primary outcome is the incidence of PONV within 48 h post-surgery. Secondary outcomes include PONV severity at 24 and 48 h, antiemetic use, pain scores, need for rescue analgesia, Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) scores, Richards-Campbell Sleep Questionnaire (RCSQ) scores, hemodynamic interventions, extubation time, length of stay in PACU and hospital, adverse events (hypertension, hypotension, bradycardia, tachycardia, desaturation after extubation, postoperative shivering, emergence agitation, allergic reactions, severe arrhythmias arrhythmia, cardiac arrest, hypothermia), patient satisfaction, and postoperative complications based on the Postoperative Morbidity Survey (POMS). Analyses will be conducted using modified intention-to-treat (mITT) and per-protocol (PP) populations.

DISCUSSION

We hypothesize that intraoperative use of noise-cancelling headphones will reduce PONV incidence in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopic surgery. The findings could enhance postoperative care protocols for thoracoscopic gynecological procedures.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2400087460).

Opioid-Free Anesthesia for Upper Limb Surgery in Obese Patients as a Day Case Surgery: A Prospective Observational Study

Background

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is a relatively new approach, and many studies are still needed to assess its effectiveness and compare it to opioid-based anesthesia (OBA).

Objectives

This study investigated the use of OFA in obese patients undergoing upper limb surgery and compares its outcomes with those of OBA.Methods:This prospective randomized clinical study included 76 obese patients with a Body Mass Index (BMI) ≥ 30 kg/m² who were scheduled for upper limb surgery. Patients were randomly assigned to receive either OFA (group A, n = 38) or OBA (group B, n = 38). The OBA group was administered propofol, fentanyl, and atracurium, while the OFA group received lidocaine, propofol, atracurium, and dexmedetomidine. All patients were mechanically ventilated, and anesthesia was maintained with isoflurane and atracurium. Primary outcomes monitored included postoperative pain [Visual Analog Scale (VAS) ≥ 4] and the number of rescue doses of tramadol. Secondary outcomes included extubation time, any cardiac events, hypoxia, postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), intensive care unit (ICU) admission rates, and duration of hospital stay.

Results

The OFA group had significantly lower extubation time, mean arterial pressure (MAP), and heart rate (HR) compared to the OBA group. Additionally, VAS scores were significantly lower at the 30-minute and 2-hour marks after extubation (P < 0.001 and P < 0.001, respectively) in patients receiving OFA. The OFA group also experienced fewer adverse effects, required fewer rescue doses of tramadol, and had shorter hospital stays.

Conclusions

Opioid-free anesthesia may result in better and safer outcomes for obese patients undergoing upper limb surgeries, with fewer postoperative complications and shorter hospital stays. However, further research is needed to fully understand the potential benefits of OFA compared to OBA.

Impact of Dexmedetomidine-Based Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia on Opioid Use After Minimally Invasive Repair of Pectus Excavatum: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Background: Opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA) using dexmedetomidine has gained attention as an alternative to opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) due to its potential to reduce opioid consumption and the associated side effects. This study aimed to investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine-based OSA on postoperative pain intensity, opioid consumption, and recovery outcomes in patients undergoing a minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum. Methods: Eighty-four patients undergoing a minimally invasive repair of pectus excavatum were randomized to either the OSA group, receiving dexmedetomidine, or the OBA group, receiving remifentanil. The primary outcome was the total amount of analgesics administered within 24 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes included pain intensity and analgesic consumption over 48 h, recovery outcomes, intraoperative hemodynamics, and opioid-related complications. Results: The OFA group reported a significantly reduced total morphine-equivalent dose within 24 h (55.4 ± 31.1 mg vs. 80.2 ± 26.7 mg, p < 0.001) and lower VAS scores at 24 h (3.9 ± 1.5 vs. 5.4 ± 2.1, p < 0.001). Pain intensity was lower, and analgesic consumption was reduced in the OSA group 1-6, 6-24, and 24-48 h after surgery. Recovery times and intraoperative hemodynamics were comparable between the groups, with no significant differences in opioid-related complications. Conclusions: Dexmedetomidine-based OSA effectively reduces postoperative pain and opioid use without compromising recovery or hemodynamic stability. These findings support its use as a viable alternative to OBA, particularly in the minimally invasive repair of the pectus excavatum.

No Difference in Postoperative Recovery Outcomes Between Opioid-Free and Opioid-Sparing Anesthesia Under Multimodal Analgesic Protocol for Video-Assisted Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Propensity Score Matching Cohort Study

Background: With growing concerns about opioid-related risks, efforts to reduce opioid use throughout the perioperative period have increased. This study aimed to compare postoperative recovery outcomes between opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) and opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA) under a multimodal analgesic protocol in video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS). Methods: A retrospective cohort study was conducted on 196 patients undergoing VATS from August 2019 to December 2021. Patients received either dexmedetomidine-based OFA or remifentanil-based OSA. Postoperative recovery was assessed using the Quality of Recovery-15 (QoR-15) score, opioid consumption, and pain intensity. Additionally, opioid-related complications and intraoperative hemodynamic changes were evaluated. Results: Both groups showed similar QoR-15 scores 24 h postoperatively (124.2 ± 7.0 vs. 123.0 ± 6.9, p = 0.227). Opioid consumption and pain intensity were comparable, and the incidence of opioid-related adverse events did not significantly differ between the groups. Intraoperative hypotension and bradycardia were more frequent in the OFA group, but the differences were not statistically significant. Conclusions: The study concluded that both OFA and OSA, when used under a multimodal analgesic protocol, provided effective postoperative recovery in patients undergoing VATS with no significant differences in outcomes.

Effects of Footbath on Pain, Anxiety, Sleep, and Comfort Levels in Patients With Postlaparoscopic Cholecystectomy: A Randomized Controlled Study

PURPOSE

The aim of the study is to determine the effect of of hot footbaths on the pain, anxiety, sleep, and comfort levels of patients who underwent laparoscopic cholecystectomy.

DESIGN

The study is a randomized controlled designed.

METHODS

This study was conducted in surgery clinic of a university hospital between January 2022 and November 2022. The research was completed with 54 patients in the experimental group and 54 patients in the control group.

FINDINGS

The mean state anxiety score and VAS-Sleep score of the patients in the experimental group 120 minutes after the application was 31.07±4.70 and 612.62±82.37, respectively, which was statistically significantly lower than that of the patients in the control group ( P <0.05). On the other hand, at the 120th minutes after the application, the mean VAS-Comfort scores of the patients in the experimental group were statistically significantly higher than those of the patients in the control group ( P <0.05). A positive relationship was found between the mean VAS-Pain and VAS-Sleep scores of the patients in the experimental group, and a significant negative relationship was found between the mean VAS-Comfort and state anxiety scores.

CONCLUSIONS

Foot bath is effective in reducing the pain and anxiety levels of patients undergoing laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgery.

Comparison of opioid-free and opioid-inclusive propofol anaesthesia for thyroid and parathyroid surgery: a randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting occur frequently following thyroid and parathyroid surgery and are associated with worse patient outcomes. We hypothesised that opioid-free propofol anaesthesia would reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting compared with opioid-inclusive propofol anaesthesia in patients undergoing these procedures.

METHODS

We conducted a randomised, double-blinded controlled trial in adult patients scheduled to undergo thyroid and parathyroid surgery at two medical centres in mainland China. Patients were allocated randomly (1:1, stratified by sex and trial site) to an opioid-free anaesthesia group (esketamine, lidocaine, dexmedetomidine and propofol) or an opioid-inclusive group (sufentanil and propofol). Propofol infusions were titrated to bispectral index 45-55. Patients received prophylaxis for nausea and vomiting using dexamethasone and ondansetron and multimodal analgesia with paracetamol and flurbiprofen axetil. The primary outcome was the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first 48 h after surgery.

RESULTS

We assessed 557 patients for eligibility and 394 completed this trial. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting in the first postoperative 48 h was lower in the opioid-free anaesthesia group (10/197, 5%) compared with opioid-inclusive group (47/197, 24%) (OR (95%CI) 0.17 (0.08-0.35), p < 0.001), yielding a number needed to treat of 5.3. Additionally, opioid-free propofol anaesthesia was associated with a reduced need for rescue anti-emetics, lower rates of hypotension and desaturation after tracheal extubation, and higher patient satisfaction. Time to tracheal extubation was prolonged slightly in the opioid-free group. The two groups had similar postoperative pain scores and 30-day outcomes.

DISCUSSION

Opioid-free propofol anaesthesia reduced postoperative nausea and vomiting in patients undergoing thyroid and parathyroid surgery. An opioid-free anaesthetic regimen can optimise anaesthetic care during thyroid and parathyroid surgery.

Opioid-free general anesthesia: considerations, techniques, and limitations

PURPOSE OF REVIEW

To discuss the role of opioids during general anesthesia and examine their advantages and risks in the context of clinical practice. We define opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) as the absolute avoidance of intraoperative opioids.

RECENT FINDINGS

In most minimally invasive and short-duration procedures, nonopioid analgesics, analgesic adjuvants, and local/regional analgesia can significantly spare the amount of intraoperative opioid needed. OFA should be considered in the context of tailoring to a specific patient and procedure, not as a universal approach. Strategies considered for OFA involve several adjuncts with low therapeutic range, requiring continuous infusions and resources, with potential for delayed recovery or other side effects, including increased short-term and long-term pain. No evidence indicates that OFA leads to decreased long-term opioid-related harms.

SUMMARY

Complete avoidance of intraoperative opioids remains questionable, as it does not necessarily ensure avoidance of postoperative opioids. Multimodal analgesia including local/regional anesthesia may allow OFA for selected, minimally invasive surgeries, but further research is necessary in surgeries with high postoperative opioid requirements. Until there is definitive evidence regarding procedure and patient-specific combinations as well as the dose and duration of administration of adjunct agents, it is imperative to practice opioid-sparing approach in the intraoperative period.

Evaluation of effects of intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine or lignocaine on stress response and postoperative pain in patients undergoing craniotomy for intracranial tumors: A randomized controlled exploratory study

Background

Goals of anesthesia in neurosurgery include stable cerebral hemodynamics and provide relaxed brain to surgeon. Dexmedetomidine and lignocaine as an adjuvant can fulfill these criteria but literature comparing the two are sparse. We compared the effects of intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine or lignocaine on stress response, postoperative pain, and recovery in patients undergoing craniotomy for intracranial tumors.

Methods

Approval was obtained from IEC, and the study was prospectively registered (CTRI/2022/11/047434). Written and informed consent was obtained from 105 patients fulfilling inclusion criteria, and they were divided into three groups. Group D received intravenous infusion of dexmedetomidine 1 mcg/kg over 15 minutes followed by infusion at rate of 0.5 mcg/kg/h, Group L received intravenous infusion of lignocaine 2 mg/kg over 15 minutes followed by infusion at rate of 1.5 mg/kg/h, and Group N received intravenous infusion of normal saline at the rate of 4-8 ml/h till skin suturing. SPSS v23 (IBM Corp.) was used for data analysis.

Results

There was a significant difference between groups in terms of intraoperative hemodynamic variations, brain relaxation score, extubation criteria, postoperative pain, stress indicator response, and quality of recovery.

Conclusions

Dexmedetomidine as an adjuvant to anesthetic drugs has a better profile than lignocaine in suppressing stress response and preventing hemodynamic variations at intubation, skull pin application, and surgical incision. Dexmedetomidine increases the duration of effective analgesia more than lignocaine, in postoperative period in patients undergoing craniotomy.

Dexmedetomidine Versus Fentanyl on Time to Extubation in Patients with Morbid Obesity Undergoing Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy

Background

Sleeve gastrectomy (SG) is an effective method for managing obesity. While opioids are used for their hemodynamic stability and their ability to reduce intraoperative stress, they also have reported side effects. Dexmedetomidine (DEX), an α2 adrenergic receptor agonist, is noted for its analgesic and anesthetic-sparing effects, leading to a higher quality of recovery.

Objectives

The study aims to compare the effects of fentanyl and dexmedetomidine (DEX) on the recovery of morbidly obese patients following laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy (SG).

Methods

This randomized, double-blind study involved 64 patients, equally divided into two groups. The Dexmedetomidine group (Group D) received an intravenous (IV) loading dose of dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg) over 15 minutes before anesthesia induction, followed by a 10 mL saline 0.9% infusion over 60 seconds during induction. Post-intubation, dexmedetomidine was administered at 0.5 μg/kg/h. The Fentanyl group (Group F) received a volume-matched saline 0.9% IV over 15 minutes pre-induction and fentanyl (1 μg/kg) diluted in 10 ml saline 0.9% IV over 60 seconds during induction. After intubation, a continuous fentanyl infusion was maintained at a rate of 1 μg/kg/hr.

Results

Extubation time was significantly shorter in the Dexmedetomidine group (Group D) at 8.25 ± 2.7 minutes compared to the Fentanyl group (Group F) at 10.47 ± 2.17 minutes, with a P-value of 0.001. Intraoperative heart rate and mean arterial blood pressure were also significantly lower in Group D than in Group F. Visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores were significantly lower in Group D compared to Group F upon arrival at the post-anesthesia care unit and at 2 hours postoperatively (P-value < 0.05). Additionally, the morphine dose consumed in the first 12 hours after surgery was significantly lower in Group D (5.75 ± 2.20 mg) compared to Group F (8 ± 2.38 mg), with a P-value of 0.001.

Conclusions

For morbidly obese patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy, dexmedetomidine (DEX) proves to be an effective anesthetic choice. It not only reduces extubation time but also lowers early postoperative visual analogue scale (VAS) pain scores and opioid consumption within the first 12 hours following surgery.

Opioid-free versus opioid-based anesthesia in major spine surgery: a prospective, randomized, controlled clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Major spine surgery is associated with severe postoperative pain and increased opioid consumption. Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is thought to provide adequate intraoperative analgesia with reduced postoperative opioid consumption. The aim of this study is to compare the impact of intraoperative OFA approach to the conventional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) on postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and related side effects in patients undergoing multilevel spinal fusion surgery.

METHODS

Forty-eight patients undergoing elective major spine surgery were randomly allocated to either receive intraoperative dexmedetomidine and lidocaine (OFA group) or fentanyl during induction and intraoperative remifentanil (OBA group). All patients received intraoperative sevoflurane, propofol, rocuronium, ketamine, dexamethasone, ondansetron and postoperative paracetamol and patient-controlled analgesia device set to deliver intravenous morphine for 48 hours after surgery. Postoperative pain was measured using numerical rating scale. Opioid side effects were documented, when present.

RESULTS

OFA group required less morphine in the first 24 hours post-surgery (17.28±12.25 mg versus 27.96±19.75 mg, P<0.05). The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) was significantly lower in the OFA group. More patients in the OFA group required antihypertensive medications compared to patients in the OBA group (P<0.05). In the post anesthesia care unit, OFA patients had a significantly longer stay than OBA patients (114.1±49.33 min versus 89.96±30.71 min, P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

OFA can be an alternative to OBA in patients undergoing multilevel spine fusion surgery. OFA reduces opioids consumption in the first 24 hours and PONV.

A comparative analysis of opioid-free and opioid-sparing anaesthesia techniques for laparoscopic ovariectomy in healthy dogs

OBJECTIVE

To compare the perioperative analgesic effects of an opioid-free (OFA) and an opioid-sparing (OSA) anaesthetic protocol in dogs undergoing laparoscopic ovariectomy.

STUDY DESIGN

Prospective, randomized, blinded, clinical trial.

ANIMALS

A group of 28 client-owned dogs.

METHODS

Dogs were allocated to one of two groups. The OFA group was administered intramuscular (IM) dexmedetomidine 5 μg kg-1 and ketamine 1 mg kg-1, followed by two intraoperative constant rate infusions (CRIs) of dexmedetomidine (3 μg kg-1 hour-1) and lidocaine (1 mg kg-1 loading dose, 2 mg kg-1 hour-1). The OSA group was administered IM dexmedetomidine 5 μg kg-1, ketamine 1 mg kg-1 and methadone 0.2 mg kg-1, followed by two intraoperative saline CRIs. In both groups, anaesthesia was induced with intravenous (IV) propofol 2 mg kg-1 and diazepam 0.2 mg kg-1 and maintained with isoflurane. Rescue dexmedetomidine (0.5 μg kg-1) was administered IV if there was a 20% increase in cardiovascular variables compared with pre-stimulation values. Ketorolac (0.5 mg kg-1) was administered IV when the surgery ended. Postoperative analgesia was evaluated using the Short Form-Glasgow Composite Measure Pain Scale and methadone (0.2 mg kg-1) was administered IM if the pain score was ≥ 6/24. Statistical analysis included mixed analysis of variance, Chi-square test and Mann-Whitney U test.

RESULTS

There were no significant differences in the intraoperative monitored variables between groups. The OFA group showed a significantly lower intraoperative rescue analgesia requirement (p = 0.016) and lower postoperative pain scores at 3 (p =0.001) and 6 (p < 0.001) hours. No dogs were administered rescue methadone postoperatively.

CONCLUSIONS AND CLINICAL RELEVANCE

Although both groups achieved acceptable postoperative pain scores with no need for further intervention, the analgesic efficacy of the OFA protocol was significantly superior to that of the OSA protocol presented and was associated with a lower intraoperative rescue analgesia requirement and early postoperative pain scores.

Effects of opioid-free anaesthesia compared with balanced general anaesthesia on nausea and vomiting after video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery: a single-centre randomised controlled trial

OBJECTIVES

Opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) has emerged as a promising approach for mitigating the adverse effects associated with opioids. The objective of this study was to evaluate the impact of OFA on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) following video-assisted thoracic surgery.

DESIGN

Single-centre randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Tertiary hospital in Shanghai, China.

PARTICIPANTS

Patients undergoing video-assisted thoracic surgery were recruited from September 2021 to June 2022.

INTERVENTION

Patients were randomly allocated to OFA or traditional general anaesthesia with a 1:1 allocation ratio.

PRIMARY AND SECONDARY OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome measure was the incidence of PONV within 48 hours post-surgery, and the secondary outcomes included PONV severity, postoperative pain, haemodynamic changes during anaesthesia, and length of stay (LOS) in the recovery ward and hospital.

RESULTS

A total of 86 and 88 patients were included in the OFA and control groups, respectively. Two patients were excluded because of severe adverse events including extreme bradycardia and epilepsy-like convulsion. The incidence and severity of PONV did not significantly differ between the two groups (29 patients (33.0%) in the control group and 22 patients (25.6%) in the OFA group; relative risk 0.78, 95% CI 0.49 to 1.23; p=0.285). Notably, the OFA approach used was associated with an increase in heart rate (89±17 vs 77±15 beats/min, t-test: p<0.001; U test: p<0.001) and diastolic blood pressure (87±17 vs 80±13 mm Hg, t-test: p=0.003; U test: p=0.004) after trachea intubation. Conversely, the control group exhibited more median hypotensive events per patient (mean 0.5±0.8 vs 1.0±2.0, t-test: p=0.02; median 0 (0-4) vs 0 (0-15), U test: p=0.02) during surgery. Postoperative pain scores, and LOS in the recovery ward and hospital did not significantly differ between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Our study findings suggest that the implementation of OFA does not effectively reduce the incidence of PONV following thoracic surgery when compared with traditional total intravenous anaesthesia. The opioid-free strategy used in our study may be associated with severe adverse cardiovascular events.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

ChiCTR2100050738.

Opioid-free anesthesia: A systematic review and meta-analysis

STUDY OBJECTIVE

To evaluate all available evidence thus far on opioid based versus opioid-free anesthesia and its effect on acute and chronic postoperative pain.

DESIGN

Systematic review and meta-analysis of randomized clinical trials.

SETTING

Operating room, postoperative recovery room and ward.

PATIENTS

Patients undergoing general anesthesia.

INTERVENTIONS

After consulting MEDLINE, EMBASE and Cochrane database, studies which compared opioid free anesthesia (OFA) with opioid based anesthesia (OBA) were included (last search April 15th 2022).

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcomes were acute and chronic pain scores in NRS or VAS. Secondary outcomes were quality of recovery and postoperative opioid consumption. Risk of bias was assessed using the RoB2 tool and a random effects model for the meta-analysis was conducted.

MAIN RESULTS

We identified 1245 citations, of which 38 studies met our inclusion criteria. There is moderate quality evidence showing no clinically relevant difference of Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) scores or opioid consumption in the postoperative period (pooled mean difference of 0.39 points with a CI of 0.19-0.59 and 4.02 MME with a CI of 1.73-6.30). We found only one small-sized study reporting no effect of opioid-free anesthesia on chronic pain. The quality of recovery was superior in patients with opioid-free anesthesia (mean difference of 8.26 points), however, this pooled analysis was comprised of only two studies. Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) occurred less in opioid-free anesthesia, but bradycardia was more frequent.

CONCLUSIONS

We concluded that we cannot recommend one strategy over the other. Future studies could focus on quality of recovery as outcome measure and adequately powered studies on the effects of opioid-free anesthesia on chronic pain are eagerly awaited.

Non-opioid versus Opioid Peri-operative Analgesia In Neurosurgery (NOPAIN): Study protocol for a multi-centric randomised controlled trial

Background and Aims

Many patients suffer from post-operative pain after neurosurgery despite using intra-operative opioids. Opioid side effects are problematic in neurosurgical patients. Hence, non-opioid alternatives for the management of nociception and pain are needed. Previous studies comparing opioids with non-opioids in the neurosurgical population were few, from single centres, of small sample sizes and were equivocal in findings, which prevented change in clinical practice. To overcome these limitations, we are conducting a multi-centre trial with objectives to compare intra-operative rescue opioid requirements and post-operative pain scores (primary objectives), adverse events, quality of recovery from anaesthesia, quality of sleep and patient satisfaction during hospital stay, and persistent post-surgical pain and quality of life at 3 and 6 months (secondary objectives) in patients receiving opioid and non-opioid analgesia for brain tumour surgeries.

Methods

This study protocol describes the methodology of a multi-centre randomised controlled trial. Ethics committee approval has been obtained from all five centres, the trial has been registered with the Clinical Trial Registry- India, and insurance has been obtained for this investigator-initiated funded study. In patients undergoing supra-tentorial brain tumour surgery (population), we will compare fentanyl (intervention) 1 µg/kg/h with dexmedetomidine (comparator) 0.5 µg/kg/h administered during surgery with regards to intra-operative rescue opioid requirement and post-operative pain (primary outcomes).

Results

We describe the study protocol of the multi-centre trial (protocol version 2, dated 29/01/2022). The first patient was recruited on 19/10/2022, and we will complete recruitment before March 2024.

Conclusion

We expect our study to establish dexmedetomidine as an effective non-opioid analgesic vis-à-vis opioids in the neurosurgical population.

Effect of opioid-free anesthesia on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting: A meta-analysis of randomized controlled studies

BACKGROUND

Research on opioid-free anesthesia has increased in recent years; however, it has never been determined whether it is more beneficial than opioid anesthesia. This meta-analysis was primarily used to assess the effect of opioid-free anesthesia compared with opioid anesthesia on the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting.

METHODS

We searched the electronic databases of PubMed, the Cochrane Library, Web of Science and Embase from 2014 to 2022 to identify relevant articles and extract relevant data. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, time to extubation, pain score at 24 hours postoperatively, and time to first postoperative rescue analgesia were compared between patients receiving opioid-free anesthesia and those receiving standard opioid anesthesia. Differences in the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting were evaluated using risk ratios (95% confidence interval [CI]). The significance of the differences was assessed using mean differences and 95% CI. The heterogeneity of the subject trials was evaluated using the I2 test. Statistical analysis was performed using the RevMan 5.4 software.

RESULTS

Fourteen randomized controlled trials, including 1354 participants, were evaluated in the meta-analysis. As seen in the forest plot, the OFA group had a lower risk of postoperative nausea and vomiting than the control group (risk ratios = 0.41, 95% CI: 0.33-0.51, P < .00001; n = 1354), and the meta-analysis also found that the OFA group had lower postoperative analgesia scores at 24 hours (P < .000001), but time to extubation (P = .14) and first postoperative resuscitation analgesia time (P < .54) were not significantly different.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-free anesthesia reduces the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting while providing adequate analgesia without interfering with postoperative awakening.

Comparison between the Effect of Lidocaine or Ropivacaine Hematoma Block and of Different Timings of Administration on Post-Operative Pain in Dogs Undergoing Osteosynthesis of Long-Bone Fractures

OBJECTIVE

We aimed to compare the efficacy of intra-operative lidocaine hematoma block (HB) to ropivacaine HB and to compare the efficacy of different timings of ropivacaine HB in controlling post-operative pain in dogs undergoing the osteosynthesis of long-bone fractures.

STUDY DESIGN

We conducted a randomized, blinded, prospective clinical study.

ANIMALS

Forty-eight dogs with long-bone fractures were included and were randomly allocated to four groups: lidocaine (L), ropivacaine (Rmid), ropivacaine pre- (Rpre) and ropivacaine post- (Rpost) groups.

METHODS

The dogs in group L (n = 14) and in group Rmid (n = 11) received a lidocaine or ropivacaine HB, respectively, after fracture reduction and before osteosynthesis material placement. Rpre dogs (n = 11) received ropivacaine HB before fracture reduction, and Rpost dogs (n = 12) received ropivacaine HB after osteosynthesis material placement. Eight post-operative pain assessments were performed using the University of Melbourne Pain Scale (UMPS) and an algometer. Rescue analgesia was administered based on UMPS scoring. For data analysis, the Shapiro-Wilk test of normality, chi-square, Student t test and Split Plot analysis were used. The level of significance was set at α = 0.05.

RESULTS

Rescue analgesia was administered to one dog in group L, one in group Rmid and one in group Rpost, with no significant differences detected. Compared to group Rmid, group L dogs exhibited significantly higher mean mechanical pain thresholds (p = 0.049) and lower mean UMPS scores (p = 0.001). Group Rpost dogs had statistically significantly higher mean pain thresholds compared to group Rmid (p = 0.009).

CLINICAL IMPLICATIONS

When performed after fracture reduction and before osteosynthesis material placement, lidocaine HB seems to be more effective than ropivacaine HB in controlling post-operative pain in dogs undergoing osteosynthesis of long-bone fractures. The administration of ropivacaine HB after osteosynthesis material placement seems to be more effective than administration after fracture reduction and before osteosynthesis material placement or administration before fracture reduction in controlling post-operative pain in dogs undergoing osteosynthesis of long-bone fractures.

Protocol Study for the Evaluation of Non-Opioid Balanced General Anaesthesia in Cardiac Surgery with Cardiopulmonary Bypass: A Randomised, Controlled, Multicentric Superiority Trial (OFACAR Study)

Opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) is general anaesthesia based on the use of several non-opioid molecules that aim to have an analgesic effect, decrease the sympathetic response, decrease hormonal stress, and decrease the inflammatory response during surgery. Although this approach to anaesthesia is regularly used in clinical practice, it remains a novel approach. The literature on this anaesthesia modality finds a number of positive effects on cardiac, respiratory, and cognitive function but no randomised study evaluated these effects during cardiac surgery where there is a high incidence of postoperative complications. The main aim of the study is to compare OFA vs. standard balanced opioid general anaesthesia on the incidence of postoperative complications and the length of stay in intensive care and hospital. OFACAR is a multicentric, randomised, controlled, superiority, single-blind, two parallel-arm clinical trial in patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. We compared a balanced general anaesthesia without opioids (OFA group) vs. a balanced opioid general anaesthesia with sufentanil (control group). One hundred and sixty patients will be enrolled in each treatment group. The primary endpoint is a composite one which corresponds to the occurrence of at least one of the postoperative complications, defined according to European standards within 30 days after surgery. Recruitment started in September 2019, and data collection is expected to end in November 2024.

A multidisciplinary opioid-reduction pathway for robotic prostatectomy: outcomes at year one

BACKGROUND

Opioid use has come under increasing scrutiny, driven in part by the opioid crisis and growing concerns that up to 6% of opioid-naïve patients may become chronic opioid users. This has resulted in a revaluation of perioperative practice. For this reason, we implemented a multidisciplinary pathway to reduce perioperative opioid usage through education and standardization of practice.

METHODS

A single-centre retrospective evaluation was performed after 1 year, comparing the outcomes to those of the 2 years prior to pathway implementation. Comparisons were made between pre- vs. post pathway change by 2:1 propensity matching between cohorts. Univariate linear regression models were created using demographic variables with those that were p < 0.15 included in the final model and using post-operative opioid use (in oral morphine equivalents, OME) as the primary outcome.

RESULTS

We found that intraoperative opioid use was significantly decreased 38.2 mg (28.3) vs. 18.0 mg (40.4) oral morphine equivalents (OME), p < .001, as was post-operative opioid use for the duration of the hospitalization, 46.3 mg (49.5) vs. 35.49 mg (43.7) OME, p = 0.002. In subgroup analysis of those that received some intraoperative opioids (n = 152) and those that received no opioids (n = 34), we found that both groups required fewer opioids in the post-operative period 47.0 mg (47.7) vs. 32.4 mg (40.6) OME, p = 0.001, + intraoperative opioids, 62.4 mg (62.9) vs. 35.8 mg (27.7) OME, p = 0.13, - intraoperative opioids. Time to discharge from the PACU was reduced in both groups 215 min (199) vs. 167 min (122), p < 0.003, + intraoperative opioids and 253 min (270) vs. 167 min (105), p = 0.028, - intraoperative opioids. The duration of time until meeting discharge criteria from PACU was 221 min (205) vs. 170 min (120), p = 0.001. Hospital length of stay (LOS) was significantly reduced 1.4 days (1.3) vs. 1.2 days (0.8), p = 0.005. Both sub-groups demonstrated reduced hospital LOS 1.5 days (1.4) vs. 1.2 days (0.8), p = 0.0047, + intraoperative opioids and 1.7 days (1.6) vs. 1.3 days (0.9), p = 0.0583, - intraoperative opioids. Average pain scores during PACU admission and post-PACU until discharge were not statistically different between cohorts.

CONCLUSIONS

These findings underscore the effectiveness of a multidisciplinary approach to reduce opioids. Furthermore, it demonstrates improved patient outcomes as measured by both shorter PACU and almost 50% reduction in perioperative opioid use whilst maintaining similar analgesia as indicated by patient-reported pain scores.

Guidelines on perioperative optimization protocol for the adult patient 2023

OBJECTIVE

The French Society of Anesthesiology and Intensive Care Medicine [Société Française d'Anesthésie et de Réanimation (SFAR)] aimed at providing guidelines for the implementation of perioperative optimization programs.

DESIGN

A consensus committee of 29 experts from the SFAR was convened. A formal conflict-of-interest policy was developed at the outset of the process and enforced throughout. The entire guidelines process was conducted independently of any industry funding. The authors were advised to follow the principles of the Grading of Recommendations Assessment, Development and Evaluation (GRADE) system to guide assessment of quality of evidence.

METHODS

Four fields were defined: 1) Generalities on perioperative optimization programs; 2) Preoperative measures; 3) Intraoperative measures and; 4) Postoperative measures. For each field, the objective of the recommendations was to answer a number of questions formulated according to the PICO model (population, intervention, comparison, and outcomes). Based on these questions, an extensive bibliographic search was carried out using predefined keywords according to PRISMA guidelines and analyzed using the GRADE® methodology. The recommendations were formulated according to the GRADE® methodology and then voted on by all the experts according to the GRADE grid method. As the GRADE® methodology could have been fully applied for the vast majority of questions, the recommendations were formulated using a "formalized expert recommendations" format.

RESULTS

The experts' work on synthesis and application of the GRADE® method resulted in 30 recommendations. Among the formalized recommendations, 19 were found to have a high level of evidence (GRADE 1±) and ten a low level of evidence (GRADE 2±). For one recommendation, the GRADE methodology could not be fully applied, resulting in an expert opinion. Two questions did not find any response in the literature. After two rounds of rating and several amendments, strong agreement was reached for all the recommendations.

CONCLUSIONS

Strong agreement among the experts was obtained to provide 30 recommendations for the elaboration and/or implementation of perioperative optimization programs in the highest number of surgical fields.

Effects of opioid-free total intravenous anesthesia on postoperative nausea and vomiting after treatments of lower extremity wounds: protocol for a randomized double-blind crossover trial

BACKGROUND

Postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) are common after general anesthesia and surgery. This study aims to compare the effects of total intravenous opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) with conventional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) on PONV in patients following treatments for wounds of lower extremities.

METHODS

This randomized, double-blind, crossover trial will include a total of 72 adult patients scheduled for at least two separate surgical treatments of lower extremity wounds under general anesthesia. Patients will be randomized to 1 of 2 anesthesia sequences of OFA and OBA. Patients in sequence 1 will receive OFA in the first treatment procedure and OBA in the second procedure, while patients in sequence 2 will receive the two anesthesia regimens in the reverse order. The washout period is at least 5 days. OFA will be delivered with intravenous esketamine, lidocaine, dexmedetomidine, and propofol. OBA will be delivered with intravenous sufentanil and propofol. The primary endpoint is the incidence of PONV within the first 48 h postoperatively. The secondary endpoints are the severity of PONV, antiemetic rescue therapy, postoperative pain scores, the worst pain, need for rescue analgesia, postoperative sedation, hypotension, bradycardia, hypertension, tachycardia, hypoxemia, psychotomimetic or dissociative effects, time to extubation, and length of postanesthesia care unit stay. Patients who complete two surgical procedures with designated anesthesia regimens will be included in the final analyses.

DISCUSSION

This crossover trial will determine whether total intravenous OFA reduces PONV in patients following treatments for lower extremity wounds. The results of this trial will also represent an important step to understand the benefits and possible risks of OFA in surgical patients.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200061511).

The effect of opioid-free anaesthesia on the quality of recovery after endoscopic sinus surgery: A multicentre randomised controlled trial

BACKGROUND

It remains to be determined whether opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) is consistently effective for different types of surgery.

OBJECTIVES

The current study hypothesised that OFA could effectively inhibit intraoperative nociceptive responses, reduce side effects associated with opioid use, and improve the quality of recovery (QoR) in endoscopic sinus surgery (ESS).

DESIGN

A multicentre randomised controlled study.

SETTING

Seven hospitals participated in this multicentre trial from May 2021 to December 2021.

PATIENTS

Of the 978 screened patients who were scheduled for elective ESS, 800 patients underwent randomisation, and 773 patients were included in the analysis; 388 patients in the OFA group and 385 patients in the opioid anaesthesia group.

INTERVENTIONS

The OFA group received balanced anaesthesia with dexmedetomidine, lidocaine, propofol and sevoflurane; the opioid anaesthesia group received opioid-based balanced anaesthesia using sufentanil, remifentanil, propofol and sevoflurane.

OUTCOME MEASURES

The primary outcome was 24-h postoperative QoR as evaluated by the Quality of Recovery-40 questionnaire. The key secondary outcomes were episodes of postoperative pain and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

RESULTS

A significant difference (P = 0.0014) in the total score of 24-h postoperative Quality of Recovery-40 was found between the OFA group, median [interquartile range], 191 [185 to 196] and the opioid anaesthesia group (194 [187 to 197]). There were significant differences between the opioid anaesthesia group and the OFA group in the numerical rating scale score for pain after surgery at 30 min (P  = 0.0017), 1 h (P  = 0.0052), 2 h (P  = 0.0079) and 24 h (P = 0.0303). The difference in the area under the curve of pain scale scores between the OFA group (24.2 [3.0 to 47.5]) and the opioid anaesthesia group (11.5 [1.0 to 39.0]) was significant (P = 0.0042). PONV occurred in 58 of 385 patients (15.1%) in the opioid anaesthesia group compared with 27 of 388 patients (7.0%) in the OFA group, suggesting the incidence of PONV in the OFA group was significantly lower than in the opioid anaesthesia group (P  = 0.0021).

CONCLUSION

OFA can provide good intraoperative analgesia and postoperative recovery quality as effectively as conventional opioid anaesthesia in patients undergoing ESS. OFA can be an alternative option in the pain management of ESS.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The study was registered at the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2100046158; registry URL: http://www.chictr.org.cn/enIndex.aspx.).

The Performance of Opioid-Free Anesthesia for Bariatric Surgery in Clinical Practice

PURPOSE

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is an alternative to conventional opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in patients undergoing bariatric surgery. Several small studies and a meta-analysis have suggested advantages of OFA for bariatric surgery, but current evidence is still contradictory, and a universally accepted concept has not yet been established. The purpose of this study was to determine whether patients undergoing bariatric surgery experience less postoperative pain and better postoperative recovery when anesthetized with an OFA regimen than with an OBA regimen.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

This prospective observational cohort study, conducted between October 2020 and July 2021, compared patients receiving OFA with patients receiving OBA. Patients were visited 24 and 48 h after the surgical procedure and asked about their postoperative pain using the visual analogue scale (VAS). Additionally, the quality of recovery-40 questionnaire (QoR-40) and the postoperative opioid requirements were recorded.

RESULTS

Ninety-nine patients were included and analyzed in this study (OFA: N = 50; OBA: N = 49). The OFA cohort exhibited less postoperative pain than the OBA cohort within 24 h (VAS median [interquartile range (IQR)]: 2.2 [1-4.4] vs. 4.1 [2-6.5]; P ≤ 0.001) and 48 h (VAS median [IQR]: 1.9 [0.4-4.1] vs. 3.1 [1.4-5.8]; P ≤ 0.001) postoperatively. Additionally, the OFA cohort had higher QoR-40 scores and required less opioid therapy postoperatively.

CONCLUSION

Based on our results the use of OFA for bariatric surgery results in less pain, reduced opioid requirements, and improved postoperative recovery-adding additional evidence regarding the use of OFA in everyday clinical practice.

Opioid-free analgesia: is it achievable in open colorectal surgery without neuraxial block?

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to evaluate feasibility and results of opioid-free analgesia (OFA) in open colorectal operation, and to determine factors influencing successful OFA.

METHODS

This study included 89 adult patients having elective open colectomy and/or proctectomy (without neuraxial or nerve block) from 2018 to 2020 in a university hospital. Current opioid users were excluded. Non-opioid analgesics were given based on patient's comorbidity. Successful OFA was determined by whether patients required morphine administered by intravenous patient-controlled analgesia. Clinical outcomes were prospectively collected and compared between OFA group and the other. Factors influencing successful OFA were determined (Trial registration number: TCTR20211220007).

RESULTS

The studied population had an average age of 68±12 years. Colorectal resection with stoma formation was performed in 17 cases (19%). OFA was achieved in 15 cases (17%). Median amount of morphine used was 18 mg per person (interquartile range 10-30) in those requiring opioid. There was no significant difference in patient's characteristics, intraoperative parameters and clinical outcomes between OFA group and the other except lower pain scores in the OFA group. The regimen of perioperative analgesia was the only predictor of successful OFA. Patients receiving multimodal analgesia with acetaminophen, selective cyclooxygenase-2 inhibitor and nefopam had the highest chance of successful OFA (5 of 15 cases, 33%).

CONCLUSIONS

This study showed that OFA was achievable in 17% of patients undergoing open colorectal resection without neuraxial block. The regimen of perioperative analgesia was the predictor of successful OFA.

Effect of balanced opioid-free anaesthesia on postoperative nausea and vomiting after video-assisted thoracoscopic lung resection: protocol for a randomised controlled trial

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) may reduce opioid-related side effects such as postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and hyperalgesia. This study aims to investigate the effects of balanced OFA on PONV and pain outcomes in patients undergoing video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This randomised controlled trial will be conducted at the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University in Suzhou, China. A total of 120 adults scheduled for VATS lung resection will be randomly assigned with a 1:1 ratio to either an OFA group or a control group, stratified by sex (n=60 in each group). Patients will receive balanced anaesthesia with esketamine, dexmedetomidine and sevoflurane (the OFA group), or sufentanil and sevoflurane (the control group). All patients will receive PONV prophylaxis with intraoperative dexamethasone and ondansetron. Multimodal analgesia consists of intraoperative flurbiprofen axetil, ropivacaine infiltration at the end of surgery and postoperative patient-controlled sufentanil. The primary outcome is the incidence of PONV within 48 hours after surgery. Secondary outcomes are nausea, vomiting, need for antiemetic therapy, pain scores at rest and while coughing, postoperative sufentanil consumption, need for rescue analgesia, length of post-anaesthesia care unit stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, and 30-day and 90-day post-surgical pain and mortality. Safety outcomes are hypotension, bradycardia, hypertension, tachycardia, interventions for haemodynamic events, level of sedation, headache, dizziness, nightmare and hallucination. All analyses will be performed in the modified intention-to-treat population.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

Ethics approval was obtained from the Ethics Committee of the First Affiliated Hospital of Soochow University (2022-042). All patients will provide written informed consent. The results of this study will be published in a peer-reviewed journal.

TRIAL REGISTRATION NUMBER

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (ChiCTR2200059710).

The efficacy and safety of an adapted opioid-free anesthesia regimen versus conventional general anesthesia in gynecological surgery for low-resource settings: a randomized pilot study

INTRODUCTION

There is scarce data on the safety and efficacy of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), in resource-limited settings due to the non-availability of dexmedetomidine, the reference OFA agent. We aimed to demonstrate the feasibility, efficacy and safety of a practical OFA protocol not containing dexmedetomidine, adapted for low-resource environments in very painful surgeries like gynecological surgery.

METHODS

We conducted a randomized pilot study on ASA I and II women undergoing elective gynecological surgery at a tertiary care hospital in Cameroon. Patients were matched in a ratio of 1:1 into an OFA and a conventional general anesthesia (CGA) group. The OFA protocol entailed the intravenous (IV) magnesium sulfate, lidocaine, ketamine, dexamethasone, propofol, and rocuronium, followed by isoflurane and a continuous infusion of a calibrated mixture of magnesium sulfate, ketamine and clonidine. The CGA protocol was IV dexamethasone, diazepam, fentanyl, propofol, and rocuronium, followed by isoflurane and reinjections of fentanyl propofol and a continuous infusion of normal saline as placebo. The primary endpoints were the success rate of OFA, isoflurane consumption and intraoperative anesthetic complications. The secondary endpoints were postoperative pain intensity, postoperative complications, patient satisfaction assessed using the QoR-40 questionnaire and the financial cost of anesthesia.

RESULTS

We enrolled a total of 36 women undergoing gynecological surgery; 18 in the OFA group and 18 in the CGA group. The success rate of OFA was 100% with significant lesser consumption of isoflurane in the OFA group, no significant intraoperative complication and better intraoperative hemodynamic stability in the OFA group. Postoperatively, compared to the CGA group, the OFA group had statistically significantly less pain during the first 24 h, no morphine consumption for pain relief, had less hypoxemia during the first six hours, less paralytic ileus, less nausea and vomiting, no pruritus and better satisfaction. The mean financial cost of this adapted OFA protocol was statistically significant lesser than that of CGA.

CONCLUSION

This OFA regimen without dexmedetomidine for a low-resource setting has a promising success rate with few perioperative complications including mild intraoperative hemodynamic changes, decrease postoperative complications, pain, and opioid consumption in patients undergoing elective gynecology surgery.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

This study was registered at clinicaltrials.gov on 03/02/2021 under the registration number NCT04737473.

Opioid-free total intravenous anesthesia for thyroid and parathyroid surgery: Protocol for a randomized, double-blind, controlled trial

Background

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) may improve postoperative outcomes by reducing opioid-related adverse effects. This study aims to evaluate the effects of OFA on postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), postoperative pain, and 30-day outcomes after thyroid and parathyroid surgery.

Methods

This two-center, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial will include 400 adult patients scheduled for thyroid and parathyroid surgery. Patients will be randomly assigned, 1:1 and stratified by sex and site, to an OFA group (esketamine, lidocaine, and dexmedetomidine) or a control group (opioid-based anesthesia with sufentanil). All patients will receive propofol-based total intravenous anesthesia and PONV prophylaxis with dexamethasone and ondansetron. The primary outcome is the incidence of PONV (defined as experiencing any event of nausea, retching, or vomiting) during the first 48 h postoperatively. The secondary outcomes include the severity of PONV, antiemetic rescue therapy, pain scores at rest and while coughing, need for rescue analgesia, perioperative adverse effects related to anesthetics or analgesics (hypotension, bradycardia, hypertension, tachycardia, desaturation, dizziness, headache, hallucination, and nightmare), time to extubation, length of post-anesthesia care unit stay, length of postoperative hospital stay, patient satisfaction, and a composite of 30-day major adverse events (myocardial infarction, cardiac arrest, cerebrovascular accident, coma, acute renal failure, pulmonary embolism, sepsis, septic shock, deep neck space infection, reintubation, reoperation, blood transfusion, failure to wean off ventilator, and death). Analyses will be performed in the modified intention-to-treat population.

Discussion

We hypothesize that our OFA regimen reduces PONV after thyroid and parathyroid surgery. We will also investigate whether OFA leads to improvements in postoperative pain and major adverse events. Our results will offer evidence for optimizing anesthesia regimens in patients who undergo thyroid and parathyroid surgical procedures.

Clinical trial registration

http://www.chictr.org.cn, identifier: ChiCTR2200059656.

Opioid-free anesthesia compared to opioid anesthesia for laparoscopic radical colectomy with pain threshold index monitoring: a randomized controlled study

BACKGROUND

Few studies have investigated the depth of intraoperative analgesia with non-opioid anesthesia. This study evaluated whether opioid-free anesthesia can provide an effective analgesia-antinociception balance monitored by the / pain threshold index in laparoscopic radical colectomy.

METHODS

We enrolled 102 patients undergoing laparoscopic radical colectomy with general anesthesia. Participants were randomly allocated into two groups to receive opioid-free anesthesia (group OFA) with dexmedetomidine (loading dose with 0.6 μg·kg^-1 for 10 min and then 0.5 μg·kg^-1·h^-1 continuous infusion) and sevoflurane plus bilateral paravertebral blockade (0.2 μg·kg^-1 dexmedetomidine and 0.5% ropivacaine 15 ml per side) or opioid-based anesthesia (group OA) with remifentanil, sevoflurane, and bilateral paravertebral blockade (0.5% ropivacaine 15 ml per side). The primary outcome variable was pain intensity during the operation, as assessed by the pain threshold index with the multifunction combination monitor HXD- I. Results were analyzed using repeated measures analysis of variance and Student's t-test. The secondary outcomes were wavelet index, lactic levels, and blood glucose concentration during the operation. The visual analog scale (VAS), rescue analgesic consumption, and side-effects of opioids after surgery were further assessed.

RESULTS

One hundred and one patients were included in the analysis. Analysis revealed that the intraoperative pain threshold index readings were not significantly different between the groups from incision to the end of the operation (P = 0.06). Furthermore, similar changes in the brain wavelet index readings were observed in the OFA and OA groups. There was no statistical difference in VAS scores between the groups (P > 0.05); however, non-opioid anesthesia did reduce the rescue analgesic consumption after operation (P < 0.05). In the OFA group, the blood glucose levels increased by 20% compared to baseline and were significantly higher than those in the OA group (P < 0.001). The incidences of postoperative nausea and vomiting, urine retention, intestinal paralysis and pruritus were not significantly different from those in the OA group (P > 0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

This study suggests that compared to the opioid anesthesia regimen, our opioid-free anesthesia regimen achieved an equally effective intraoperative pain threshold index in laparoscopic radical colectomy. The incidence of opioid-related adverse reactions was not different between regimens, and intraoperative blood glucose levels were higher with opioid-free anesthesia.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

ChiCTR1900021223, 02/02/2019, Title: " Opioid-free anesthesia in laparoscopic surgery: a randomized controlled trial ". Website: hppts:// www.chictr.ogr.cn.

Effects of opioid-free anesthesia on postoperative morphine consumption after bariatric surgery

STUDY OBJECTIVES

The objective of this study was to determine whether postoperative morphine requirement in obese patients undergoing laparoscopic bariatric surgery was reduced by opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), as compared to an anesthetic strategy using opioids (opioid balanced anesthesia (OBA)) and to investigate the differences that may exist between the use of clonidine and dexmedetomidine in the context of OFA.

DESIGN

Retrospective cohort study.

SETTING

Academic medical center in Lyon, France.

PATIENTS

257 patients who underwent laparoscopic bariatric surgery between March 2017 and March 2019. 77 patients were included in the OBA group and 180 in the OFA group. The OFA group was subdivided in two: 90 patients received OFA with clonidine (OFAC) and 90 received OFA with dexmedetomidine (OFAD).

MEASUREMENTS

Proportion of patients who did not receive morphine during the first 24 postoperative hours.

MAIN RESULTS

During the first 24 postoperative hours, the proportion of patients who did not require morphine was significantly higher in the OFA (87%) than in the OBA (52%) group (OR: 6.31; 95% CI [3.38; 11.80], P < 0.001). This difference remained significant after adjustment for age, body mass index, sex, type and duration of surgery (OR: 7.99; 95% CI [4.05; 16.48], P < 0.001). A greater proportion of patients in the OFAD (93%) than in the OFAC group (81%, P = 0.026) did not receive morphine during the same period.

CONCLUSIONS

OFA is associated with a lower morphine requirement than with OBA during the first 24 h after bariatric surgery. In addition, OFAD seems to be more effective than OFAC in order to reduce morphine consumption.

Effect of opioid-free anesthesia on postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic gynecologic surgery

BACKGROUND

We performed this randomised controlled trial to evaluate the effect of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) on postoperative analgesia after laparoscopic gynecologic surgery.

METHODS

78 patients undergoing laparoscopic gynecologic surgery were randomized to receive either OFA (Group OF) or opioid-inclusive anesthesia (Group C). Postoperative sufentanil consumption within the first 24 h, visual analogue scale (VAS) for pain, postoperative equivalent milligrams of morphine (EMM), severity of postoperative nausea (PN) and vomiting (PV), prevalence of PONV, use of antiemetics, time to first passage of flatus were compared by a two-tailed Student's t test, Wilcoxon rank-sum tests or Fisher's exact tests. Repeated measures ANOVA was used to assess the effect of allocation of groups over time.

RESULTS

The median [IQR] sufentanil consumption within 24 h was lower in Group OF (4[4.5]) than in Group C (6[8], mean difference [MD]=-2, 95% confidence interval [CI] [-4 to 0], P=0.029). The VAS scores at rest and during coughing at 6 h (P=0.009 at rest; P=0.002 during coughing), VAS scores during coughing at 2h (P=0.013) and 4 h (P=0.008), EMM (P=0.026), severities of PN (P=0.003) and PV (P=0.003), and the mean time to first passage of flatus (P=0.017) was significantly less in Group OF than that in Group C. The prevalence of PONV (26.3% [Group OF], 68.4% [Group C], OR=0.31, 95% CI [0.158 to 0.589], P <0.001), use of antiemetics (5.3% [Group OF], 28.9% [Group C], OR=0.136, 95% CI[0.028 to 0.667], P=0.012) was also significantly different between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Compared to opioid-inclusive anesthesia during laparoscopic gynecologic surgery, OFA was associated with significant improvement in postoperative analgesia, reduced PONV incidenceprevalence and severity, and faster first passage of flatus.

Total opioid-free general anaesthesia can improve postoperative outcomes after surgery, without evidence of adverse effects on patient safety and pain management: A systematic review and meta-analysis

BACKGROUND

Opioid-based treatment is used to manage stress responses during surgery and postoperative pain. However, opioids have both acute and long-term side effects, calling for opioid-free anaesthetic strategies. This meta-analysis compares adverse events, postoperative recovery, discharge time from post-anaesthesia care unit, and postoperative pain, nausea, vomiting, and opioid consumption between strict opioid-free and opioid-based general anaesthesia.

METHODS

We conducted a systematic review and meta-analysis. We searched PubMed, Embase, Cinahl, Cochrane Library, selected reference lists, and Google Scholar. We included randomised controlled trials (RCTs) published between January 2000 and February 2021 with at least one opioid-free study arm, i.e. no opioids administered preoperatively, during anaesthesia induction, before skin closure, or before emergence from anaesthesia.

RESULTS

The study comprised 1934 patients from 26 RCTs. Common interventions included laparoscopic gynaecological surgery, upper gastrointestinal surgery, and breast surgery. There is firm evidence that opioid-free anaesthesia significantly reduced adverse postoperative events (OR 0.32, 95% CI 0.22 to 0.46, I²  = 56%, p < 0.00001), mainly driven by decreased nausea (OR 0.27, (0.17 to 0.42), p < 0.00001) and vomiting (OR 0.22 (0.11 to 0.41), p < 0.00001). Postoperative opioid consumption was significantly lower in the opioid-free group (-6.00 mg (-8.52 to -3.48), p < 0.00001). There was no significant difference in length of post-anaesthesia care unit stay and overall postoperative pain between groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-free anaesthesia can improve postoperative outcomes in several surgical settings without evidence of adverse effects on patient safety and pain management. There is a need for more evidence-based non-opioid anaesthetic protocols for different types of surgery as well as postoperative phases.

Combined opioid free and loco-regional anaesthesia enhances the quality of recovery in sleeve gastrectomy done under ERAS protocol: a randomized controlled trial

Background

It is debatable whether opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) is better suited than multimodal analgesia (MMA) to achieve the goals of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) in patients undergoing laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy.

Methods

In all patients, anaesthesia was conducted with an i.v. induction with propofol (2 mg. kg-1), myorelaxation with cisatracurium (0.15 mg.kg-1), in addition to an ultrasound-guided bilateral oblique subcostal transverse abdominis plane block. In addition, patients in the OFA group (n = 51) received i.v. dexmedetomidine 0.1 μg.kg-1 and ketamine (0.5 mg. kg-1) at induction, then dexmedetomidine 0.5 μg. kg-1.h-1, ketamine 0.5 mg.kg-1.h-1, and lidocaine 1 mg. kg-1.h-1 for maintenance, while patients in the MMA group (n = 52) had only i.v. fentanyl (1 μg. kg-1) at induction. The primary outcome was the quality of recovery assessed by QoR-40, at the 6th and the 24th postoperative hour. Secondary outcomes were postoperative opioid consumption, time to ambulate, time to tolerate oral fluid, and time to readiness for discharge.

Results

At the 6th hour, the QoR-40 was higher in the OFA than in the MMA group (respective median [IQR] values: 180 [173–195] vs. 185 [173–191], p < 0.0001), but no longer difference was found at the 24th hour (median values = 191 in both groups). OFA also significantly reduced postoperative pain and morphine consumption (20 mg [1–21] vs. 10 mg [1–11], p = 0.005), as well as time to oral fluid tolerance (238 [151–346] vs. 175 min [98–275], p = 0.022), and readiness for discharge (505 [439–626] vs. 444 min [356–529], p = 0.001), but did not influence time to ambulate.

Conclusion

While regional anaesthesia achieved most of the intraoperative analgesia, avoiding intraoperative opioids with the help of this OFA protocol was able to improve several sensible parameters of postoperative functional recovery, thus improving our knowledge on the OFA effects.

Clinical trial number

Registration number NCT04285255.

Erector Spinae Block with Opioid Free Anesthesia in Cirrhotic Patients Undergoing Hepatic Resection: A Randomized Controlled Trial

Background

Hepatic resection is a major abdominal surgery with challenging pain management. We aimed to investigate the effect of erector spinae plane block (ESPB) with opioid free anesthesia (OFA) in cirrhotic patients scheduled for liver resection on perioperative pain management in terms of hemodynamic stability. Secondarily, we assessed time to first request for analgesia and perioperative fentanyl consumption, nausea and vomiting within 24 hours after surgery.

Methods

Forty patients were randomized to block group (n = 20): OFA with ESPB and conventional group (n = 20): conventional balanced anesthesia with opioids (OFA associated non-opioid drugs [dexmedetomidine, magnesium sulfate, xylocaine, and acetaminophen] and ESPB). Bilateral ESP block was done with ultrasound guidance at the level of thoracic vertebrae T 6–7, the local anesthetic dose was 20 mL Bupivacaine 0.25% with adjuvant dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg) on each side. We monitored hemodynamic stability as the primary endpoint (heart rate, mean arterial blood pressure, and cardiac output).

Results

Bilateral ESPB offered somatic and visceral analgesia for hepatic resection patients with no intraoperative fentanyl required. Postoperatively, the block group with dexmedetomidine adjuvant to the local anesthesia drugs showed delay in the first request for analgesia (p = 0.092) and decreased fentanyl requirement (p < 0.001), so no patient in the ESP group suffered from postoperative nausea and vomiting compared to 50% in the conventional group (p < 0.001).

Conclusion

Bilateral ESP block with OFA is an effective approach for intra- and postoperative analgesia in cirrhotic patients undergoing liver resection.

The therapeutic antiemetic and hemodynamic effects of dexmedetomidine, ephedrine, and dexamethasone in combination with midazolam on laparoscopic cholecystectomy patients: A randomised clinical trial

Objective:

The objective was to compare the hemodynamic and antiemetic effects of the combination of midazolam with ephedrine, dexamethasone, and dexmedetomidine in laparoscopic cholecystectomy surgical patients.

Materials and Methods:

This randomised, parallel-group, double-blind clinical trial was conducted by enrollment of 96 patients who were referred for laparoscopic cholecystectomy. Patients assigned into three equal-sized intervention arms having received anaesthesia induction with midazolam-ephedrine, midazolam-dexamethasone, and midazolam-dexmedetomidine using a block randomisation method. Frequency and severity of nausea and vomiting were observed from recovery to 24 h later, adverse events, and sedation on Ramsay sedation scale at recovery, 1, 2, and 4 h postoperatively. Data were recorded and analysed at a significance level lower than 0.05 in SPSS software.

Results:

The clinical parameters including mean blood pressure at all times and heart rate in 60–90 min were lower in the dexmedetomidine group when compared with other groups. The lowest severity of postsurgery nausea occurrence was observed in the midazolam-dexamethasone group and those receiving midazolam-dexmedetomidine from 4 to 24 h. In addition, vomiting scores were lower throughout recovery up to postoperative 4 h in the dexamethasone and dexmedetomidine groups (all P < 0.05). The highest sedation score was observed in the dexmedetomidine group during recovery up to 2 h (P = 0.001), reflecting a more clinically superior effect than dexamethasone (P = 0.01).

Conclusions:

A positive implication of dexmedetomidine was observed in attenuating postoperative nausea and vomiting and potentiating sedation. Nevertheless, it is providing a drop in the blood pressure and heart rate. Lending support to the potent adjuvant efficacy of dexamethasone following dexmedetomidine, consequently, a hypothesis can be put forward, stating that the dexmedetomidine and dexamethasone as adjuvants to midazolam are expected to bring the advantages of avoiding the adverse events and improving postoperative sedation.

Opioid-free anaesthesia for laparoscopic surgeries - A prospective non-randomised study in a tertiary care hospital

Background and Aims:

Opioids have nowadays become superfluous because of their adverse effects involving post-operative recovery of the patients. So, we aimed at comparing opioid-free anaesthesia with opioid-based technique for post-operative pain relief in laparoscopic surgeries. The primary objective was to assess the pain scores in the post-operative period using visual analogue scale (VAS) for 24 h, and the secondary objective was to compare intraoperative haemodynamic parameters, duration of postoperative analgesia and total analgesics consumed in the first 24 h.

Methods:

This study was conducted in 60 patients aged between 20 and 70 years, belonging to the American Society of Anesthesiologists physical class I and II posted for laparoscopic surgeries. Anaesthetic doses of lidocaine, magnesium and paracetamol in combination with fascial plane block for post-operative pain relief were given for 30 patients, and the other 30 patients received the conventional opioid-based anaesthesia. Mann–Whitney test was used for VAS scores, and Friedman test was used for repeated measures comparison.

Results:

VAS scores were higher in the conventional group as compared to the opioid-free group at 0, 2, 4, and 6 h during rest and at 0, 2, 4, 6, 24 h during movement and were statistically significant (P-value < 0.05). The duration of analgesia for the conventional group was 13.8 + 6.7 h, and for opioid-free anaesthesia was 6.7 + 2.2 hours. Intraoperative haemodynamic parameters did not show a statistically significant difference except for systolic blood pressure which was higher in the opioid-free group but was clinically insignificant. (P-value 0.013).

Conclusion:

Opioid-free anaesthesia along with erector spinae plane block provides better post-operative pain relief when compared to conventional opioid anaesthesia.

Decreasing Inpatient Opioid Use Following Orthognathic Surgery

PURPOSE

Strategies to decrease postoperative opioid use are important for mitigating the immediate and long-term risks associated with their use. We aimed to investigate the impact of perioperative various factors on inpatient opioid needs for patients undergoing orthognathic surgery.

METHODS

This was a retrospective cohort study of all patients who underwent orthognathic surgery performed by the senior author from 2012 to 2018. Patients were grouped into intravenous (IV) acetaminophen and no-IV acetaminophen cohorts. Opioid medications received by patients during hospital stay were converted to mean morphine equivalents (MME) for comparison. Additional factors that influenced opioid consumption, such as transexamic acid (TXA) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), were identified using univariate analysis. Factors found to have statistical significance were added to a multivariate linear regression model.

RESULTS

319 patients were included. Those who received IV acetaminophen had lower rates of total opioid use (57.3 versus 74.8 MME; P = 0.002) and postoperative opioid use (24.0 versus 37.7 MME; P < 0.001). Perioperative prothrombotic agents, such as TXA, were associated with lower total and postoperative MME (P = 0.005, P = 0.002). Multivariate regression analysis showed that increased PONV resulted in increased postoperative opioid use, whereas perioperative acetaminophen lowered total and postoperative quantities.

CONCLUSIONS

Perioperative IV acetaminophen is an effective method for decreasing inpatient opioid analgesia after orthognathic surgery. Intravenous TXA and PONV control may provide additional benefit to decreasing inpatient opioid consumption. More research as to the mechanisms and ideal clinical applications for both IV acetaminophen and TXA are warranted.

Opioid-free anesthesia versus opioid-inclusive anesthesia for breast cancer surgery: a retrospective study

BACKGROUND

Breast cancer surgery is usually managed using opioid-inclusive anesthesia (OIA), although opioids are associated with several adverse events, including nausea, vomiting, and constipation. Multimodal opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) has been introduced to reduce the incidence of these side effects. In this single-center retrospective study, we investigated whether ketamine, combined with magnesium and clonidine, could effectively control postoperative pain in patients undergoing quadrantectomy, while reducing postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV).

RESULTS

A total of 89 patients submitted to quadrantectomy were included and divided into an OFA group (38 patients) and an OIA group (51 patients) according to the received anesthetic technique. Analgesia in the OIA group was based on an intraoperative infusion of remifentanil, and analgesia in the OFA consisted of an intraoperative infusion of ketamine and magnesium sulfate. Postoperative pain in both groups was managed with nonsteroidal anti-inflammatory drugs (NSAIDs) and paracetamol. Postoperative pain, assessed with the numeric rating scale (NRS), requirements for additional analgesics, the incidence of PONV, and patient satisfaction evaluated using a QoR-40 questionnaire were compared between the two groups. Levels of pain at 30 min and 6, 12, and 24 h after surgery; number of paracetamol rescue doses; and the incidence of PONV were lower in the OFA group (p <0.05). Patient satisfaction was comparable in the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A combination of ketamine, magnesium, and clonidine could be more effective than opioid-based analgesia in reducing postoperative pain and lowering PONV occurrence after quadrantectomy for breast cancer.

Analgesic effect of magnesium sulfate during total intravenous anesthesia: randomized clinical study

INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE

Opioids have usually been used as intraoperative analgesic components, regardless of the many adverse effects they are associated with, such as nausea, vomiting, respiratory depression, and hyperalgesia. Several approaches have been investigated to reduce doses used, and magnesium sulfate has been shown to be a valuable analgesic adjunct. The main objective of the present trial was to evaluate the effectiveness of magnesium sulfate as the chief intraoperative analgesic, and the secondary objectives were to assess propofol consumption, postoperative analgesia, and intraoperative hemodynamic stability.

METHODS

In this prospective, double-blind trial, 50 patients scheduled to undergo post-bariatric abdominoplasty under general intravenous anesthesia were divided into two groups, to receive remifentanil or magnesium sulfate as intraoperative analgesic. Fentanyl 1 µg kg-1 was the rescue analgesic.

RESULTS

Among the patients in the group receiving Magnesium Sulfate (MSG), 64% did not need supplemental analgesia and none of the patients in the Remifentanil Group (RG) required fentanyl. MSG patients showed propofol consumption 36.6% higher (guided by the Bispectral Index - BIS). MSG patients consumed significantly less ephedrine (mean ± SD) than RG patients, respectively 1.52 ± 4.38 mg and 10 ± 10.39 mg, p < 0.001. Mean values of blood concentrations of magnesium were comparable to values previously described in the literature.

CONCLUSION

Magnesium sulfate is a safe and effective option for intraoperative analgesia, when avoiding or decreasing opioid use is required.

Effects of lidocaine, dexmedetomidine, and their combination infusion on postoperative nausea and vomiting following laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial

Background

A few studies have reported that administration of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine relieves the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). We explored whether combined infusion of lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine had lower occurrence of PONV undergoing laparoscopic hysterectomy with general anesthesia.

Methods

A total of 248 women undergoing elective laparoscopic hysterectomy were allocated into the following four groups: the control group (group C, n = 62) received an equal volume of saline, the lidocaine group (group L, n = 62) received intravenous lidocaine (bolus infusion of 1.5 mg/kg over 10 min, 1.5 mg/kg/h continuous infusion), the dexmedetomidine group (group D, n = 62) received dexmedetomidine administration (bolus infusion of 0.5 µg/kg over 10 min, 0.4 µg/kg/h continuous infusion), and the lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine group (group LD, n = 62) received combination of lidocaine (bolus infusion of 1.5 mg/kg over 10 min, 1.5 mg/kg/h continuous infusion) and dexmedetomidine administration (bolus infusion of 0.5 µg/kg over 10 min, 0.4 µg/kg/h continuous infusion). The primary outcome was the incidence of nausea, vomiting, and PONV during the first 48 h after surgery. The secondary outcomes included the incidence of total 24 h PONV after surgery, intraoperative remifentanil requirement, postoperative pain visual analogue scale (VAS) scores and fentanyl consumption, the incidence of bradycardia, agitation, shivering, and mouth dry during post-anesthesia care unit (PACU) stay period.

Results

The occurrence of nausea and PONV in group LD (5.0 and 8.3%) at 0–2 h after operation was lower than group C (21.7 and 28.3%) (P < 0.05). There was no statistically significant difference with respect to occurrence of nausea and PONV in groups L (13.3 and 20.0%) and D (8.3 and 13.3%) at 0–2 h after operation compared to group C (21.7 and 28.3%). The incidence of nausea, vomiting, and PONV at 2–24 and 24–48 h after surgery in all four groups was not statistically significant. The incidence of total 24 h PONV in group LD (33.3%) was significantly decreased compared to group C (60.0%) (P < 0.05). The cumulative consumption of fentanyl at 6 and 12 h after surgery was significantly reduced in group LD compared to other three groups (P < 0.05). The pain VAS scores were significantly decreased at 2, 6, and 12 h after operation in group LD compared to other three groups (P < 0.05). Remifentanil dose in the intraoperative period was significantly lower in groups LD and D compared with groups C and L (P < 0.05). The number of mouth dry, bradycardia, and over sedation during the PACU stay period was markedly increased in group LD (28.3, 30.0, and 35.0%, respectively) compared with groups C (1.7, 1.7, and 3.3%, respectively) and L (3.3, 5.0, and 6.7%, respectively) (P < 0.05).

Conclusions

Lidocaine combined with dexmedetomidine infusion markedly decreased the occurrence of nausea and PONV at 0–2 h as well as the total 24 h PONV. However, it significantly increased the incidence of mouth dry, bradycardia, and over sedation during the PACU stay period after laparoscopic hysterectomy with general anesthesia.

Trial registration

ClinicalTrials.gov (NCT03809923), registered on January 18, 2019.

Increasing the use of multimodal analgesia during adult surgery in a tertiary academic anaesthesia department

Objective

Multimodal analgesia pathways have been shown to reduce opioid use and side effects in surgical patients. A quality improvement initiative was implemented to increase the use of multimodal analgesia in adult patients presenting for general anaesthesia at an academic tertiary care centre. The aim of this study was to increase adoption of a perioperative multimodal analgesia protocol across a broad population of surgical patients. The use of multimodal analgesia was tracked as a process metric. Our primary outcome was opioid use normalised to oral morphine equivalents (OME) intraoperatively, in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), and 48 hours postoperatively. Pain scores and use of antiemetics were measured as balancing metrics.

Methods

We conducted a quality improvement study of a multimodal analgesia protocol implemented for adult (≥18 and≤70) non-transplant patients undergoing general anaesthesia (≥180 min). Components of multimodal analgesia were defined as (1) preoperative analgesic medication (acetaminophen, celecoxib, diclofenac, gabapentin), (2) regional anaesthesia (peripheral nerve block or catheter, epidural catheter or spinal) or (3) intraoperative analgesic medication (ketamine, ketorolac, lidocaine infusion, magnesium, acetaminophen, dexamethasone ≥8 mg, dexmedetomidine). We compared opioid use, pain scores and antiemetic use for patients 1 year before (baseline group—1 July 2018 to 30 June 2019) and 1 year after (implementation group—1 July 2019 to 30 June 2020) project implementation.

Results

Use of multimodal analgesia improved from 53.9% in the baseline group to 67.5% in the implementation group (p<0.001). There was no significant difference in intraoperative OME use before and after implementation (β₀=44.0, β₂=0.52, p=0.875). OME decreased after the project implementation in the PACU (β₀=34.4, β₂=−3.88, p<0.001) and 48 hours postoperatively (β₀=184.9, β₂=−22.59, p<0.001), while pain scores during those time points were similar.

Conclusion

A perioperative pragmatic multimodal analgesic intervention was associated with reduced OME use in the PACU and 48 hours postoperatively.

Impact of opioid-free anaesthesia on postoperative nausea, vomiting and pain after gynaecological laparoscopy - A randomised controlled trial

STUDY OBJECTIVE

Opioid-free anaesthesia may enhance postoperative recovery by reducing opioid-related side effects such as nausea, hyperalgesia or tolerance. The objective was to investigate the impact of multimodal opioid-free general anaesthesia on postoperative nausea, vomiting, pain and morphine consumption compared to the traditional opioid-based approach.

DESIGN

This study was conducted as a prospective parallel-group randomised controlled trial.

SETTING

Perioperative Care.

PATIENTS

152 adult women undergoing elective inpatient gynaecological laparoscopy.

INTERVENTIONS

Patients were randomly assigned for opioid-free anaesthesia (Group OF) with dexmedetomidine, esketamine and sevoflurane or to have opioid-based anaesthesia (Group C) with sufentanil and sevoflurane.

MEASUREMENTS

Primary outcome was the occurrence of nausea within 24 h after surgery. Patients were assessed for the incidence and severity of PONV, postoperative pain and morphine consumption and recovery characteristics.

MAIN RESULTS

Patients in both groups had comparable clinical and surgical data. 69.7% of patients in the control group and 68.4% of patients in the opioid-free group met the primary endpoint (OR 1.06, 95% Confidence Interval (CI) (0.53; 2.12) p = 0.86). The incidence of clinically important PONV defined by the PONV impact scale was 8.1% (Group C) vs 10.5% (OF); p = 0.57). Antiemetic requirements, pain scores and morphine consumption were equivalent in both groups. Postoperative sedation was significantly increased in group OF (p < 0.001), and the median length of stay at the post-anaesthesia care unit was 69.0 min (46.5-113.0) vs 50.0 (35.3-77.0) minutes in the control group (p < 0.001).

CONCLUSIONS

Opioid-free multimodal general anaesthesia is feasible but did not decrease the incidence of PONV, or reduce pain scores and morphine consumption compared to an opioid-containing anaesthetic regimen.

Feasibility and postoperative opioid sparing effect of an opioid-free anaesthesia in adult cardiac surgery: a retrospective study

Background

No previous study investigated the dexmedetomidine-based opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) protocol in cardiac surgery. The main objective of this study was to evaluate the feasibility and the postoperative opioid-sparing effect of dexmedetomidine-based OFA in adult cardiac surgery patients.

Methods

We conducted a single-centre and retrospective study including 80 patients above 18 years old who underwent on-pump cardiac surgery between November 2018 and February 2020. Patients were divided into two groups: OFA (lidocaine, ketamine, dexmedetomidine, MgSO4) or opioid-based anaesthesia (remifentanil and anti-hyperalgesic medications such as ketamine and/or MgSO4 and/or lidocaine at the discretion of the anesthesiologist). The primary endpoint was the total amount of opioid consumed in its equivalent of intravenous morphine during the first 48 postoperative hours. Secondary outcomes included perioperative hemodynamics, post-operative maximal pain at rest and during coughing and adverse outcomes. Data are expressed as median [interquartile range].

Results

Patients in the OFA-group had a higher EuroSCORE II, with more diabetes, more dyslipidemia and more non-elective surgery but fewer smoking history. In the OFA group, the median loading dose of dexmedetomidine was 0.6 [0.4–0.6] μg.kg^− 1 while the median maintenance dose was 0.11 μg.kg^− 1.h^− 1 [0.05–0.20]. In 10 (25%) patients, dexmedetomidine was discontinued for a drop of mean arterial pressure below 55 mmHg. The median total amount of opioid consumed in its equivalent of intravenous morphine during the first 48 postoperative hours was lower in the OFA group (15.0 mg [8.5–23.5] versus 30.0 mg [17.3–44.3], p < 0.001). While no differences were seen with rest pain (2.0 [0.0–3.0] versus 0.5 [0.0–5.0], p = 0.60), the maximal pain score during coughing was lower in OFA group (3.5 [2.0–5.0] versus 5.5 [3.0–7.0], p = 0.04). In OFA group the incidence of atrial fibrillation (18% versus 40%, p = 0.03) and non-invasive ventilation use (25% versus 48%, p = 0.04) were lower. The incidence of bradycardia and the intraoperative use of norepinephrine were similar between both groups.

Conclusion

Dexmedetomidine-based OFA in cardiac surgery patients is feasible and could be associated with a lower postoperative morphine consumption and better postoperative outcomes. Further randomized studies are required to confirm these promising results and determine the optimal associations, dosages, and infusion protocols during cardiac surgery.

Graphical abstract

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-021-01362-1.

Opioid-Free Anesthesia Benefit-Risk Balance: A Systematic Review and Meta-Analysis of Randomized Controlled Trials

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is used in surgery to avoid opioid-related side effects. However, uncertainty exists in the balance between OFA benefits and risks. We searched for randomized controlled trials (RCTs) comparing OFA to opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) in five international databases. The co-primary outcomes were postoperative acute pain and morphine consumption at 2, 24, and 48 h. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative chronic pain, hemodynamic tolerance, severe adverse effects, opioid-related adverse effects, and specific adverse effects related to substitution drugs. Overall, 33 RCTs including 2209 participants were assessed. At 2 h, the OFA groups had lower pain scores at rest MD (0.75 (−1.18; −0.32)), which did not definitively reach MCID. Less morphine was required in the OFA groups at 2 and 24 h, but with very small reductions: 1.61 mg (−2.69; −0.53) and −1.73 mg (p < 0.05), respectively, both not reaching MCID. The reduction in PONV in the OFA group in the PACU presented an RR of 0.46 (0.38, 0.56) and an RR of 0.34 (0.21; 0.56), respectively. Less sedation and shivering were observed in the OFA groups with an SMD of −0.81 (−1.05; −0.58) and an RR of 0.48 (0.33; 0.70), respectively. Quantitative analysis did not reveal differences between the hemodynamic outcomes, although severe side effects have been identified in the literature. No clinically significant benefits were observed with OFA in terms of pain and opioid use after surgery. A clear benefit of OFA use was observed with respect to a reduction in PONV. However, more data on the safe use of OFAs should be collected and caution should be taken in the development of OFA.

Perioperative Opioid Administration

Opioids form an important component of general anesthesia and perioperative analgesia. Discharge opioid prescriptions are identified as a contributor for persistent opioid use and diversion. In parallel, there is increased enthusiasm to advocate opioid-free strategies, which include a combination of known analgesics and adjuvants, many of which are in the form of continuous infusions. This article critically reviews perioperative opioid use, especially in view of opioid-sparing versus opioid-free strategies. The data indicate that opioid-free strategies, however noble in their cause, do not fully acknowledge the limitations and gaps within the existing evidence and clinical practice considerations. Moreover, they do not allow analgesic titration based on patient needs; are unclear about optimal components and their role in different surgical settings and perioperative phases; and do not serve to decrease the risk of persistent opioid use, thereby distracting us from optimizing pain and minimizing realistic long-term harms.

Balanced Opioid-free Anesthesia with Dexmedetomidine versus Balanced Anesthesia with Remifentanil for Major or Intermediate Noncardiac Surgery

BACKGROUND

It is speculated that opioid-free anesthesia may provide adequate pain control while reducing postoperative opioid consumption. However, there is currently no evidence to support the speculation. The authors hypothesized that opioid-free balanced anesthetic with dexmedetomidine reduces postoperative opioid-related adverse events compared with balanced anesthetic with remifentanil.

METHODS

Patients were randomized to receive a standard balanced anesthetic with either intraoperative remifentanil plus morphine (remifentanil group) or dexmedetomidine (opioid-free group). All patients received intraoperative propofol, desflurane, dexamethasone, lidocaine infusion, ketamine infusion, neuromuscular blockade, and postoperative lidocaine infusion, paracetamol, nefopam, and patient-controlled morphine. The primary outcome was a composite of postoperative opioid-related adverse events (hypoxemia, ileus, or cognitive dysfunction) within the first 48 h after extubation. The main secondary outcomes were episodes of postoperative pain, opioid consumption, and postoperative nausea and vomiting.

RESULTS

The study was stopped prematurely because of five cases of severe bradycardia in the dexmedetomidine group. The primary composite outcome occurred in 122 of 156 (78%) dexmedetomidine group patients compared with 105 of 156 (67%) in the remifentanil group (relative risk, 1.16; 95% CI, 1.01 to 1.33; P = 0.031). Hypoxemia occurred 110 of 152 (72%) of dexmedetomidine group and 94 of 155 (61%) of remifentanil group patients (relative risk, 1.19; 95% CI, 1.02 to 1.40; P = 0.030). There were no differences in ileus or cognitive dysfunction. Cumulative 0 to 48 h postoperative morphine consumption (11 mg [5 to 21] versus 6 mg [0 to 17]) and postoperative nausea and vomiting (58 of 157 [37%] versus 37 of 157 [24%]; relative risk, 0.64; 95% CI, 0.45 to 0.90) were both less in the dexmedetomidine group, whereas measures of analgesia were similar in both groups. Dexmedetomidine patients had more delayed extubation and prolonged postanesthesia care unit stay.

CONCLUSIONS

This trial refuted the hypothesis that balanced opioid-free anesthesia with dexmedetomidine, compared with remifentanil, would result in fewer postoperative opioid-related adverse events. Conversely, it did result in a greater incidence of serious adverse events, especially hypoxemia and bradycardia.

EDITOR’S PERSPECTIVE