An Evidence-Based Opioid-Free Anesthetic Technique to Manage Perioperative and Periprocedural Pain

Safety and effectiveness of opioid-free anaesthesia in thoracoscopic surgery: a preliminary retrospective cohort study

BACKGROUND

This study aimed to observe the effect of opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) on intraoperative haemodynamic,postoperative analgesia and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) in thoracoscopic surgery in order to provide more evidence for evaluating the safety and effectiveness of OFA technology.

METHODS

This was a single-centre retrospective observational study.Adult patients who underwent thoracoscopic surgery with the preoperative thoracic paravertebral block between January 2017 and June 2020 were included.A cohort of 101 thoracoscopic surgery patients who received the OFA technique were matched with 101 thoracoscopic surgery patients who received standard opioid-containing anaesthesia(SOA). Heart rate (HR) and mean arterial blood pressure (MAP) were measured before anaesthesia induction, immediately after endotracheal intubation, at the beginning of surgery, and 10, 20, and 30 min after surgery began.The total amount of intraoperative infusion, frequency of vasoactive drugs use, morphine ingested via the patient-controlled intravenous analgesia (PCIA) 24 h post-surgery,visual analogue scale (VAS) scores at rest and activity on the first day post-surgery, and frequency of nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery were analysed.

RESULTS

There was no significant difference in intraoperative HR between the two groups (F = 0.889, P = 0.347); however, there was significant difference in intraoperative MAP (F = 16.709, P < 0.001), which was lower in SOA patients than in OFA patients. The frequency of vasoactive drug use and amount of infusion was less in OFA patients (P = 0.001). The consumption of morphine used by the PCIA 24 h post-surgery was significantly lower in OFA patients (OFA, 1.8 [0, 4.8] mg vs. SOA, 3.6 [0.6, 23] mg, P < 0.001). There was no significant difference in VAS scores at rest (P = 0.745) or during activity (P = 0.792) on the first day post-surgery. There was also no statistically significant difference in nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery (P = 0.651).

CONCLUSIONS

This case-control study demonstrated that compared with SOA, OFA can effectively maintain the stability of intraoperative MAP, reduce the incidence of hypotension. Although OFA reduced morphine consumption via the PCIA pump 24 h post-surgery, postoperative pain scores and nausea and vomiting within 24 h post-surgery were similar between the groups.But this study was only a preliminary study and needed to confirm in a larger, more robust trial.

Effect of esketamine on inflammatory factors in opioid-free anesthesia based on quadratus lumborum block: A randomized trial

BACKGROUND

As strong analgesics, opioids provide the analgesic component of general anesthesia, but they have bidirectional effects on the immune system, promoting the production of pro-inflammatory factors. The idea of opioid-free anesthesia is to replace the analgesic effect of opioids in the treatment of acute pain with comparably effective drugs that do not affect the immune system and thereby decrease the production of inflammatory factors. Therefore, this study aims to observe the effect of opioid-free esketamine anesthesia based on quadratus lumborum block on inflammatory factors in patients undergoing lower abdominal or pelvic surgery.

METHODS

A total of 122 patients who underwent lower abdominal or pelvic surgery in our hospital from March 2021 to June 2022 were selected and divided into the esketamine (E) group (n = 62) and control (C) group (n = 60) according to the random number table method. According to the surgical field, the 2 groups underwent unilateral/bilateral quadratus lumborum block in the supine position under ultrasound guidance. In addition, both groups received a target controlled infusion of propofol 3 to 3.5 μg/mL and intravenous rocuronium 0.8 mg/kg. Group E was given opioid-free anesthesia, group C was given opioid-based anesthesia. A 3 to 5 laryngeal mask was inserted according to body weight, and rocuronium 0.5 mg/kg was added intermittently. The levels of interleukin-6 (IL-6), interleukin-8 (IL-8), C-reactive protein (CRP), procalcitonin, tumor necrosis factor-α (TNF-α), numeric rating scales, dosage of propofol, dexmedetomidine and rocuronium, as well as the numeric rating scales score and analgesic complications were monitored in the 2 groups.

RESULTS

There was no significant differences in general outcomes between the 2 groups (P > .05). The blood pressure in group E was higher than in group C at T1 (P < .05). The levels of IL-6, TNF-α, CRP and IL-8 in group E were significantly lower than in group C at T1, T2, T3, and T4 (P < .05). The levels of IL-6, TNF-α, procalcitonin, CRP and IL-8 in the 2 groups at T1, T2, T3, and T4 were significantly higher than at T0 (P < .05).

CONCLUSION

Opioid-free esketamine anesthesia based on quadratus lumborum block achieved perfect postoperative analgesia with little effect on inflammatory factors in patients undergoing lower abdominal or pelvic surgery.

Intravenous lidocaine infusion compared to thoracic epidural analgesia in cytoreductive surgery with or without heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy. A retrospective case-cohort study

BACKGROUND

Intravenous (IV) lidocaine is a proven analgesic therapy but has not been evaluated in extensive procedures such as cytoreductive surgery (CRS). Our aim was to assess the effectiveness and safety of IV lidocaine in this setting.

METHODS

This is a retrospective hybrid case-cohort study investigating analgesic effectiveness and complications of perioperative IV lidocaine at 1.5 mg/kg/h for 48 h compared to thoracic epidural anaesthesia (TEA) among patients undergoing CRS in a high-volume centre.

RESULTS

Sixty patients were included, 20 received IV lidocaine and 40 underwent TEA. Pain scores were low (median ≤2) and similar in both groups (p = 0.88). At 72 h, the lidocaine group had a lower median pain score (p = 0.03). Overall opioid consumption in the first 48 h was lower in the lidocaine compared to the TEA group (median 0 (IQR 0-9.5) mg vs. 45.4 (0-62.4) MME respectively, p = 0.001). Opioid consumption was also lower in the lidocaine compared to the TEA group during the whole 5-day period (median 1 (IQR 1-13.5) mg vs. 112 (36.6-137.85) MME respectively, p = 0.000). The incidence of PONV was significantly lower in the lidocaine group (27.5% vs 5%, p = 0.047) with no difference in other complications or length of in-hospital stay.

CONCLUSION

Intravenous lidocaine infusion may be a safe and effective analgesic approach in CRS and is associated with a significant reduction of opioid use and PONV compared to opioid-containing TEA.

Brief History of Opioids in Perioperative and Periprocedural Medicine to Inform the Future

Background: Opioids and derivatives of opium had been used as analgesics for thousands of years before the introduction of inhalational anesthetic agents. Once these early volatile agents were in widespread use, opioids were used as part of anesthetic care for premedication, as intraoperative adjuncts to general anesthesia, and for the management of postoperative pain. Evidence of growing dependence on opioids in the perioperative and periprocedural patient is supported by the ongoing research to develop synthetic opioids and to customize the pharmacokinetics and pharmacodynamics to achieve specific therapeutic goals. Methods: We explore the history of opioid use in perioperative care as a means of future management in light of new persistent opioid abuse. Results: As the opium chemical structure has been modified, newer nonopioid analgesics have been approved and brought into clinical practice. Opioid-sparing and opioid-free anesthetic techniques are not only a possibility, but a reality. Conclusion: Continuing research in neurobiology and addiction genetics will ultimately lead to a pharmacogenetic approach to patients at risk for new persistent opioid abuse.

Opioid sparing effect of intravenous dexmedetomidine in orthopaedic surgery: a retrospective analysis

BACKGROUND

Dexmedetomidine is a highly selective alpha-2 receptor agonist without any effect on the GABA receptor. It provides an excellent sedative and analgesic profile with few side effects. We report our experience with dexmedetomidine use during orthopaedic surgery under locoregional anaesthesia to ensure adequate sedation and optimal postoperative pain control.

METHODS

In this retrospective analysis, we included 128 patients who underwent orthopaedic surgery between January 2019 and December 2021. All patients received the same local anaesthetic dose of 20 ml of ropivacaine 0.375% + mepivacaine 0.5% for axillary and supraclavicular block and 35 ml of ropivacaine 0.375% + mepivacaine 0.5% for triple nerve block (femoral, obturator and sciatic nerve). The cohort was divided into two groups based on sedation drugs used during surgery (dexmedetomidine, or group D, vs midazolam, or group M). All patients received postoperative 24-h analgesia consisting of 60 mg of ketorolac, 200 mg of tramadol and 4 mg of ondansetron. The primary outcome measured how many patients in the two groups required an analgesic rescue dose of pethidine and the time to first pethidine administration. To reduce confounding, we included patients in two groups with non-statistically different demo-anamnestic parameters and who received the same dose of intraoperative local anaesthetic and postoperative analgesia.

RESULTS

The number of patients in group D who did not require a rescue dose of analgesia was significantly greater than in group M (49 vs 11, p < 0.001). Time-to-first postoperative opioid administration did not show a fundamental difference between the two groups under examination (523.75 ± 131.55 min vs 564 ± 117.84 min). Total opioid consumption was higher in the M group than in the D group (3529.8 ± 30.36 μg vs 1864.8 ± 31.59 μg, p 0.075), with a mean opioid consumption significantly higher in the M group than in the D group (26.26 ± 42.8 μg vs 69.21 ± 46.1 μg, p < 0.001): D group received 62.06% less opioid than M group.

CONCLUSIONS

The continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine during orthopaedic surgery performed under locoregional anaesthesia has been shown to increase the analgesic effect of local anaesthetics and reduce the consumption of major opioids in the postoperative period. Dexmedetomidine offers a unique ability to supply sedation and analgesia without respiratory depression, having a wide safety margin and an excellent sedative capacity. It does not increase the rate of postoperative complications.

A comparison of opioid-containing anesthesia versus opioid-free anesthesia using the Cortínez-Sepúlveda model on differential cytokine responses in obese patients undergoing gastric bypass surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Opioid anesthetic agents can modulate the impaired immune response in obese patients through mechanisms that involve the expression and release of cytokines. For this reason, anesthetic care for obese patients remains controversial. Therefore, the aim of the study was to compare the effect of opioid-containing anesthesia (OCA) vs opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) using the Cortínez-Sepúlveda model on IL-6, IL-1β and TNF-α serum levels before and after surgery in obese patients undergoing bypass surgery.

Methods

This randomized cross-sectional study conducted among 40 unrelated obese adults was performed in the Civil Hospital of Guadalajara “Dr. Juan I. Menchaca”. Before undergoing laparoscopic Roux-en-Y gastric bypass, patients were randomly assigned to two anesthesia groups: OCA (n = 20) or OFA (n = 20). Fentanyl was the opioid used in the OCA group. The Cortínez-Sepúlveda pharmacokinetic model was used to characterize the disposition of intravenous propofol for the target-controlled infusion technique in obese patients. Body mass was determined to the nearest 0.05 kg using a balance scale (Seca 703; Seca, Hamburg, Germany). Blood samples were taken before and immediately after surgery and cytokine concentrations were determined by ELISA. Pain was assessed using a numerical pain rating scale. Adverse effects were collected within the first 24 h after surgery.

Results

A total of 6 men and 34 women were included (37.9 ± 10.6 years). Pre-surgery IL-6 and TNF-α serum levels were not detected in study subjects. However, IL-1β levels significantly decreased after surgery (49.58 pg/mL (18.50–112.20)-before surgery vs 13 pg/mL (5.43–22)-after surgery, p = 0.019). IL-6 concentrations were significantly higher in subjects who received OCA (with fentanyl) compared to subjects with OFA (224.5 pg/mL (186.3–262.8) vs 99.5 pg/mL (60.8–138.2), respectively, p < 0.001; adjusted by age, gender, and BMI). In addition, the use of opioids confers an increased risk for higher IL-6 levels in obese patients (OR = 2.95, 95% CI: 1.2–7.2, p = 0.010). A linear regression model showed that the operative time (in hours) of bypass surgery and anesthetic technique were positively correlated with IL-6 levels.

Conclusion

Anesthesia with opioids correlated positively with IL-6 serum levels in obese patients undergoing bypass surgery. This finding could have clinical relevance when an appropriate anesthetic management plan is selected for bariatric surgical patients.

Trial registration

The study was retrospectively registered at ClinicalTrials.gov Identification Number: NCT04854252, date 22/04/2021.

Feasibility and effectiveness of opioid-free anesthesia in cytoreductive surgery with or without heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy

BACKGROUND

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) provides analgesia minimizing opioids. OFA has not been evaluated in cytoreductive surgery (CRS) with or without heated intraperitoneal chemotherapy. We aim to evaluate OFA feasibility and effectiveness in CRS.

METHODS

Retrospective cohort study of adult patients (84) undergoing CRS in a tertiary center from May 2020 until June 2021. Predefined protocols for either opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) or OFA were followed.

RESULTS

OFA protocol patients (41) had better mean pain scores (1 ± 0.8 vs. 2 ± 1; p = 0.00) despite the avoidance of intravenous and epidural fentanyl intraoperatively (220 ± 104 and 194 ± 73 µg, respectively, in OBA vs. 0; p = 0.00). Postoperative epidural levobupivacaine was also lower in the OFA group (575 ± 192 vs. 706 ± 346 mg; p = 0.034) despite the lack of epidural fentanyl without difference in duration (4.3 ± 1.2 vs. 4 ± 1.2 days; p = 0.22). Morphine consumption was very low (4.1 ± 10 vs. 1.7 ± 5 mg; p = 0.16). Intraoperative hypertensive events and postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) were higher for OBA (43) (30.2% vs. 7.3%; p = 0.01% and 69.8% vs. 34.1%; p = 0.001, respectively). Postoperative epidural fentanyl was independently associated with PONV (p = 0.004). There was no difference in total complications or length of stay.

CONCLUSION

OFA is feasible, safe, and offers optimal pain control while minimizing the use of opioids in CRS.

Opioid-free anesthesia in oncologic surgery: the rules of the game

BACKGROUND

Opioids are frequently used in the postoperative period due to their analgesic properties. While these drugs reduce nociceptive somatic, visceral, and neuropathic pain, they may also lead to undesirable effects such as respiratory depression, urinary retention, nausea and vomiting, constipation, itching, opioid-induced hyperalgesia, tolerance, addiction, and immune system disorders. Anesthesiologists are in the critical position of finding balance between using opioids when they are necessary and implementing opioid-sparing strategies to avoid the known harmful effects. This article aims to give an overview of opioid-free anesthesia.

MAIN BODY

This paper presents an overview of opioid-free anesthesia and opioid-sparing anesthetic techniques. Pharmacological and non-pharmacological strategies are discussed, highlighting the possible advantages and drawbacks of each approach.

CONCLUSIONS

Choosing the best anesthetic protocol for a patient undergoing cancer surgery is not an easy task and the available literature provides no definitive answers. In our opinion, opioid-sparing strategies should always be implemented in routine practice and opioid-free anesthesia should be considered whenever possible. Non-pharmacological strategies such as patient education, while generally underrepresented in scientific literature, may warrant consideration in clinical practice.

Opioids and premature biochemical recurrence of prostate cancer: a randomised prospective clinical trial

BACKGROUND

Prostate cancer is one of the most prevalent neoplasms in male patients, and surgery is the main treatment. Opioids can have immune modulating effects, but their relation to cancer recurrence is unclear. We evaluated whether opioids used during prostatectomy can affect biochemical recurrence-free survival.

METHODS

We randomised 146 patients with prostate cancer scheduled for prostatectomy into opioid-free anaesthesia or opioid-based anaesthesia groups. Baseline characteristics, perioperative data, and level of prostate-specific antigen every 6 months for 2 yr after surgery were recorded. Prostate-specific antigen >0.2 ng ml^-1 was considered biochemical recurrence. A survival analysis compared time with biochemical recurrence between the groups, and a Cox regression was modelled to evaluate which variables affect biochemical recurrence-free survival.

RESULTS

We observed 31 biochemical recurrence events: 17 in the opioid-free anaesthesia group and 14 in the opioid-based anaesthesia group. Biochemical recurrence-free survival was not statistically different between groups (P=0.54). Cox regression revealed that biochemical recurrence-free survival was shorter in cases of obesity (hazard ratio [HR] 1.63, confidence interval [CI] 0.16-3.10; p=0.03), high D'Amico risk (HR 1.58, CI 0.35-2.81; P=0.012), laparoscopic surgery (HR 1.6, CI 0.38-2.84; P=0.01), stage 3 tumour pathology (HR 1.60, CI 0.20-299) and N1 status (HR 1.34, CI 0.28-2.41), and positive surgical margins (HR 1.37, CI 0.50-2.24; P=0.002). The anaesthesia technique did not affect time to biochemical recurrence (HR -1.03, CI -2.65-0.49; P=0.18).

CONCLUSIONS

Intraoperative opioid use did not modify biochemical recurrence rates and biochemical recurrence-free survival in patients with intermediate and high D'Amico risk prostate cancer undergoing radical prostatectomy.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

NCT03212456.

INFLUENCE OF DIFFERENT TYPES OF ANESTHESIA FOR LAPAROSCOPIC HYSTERECTOMY ON THE DYNAMICS OF STRESS HORMONES

The aim of the study – to evaluate the influence of different variants of anesthesia, including low-opioid (LOA) and opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), on the dynamics of the stress response during laparoscopic hysterectomy. Materials and methods: 102 patients were randomly allocated into 3 groups: 37 women assigned to receive a standard opioid-based anesthesia (OBA group), 33 women – LOA group and 32 patients OFA group. Results: The patients of OFA group after induction and intubation of the trachea showed a significant (p<0.05) increase in cortisol level by 155.4 % and 160.9 % compared with the OBA group and LOA group. After completion of the hysterectomy, regardless of the variant of anesthesia, the level of cortisol exceeded the preoperative one (pOBA=0.116, pLOA=0.049, pOFA=0.043). Two hours after surgery with standard anesthesia (OBA group) there was a further increase in the concentration of cortisol in the blood, exceeding the initial values by 142.9 % (p=0.043). Patients in the LOA group and OFA group tended to decrease cortisolemia. The changes in adrenaline & glucose levels were somewhat similar. Conclusion: Use of OFA is accompanied by an aggravation of the stress response at the stage of hysterectomy, which is manifested by an increase in the level of adrenaline and cortisol. The most adequate perioperative protection is inherent in low-opioid anesthesia, which is accompanied by a lower release of stress hormones during hysterectomy and in the postoperative period. Opioid-based anesthesia provides adequate intraoperative protection, but is accompanied by insufficient postoperative analgesia.

Opioid-free anesthesia for adenotonsillectomy in children

INTRODUCTION

Opioids are administered during the intraoperative and postoperative periods in pediatric adenotonsillectomy and tonsillectomy. Non-opioid analgesics are often used as an analgesic during pediatric adenotonsillectomy and tonsillectomy. In this hypothesis generating study, we are evaluating safety and efficacy of stand-alone opioid analgesia for adenotonsillectomy and tonsillectomy.

METHODS

This is a single-center retrospective chart review of patients ages 2 to 13 who underwent elective adenotonsillectomy and tonsillectomy. We used a convenience sampling method to select patients who received intraoperative intravenous fentanyl, acetaminophen, ibuprofen, or any combination thereof. The following outcomes were analyzed in this study: (i) the length of Post Anesthesia Care Unit stay, (ii) administration of postoperative opioids; (iii) postoperative opioid equivalents required; (iv) administration of postoperative non-opioid analgesics; and (v) inpatient admission from ED within 30 days. We used univariate analysis to compare the data points.

RESULTS

We analyzed data from 323 patients who underwent adenotonsillectomy and tonsillectomy. The Post Anesthesia Care Unit length stay was similar for the intraoperative opioid-free and intraoperative opioid groups, 146.68 (±67.35) and 143.18 (±37.85) minutes, respectively (p = 0.586). Additionally, 102 patients (73.4%) in the intraoperative opioid-free group and 184 patients (83.2%) in the intraoperative opioid group did not receive any postoperative opioids (p = 0.033). The incidence of adverse events was similar between the intraoperative opioid-free and intraoperative opioid groups 3 (2.2%) and 5 (2.7%) respectively, p-value 0.749. A subgroup analysis comparing extracapsular 235 (72.8%) versus intracapsular 88 (27.2%) tonsillectomy yielded similar results.

CONCLUSION

In this study, our data indicates that American Society of Anesthesiologists I- II pediatric patients undergoing adenotonsillectomy and tonsillectomy can be efficiently and safely managed with an opioid-free intraoperative and postoperative analgesic regimen. Due to the explained limitations, our study results should be interpreted cautiously.

Which idea is better with regard to immune response? Opioid anesthesia or opioid free anesthesia

The stress of surgery is characterized by an inflammatory response with immune suppression resulting from many factors, including the type of surgery and the kind of anesthesia, linked with the drugs that are used and the underlying disease of the patient. The trauma of surgery triggers a cascade of reactions involving the immune response and nociception. As strong analgesics, opioids provide the analgesic component of general anesthesia with bi-directional effect on the immune system. Opioids influence almost all aspects of the immune response in regards to leukocytes, macrophages, mast cells, lymphocytes, and NK cells. The suppressive effect of opioids on the immune system is limiting their use, especially in patients with impaired immune response, so the possibility of using multimodal anesthesia without opioids, known as opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), is gaining more and more sympathizers. The idea of OFA is to eliminate opioid analgesia in the treatment of acute pain and to replace it with drugs from other groups that are assumed to have a comparable analgesic effect without affecting the immune system. Here, we present a review on the impact of anesthesia, with and without the use of opioids, on the immune response to surgical stress.

Is an opioid-free anaesthesia possible without using alpha-2 agonists?

Opioid-free anaesthesia (OFA) is an anaesthetic technique where non-opioid drugs are used in the intraoperative period. It can be successful without using alpha-2 agonists, which are main drugs used in this multimodal anaesthesia. We are presenting seven different cases where OFA was used in different abdominal surgeries (laparoscopic cholecystectomy, colon cancer operation, and laparoscopic inguinal hernia repair) alone or in a combination with epidural anaesthesia and peripheral nerve block. Prior induction to general anaesthesia all patients received dexamethasone and paracetamol. Induction of general anaesthesia consisted of giving midazolam, lignocaine, propofol, ketamine, and rocuronium. After tracheal intubation anaesthesia was maintained with sevoflurane and continuous infusion with lignocaine, magnesium sulphate, and ketamine (in some patients). At the end of the surgery, all patients received metamizole. The postoperative pain scores were reduced in most of the patients without giving opioids.

Opioid-Free Epidural-Free Anesthesia for Open Hepatectomy: A Case Report

Opioid-free perioperative approaches hold promise to reduce opioid use after surgery and their associated side effects. Here, we report the perioperative analgesic plan of a patient who requested opioid-free care for an open partial hepatectomy. Opioid-free anesthesia care for abdominal surgery is usually dependent on epidural analgesia. However, as in this case, placing an epidural is not always an option due to contraindications such as infection, coagulopathy, or patient refusal. Our multimodal management plan provided an alternative opioid-free, epidural-free perioperative strategy that may prove useful for other patients undergoing similar surgeries.

Evolving the management of acute perioperative pain towards opioid free protocols: a narrative review

Objective: Identification of pain as the fifth vital sign has resulted in over-prescription and overuse of opioids in the US, with addiction reaching epidemic proportions. In Europe, and more recently in the US, a shift has occurred with the global adoption of multimodal analgesia (MMA), which seeks to minimize perioperative opioid use. Improved functional outcomes and reduced healthcare utilization costs have been demonstrated with MMA, but wide scale use of opioids in pain management protocols continues. As a next step in the pain management evolution, opioid-free analgesia (OFA) MMA strategies have emerged as feasible in many surgical settings.Methods: Articles were limited to clinical studies and meta-analyses focusing on comparisons between opioid-intensive and opioid-free/opioid-sparing strategies published in English.Results: In this review, elimination or substantial reduction in opioid use with OFA strategies for perioperative acute pain are discussed, with an emphasis on improved pain control and patient satisfaction. Improved functional outcomes and patient recovery, as well as reduced healthcare utilization costs, are also discussed, along with challenges facing the implementation of such strategies.Conclusions: Effective MMA strategies have paved the way for OFA approaches to postoperative pain management, with goals to reduce opioid prescriptions, improve patient recovery, and reduce overall healthcare resource utilization and costs. However, institution-wide deployment and adoption of OFA is still in early stages and will require personalization and better management of patient expectations.

Opioid free onco-anesthesia: Is it time to convict opioids? A systematic review of literature

The epidemic of opioid crisis started getting recognised as a public health emergency in view of increasing opioid-related deaths occurring due to undetected respiratory depression. Prescribing opioids at discharge has become an independent risk factor for chronic opioid use, following which, prescription practices have undergone a radical change. A call to action has been voiced recently to end the opioid epidemic although with the pain practitioners still struggling to make opioids readily available. American Society of Anesthesiologist (ASA) has called for reducing patient exposure to opioids in the surgical setting. Opioid sparing strategies have emerged embracing loco-regional techniques and non-opioid based multimodal pain management whereas opioid free anesthesia is the combination of various opioid sparing strategies culminating in complete elimination of opioid usage. The movement away from opioid usage perioperatively is a massive but necessary shift in anesthesia which has rationalised perioperative opioid usage. Ideal way moving forward would be to adapt selective low opioid effective dosing which is both procedure and patient specific while reserving it as rescue analgesia, postoperatively. Many unknowns persist in the domain of immunologic effects of opioids, as complex interplay of factors gets associated during real time surgery towards outcome. At present it would be too premature to conclude upon opioid-induced immunosuppression from the existing evidence. Till evidence is established, there are no recommendations to change current clinical practice. At the same time, consideration for multimodal opioid sparing strategies should be initiated in each patient undergoing surgery.

A Retrospective Analysis of the Safety and Efficacy of Opioid-free Anesthesia versus Opioid Anesthesia for General Cesarean Section

Introduction While uncommon for cesarean delivery, general anesthesia may be patient requested or necessary due to maternal contraindication. Traditionally, opioids are used as a part of the general anesthetic. Because of their associated complications, it is standard to limit opioid use and fetal narcotic exposure during cesarean delivery. We conducted a retrospective study to evaluate the feasibility of multi-modal opioid-free general anesthesia for cesarean delivery. Methods Electronic medical records were obtained for patients receiving general anesthesia for cesarean delivery of live pregnancies through 2017 at our tertiary care facility. Post-operative pain was estimated using a 10-cm visual analogue scale and by calculating postoperative narcotic requirements in milligram morphine equivalents (MME) over three-time periods: during post-anesthesia recovery in the post-anesthesia care unit (PACU), the first 24 hrs after PACU discharge, and 24-48 hrs after PACU discharge. Apgar scores were also obtained to quantify neonatal effects of the general anesthetic. Results Eight of 17 patients (47.06%) received opioid-free anesthesia (OFA), and nine of 17 patients (52.94%) received anesthesia with opioids (OA). No significant difference was found between groups in terms of postoperative mean Visual Analog Scale (VAS) pain score over each time period. Similarly, no significant difference was found between groups in terms of postoperative narcotics requirement at all study points. Apgar scores were not significantly different between the two groups. Conclusion The OFA group displayed equivalent analgesia to the OA group in terms of self-reported VAS pain scores and postoperative MME. A larger prospective study is recommended to fully evaluate OFA for cesarean delivery.

[Non-opioid multimodal anesthesia in the surgical treatment of colorectal cancer]

This article deal with method of multimodal, opioid-free anesthesia for colorectal surgery in the perioperative period.

AIM

To improve the quality of treatment for patients with colorectal cancer using non-opioid anesthesia and analgesia in the perioperative period.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

The study included 47 patients who underwent laparoscopic colon surgery. This anesthesia method consists of epidural anesthesia with sevoflurane during surgery end epidural analgesia after surgery. We describe the method of non-opioid anesthesia technics during colorectal surgery. The pain syndrome was evaluated at various time intervals. Harvard standard for monitoring during anesthesia is presented.

RESULTS

Opioid-free anesthesia is safety method for colorectal surgery. It was also possible to reduce the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, pain, intestinal paresis, the duration of hospitalization, and rise quality of medical care for patient with colorectal cancer.