Implementation of a Reduced Opioid Utilization Protocol for Radical Cystectomy

Implementation and Assessment of No Opioid Prescription Strategy at Discharge After Major Urologic Cancer Surgery

Importance

Postoperative opioid prescriptions are associated with delayed recovery, perioperative complications, opioid use disorder, and diversion of overprescribed opioids, which places the community at risk of opioid misuse or addiction.

Objective

To assess a protocol for eliminating postdischarge opioid prescriptions after major urologic cancer surgery.

Design, Setting, and Participants

This cohort study of the no opioid prescriptions at discharge after surgery (NOPIOIDS) protocol was conducted between May 2017 and June 2021 at a tertiary referral center. Patients undergoing open or minimally invasive radical cystectomy, radical or partial nephrectomy, and radical prostatectomy were sorted into the control group (usual opioids), the lead-in group (reduced opioids), and the NOPIOIDS group (no opioid prescriptions).

Interventions

The NOPIOIDS group received a preadmission educational handout, postdischarge instructions for using nonopioid analgesics, and no routine opioid prescriptions. The lead-in group received a postdischarge instruction sheet and reduced opioid prescriptions at prescribers' discretion. The control group received opioid prescriptions at prescribers' discretion.

Main Outcomes and Measures

Primary outcome measures included rate and dose of opioid prescriptions at discharge and for 30 days postdischarge. Additional outcome measures included patient-reported pain and satisfaction level, unplanned health care utilization, and postoperative complications.

Results

Of 647 opioid-naive patients (mean [SD] age, 63.6 [10.0] years; 478 [73.9%] male; 586 [90.6%] White), the rate of opioid prescriptions at discharge for the control, the lead-in, and the NOPIOIDS groups was 80.9% (157 of 194), 57.9% (55 of 95), and 2.2% (8 of 358) (Kruskal-Wallis test of medians: P < .001), and the overall median (IQR) tablets prescribed was 14 (10-20), 4 (0-5.3), and 0 (0-0) per patient in the control, lead-in, and NOPIOIDS groups, respectively (Kruskal-Wallis test of medians: P < .001). In the NOPIOIDS group, median and mean opioid dose was 0 tablets for all procedure types, with the exception of kidney procedures (mean [SD], 0.5 [1.7] tablets). Patient-reported pain surveys were received from 358 patients (72.6%) in the NOPIOIDS group, demonstrating low pain scores (mean [SD], 2.5 [0.86]) and high satisfaction scores (mean [SD], 86.6 [3.8]). There was no increase in postoperative complications in the group with no opioid prescriptions.

Conclusions and Relevance

This perioperative protocol, with emphasis on nonopioid alternatives and patient instructions, may be safe and effective in nearly eliminating the need for opioid prescriptions after major abdominopelvic cancer surgery without adversely affecting pain control, complications, or recovery.

Discharge Opioids are Unnecessary Following Radical Cystectomy

OBJECTIVE

To show that zero-opioid discharges after both open and robotic cystectomy are feasible and to examine the impact of zero-opioid discharges on patient interaction with the physician's office.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

107 patients who underwent either open or robotic radical cystectomy from March 1, 2020 to December 30, 2020 were identified. Patient demographics, perioperative data, and 30 day pain related outcomes including phone calls, office visits, requests for pain medication, emergency department visits, and readmissions were abstracted from the chart. We then examined variables associated with a zero-opioid discharge.

RESULTS

Thirty-two patients were discharged with an opioid prescription (Median Oral Morphine Equivalents Prescribed = 90) and seventy-five were discharged without an opioid prescription. On regression analysis, age (OR 1.07, 95% CI [1.02-1.12]) and pathology (OR 0.36, 95% CI[0.14-0.9]) remained significantly associated with postoperative opioid prescriptions. There were no differences in the percent of patients presenting to the emergency department, being readmitted, calling the office, calling the office regarding pain, or requesting opioid prescriptions within thirty days of discharge, or the number of post-operative office visits (p> 0.05 for all).

CONCLUSIONS

Patients can safely be discharged home without opioids following cystectomy, regardless of robotic or open approach. Age and pathology are predictors of the need for an opioid prescription on discharge. These patients did not have increased follow-up visits, phone calls, or requests for pain medication.

Association between use of ERAS protocols and complications after radical cystectomy

PURPOSE

Implementation of enhanced recovery protocols in cystectomy patients has significantly changed the perioperative course of this major operation. This paper summarizes evidence based interventions to enhance the postoperative course of radical cystectomy.

METHODS

A comprehensive search of PubMed and Embase databases was performed and also the results of our institutional enhanced recovery protocol were discussed.

RESULTS

One of the major advantages of such changes is the reduced rate of postoperative gastrointestinal (GI) complications especially postoperative ileus which could be contributed to several components of these protocols. However, Alvimopan is the only component which its use is supported by level I evidence. Although there are some evidence suggesting the decreased rate of urinary tract infection with the use of prophylactic antibiotics and wound complications by the use of negative wound pressure devices, their clear benefit is yet to be shown. Although robotic approach has proven advantages in intraoperative blood loss and postoperative blood transfusion rate, surgical team's experience and dedicated infrastructure seem to be more influential in optimized outcome than just the surgical approach.

CONCLUSION

current evidence suggests that such protocols have not only reached the goal of maintaining complication rate while decreasing length of hospital stay, but it might have caused a decrease in the rate of low-grade complications, especially GI complications.

Opioid Prescribing and Use Among Cancer Survivors: A Mapping Review of Observational and Intervention Studies

CONTEXT

Recent years show a sharp increase in research on opioid use among cancer survivors, but evidence syntheses are lacking, leaving knowledge gaps. Corresponding research needs are unclear.

OBJECTIVES

To provide an evidence synthesis.

METHODS

We searched PubMed and Embase, identifying articles related to cancer, and opioid prescribing/use published through September 2020. We screened resulting titles/abstracts. Relevant studies underwent full-text review. Inclusion criteria were quantitative examination of and primary focus on opioid prescribing or use, and explicit inclusion of cancer survivors. Exclusion criteria included end-of-life opioid use and opioid use as a secondary or downstream outcome (for intervention studies). We extracted information on the opioid-related outcome(s) examined (including definitions and terminology used), study design, and methods.

RESULTS

Research returned 16,591 articles; 296 were included. Only 22 of 296 studies evaluated an intervention. There were 105 studies evaluating outcomes indicative of potentially high-risk, nonrecommended, or avoidable opioid use, e.g., continuous use-described as chronic use, prolonged use, and persistent use (n = 17); use after completion of curative-intent treatment-described as chronic opioid use, long-term opioid use, persistent opioid use, prolonged opioid use, continued opioid use, late opioid use, post-treatment opioid use (n = 27); use of opioids concurrent with other potentially high-risk medications (n = 13), and opioid misuse (n = 14).

CONCLUSIONS

We found lack of consistency in the measurement of and terms used to describe similar opioid use outcomes, and a lack of interventional research targeting well-documented patterns of potentially nonrecommended, potentially avoidable, or potentially high-risk opioid prescribing or use.

Updates on enhanced recovery after surgery for radical cystectomy

Enhanced Recovery after Surgery (ERAS) is a multimodal pathway that provides evidence-based guidance for improving perioperative care and outcomes in patients undergoing surgery. In 2013, the ERAS society released its original guidelines for radical cystectomy (RC) for bladder cancer (BC), adopting much of its supporting data from colorectal literature. In the last decade, growing interest in ERAS has increased RC-specific ERAS research, including prospective randomized controlled trials (RCTs). Collective data suggest ERAS contributes to improved complication rates, decreased hospital length-of-stay, and/or time to bowel recovery. Various institutions have adopted modified versions of the ERAS pathway, yet there remains a lack of consensus on the efficacy of specific ERAS items and standardization of the protocol. In this review, we summarize updated evidence and practice patterns of ERAS pathways for RC since the introduction of the original 2013 guidelines. Novel target interventions, including use of immunonutrition, prehabilitation, alvimopan, and methods of local analgesia are reviewed. Finally, we discuss barriers to implementing and future steps in advancing the ERAS movement.

Narcotic Avoidance After Robotic Radical Cystectomy Allows Routine of Only Two-Day Hospital Stay

OBJECTIVE

To evaluate the outcomes of a narcotic-sparing clinical pathway after robotic-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with ileal conduit targeting discharge on postoperative day #2 and report postoperative narcotic consumption, pain scores, and the resulting length of stay (LOS).

METHODS

We reviewed a single-surgeon series of consecutive RARCs between August 2015-September 2020. Acetaminophen and ketorolac were given with thorough patient education reserving oral narcotics for breakthrough pain. Intravenous narcotics were intentionally excluded from postoperative orders. Alvimopan was given once it became available. Subcutaneous ropivacaine pain pumps were removed before discharge. Discharge criteria included diet, oral analgesia, ambulation, and bowel function. Narcotic use and pain scores were evaluated to deternine the success of the applied narcotic-avoidance strategy.

RESULTS

None of the 54 patients required intravenous narcotics postoperatively, and 19 patients (35%) never required even oral narcotics. Mean pain scores were higher in patients who required oral narcotics (4.3/11 vs 3.0/11, p=0.001, respectively). Among 35 patients who received narcotics, mean tablets taken were 4.3/day (range, 1-13) with 68% using 8 or less tablets during their entire LOS. Mean LOS was 2.1d (range 1-4). Five patients (9%) were discharged on POD#1, 37/54 (68.5%) on POD #2, 10/54 (18.5%) on POD#3 and 2/54 (4%) on POD #4. Eight patients (15%) were readmitted within 90 days.

CONCLUSION

Minimizing narcotics after RARC with conduit allowed for a 2-day LOS in the majority of patients and the shortest ever reported mean LOS after cystectomy, essentially halving hospitalization time. Patient education is critical to minimizing narcotic usage.

Implementation of a nonopioid protocol following robot-assisted radical cystectomy with intracorporeal urinary diversion

PURPOSE

The implementation of robot-assisted radical cystectomy (RARC) with intracorporeal urinary diversion (ICUD) for management of patients with muscle-invasive or high-risk noninvasive bladder cancer has increased in utilization over the last decade. Here, we seek to describe institutional opioid prescription and utilization patterns following implementation of a nonopioid (NOP) perioperative pain management protocol in patients who received RARC with ICUD.

MATERIALS AND METHODS

The records of all patients who underwent RARC that utilized a NOP perioperative pain management protocol at a single academic institution from 2016 to 2020 were retrospectively reviewed. Descriptive statistical analyses were performed. For comparison, we included 74 consecutive patients who received the same NOP protocol with extracorporeal urinary diversion (ECUD).

RESULTS

A total of 116 patients who received ICUD were included in our analysis. The median operation time for the ICUD group was 305 minutes (interquartile range [IQR]: 262-352). 12.1% (n = 14) of patients who underwent ICUD required narcotics during inpatient hospitalization. For these patients, the median morphine milligram equivalent requirement was 52.0 (IQR: 7.62-157). Additionally, only 12.1% (n = 14) of patients were prescribed opioids postoperatively at discharge. We identified that within 6 months of surgery only 5 (4.3%) patients required a second narcotic prescription. Furthermore, of patients who did not use mu-opioid blockers, a minority experienced postoperative ileus (15.7%, n = 16). 30- and 90-day all Clavien complication rates for patients were 44.8% (n = 52) and 49.1% (n = 57), respectively. Nineteen (16.4%) patients were readmitted within 30 days of discharge, of which none were pain related. When compared to ECUD, patients who received ICUD experienced similar complication and readmission rates.

CONCLUSIONS

The implementation of a NOP protocol for patients undergoing RARC with ICUD allows for both decreased postoperative narcotic use and reduced need for narcotic prescriptions at discharge with acceptable complication and readmission rates.

Bupivacaine local anesthetic to decrease opioid requirements after radical cystectomy: Does formulation matter?

INTRODUCTION

Reduction of opioids is an important goal in the care of patients undergoing radical cystectomy (RC). Liposomal bupivacaine (LB) has been shown to be a safe and effective pain reliever in the immediate postoperative period and has been reported to reduce postoperative opioid requirements. Since the liposomal formulation is predicated on slow systemic absorption, the amount of bupivacaine administered is notably higher than that typically used with standard bupivacaine (SB) formulations. In addition, LB is costly, not universally available, and studies comparing this formulation to SB are lacking. We sought to determine if there is a difference in postoperative opioid requirements in patients who receive LB vs. high dose SB at the time of RC.

METHODS

In May 2019 we transitioned to administration of high-volume SB injected intraoperatively at the time of RC. This prospective cohort was compared to a historical cohort of patients who received injection of LB at the time of surgery. Primary endpoints included postsurgical opioid use measured in morphine equivalent dose (MED) and patient-reported Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) pain scores and length of stay. All patients were managed using principles of enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS).

RESULTS

From May 2019 through August 2019, 28 patients underwent RC and met eligibility criteria to receive SB at the time of surgery. They were compared to a historical cohort of 34 patients who received LB between November 2017 and July 2018. There was no difference in MED exposure either in the postanesthesia care unit (SB 9.0 ± 8.9 MED vs. LB 6.5 ± 9.4 MED, P= 0.29) or during the remainder of the hospital stay (SB 36.8 ± 56.9 MED vs. LB 42.1 ± 102.5 MED, P= 0.81), no difference in NRS pain scores on postoperative day 1 (SB 2.6 ± 1.6 vs. LB 2.1 ± 1.7, P= 0.23), day 2 (SB 2.4 ± 1.8 vs. LB 1.9 ± 1.6, P= 0.19), or day 3 (SB 1.9 ± 1.8 vs. LB 1.7 ± 1.7, P= 0.69) and no difference in length of stay (SB 5.0 ± 1.7 days, LB 4.9 ± 3.3 days, P= 0.93). Subgroup analysis of open RC and robotic-assisted RC showed no significant difference in MED or pain scores between LB and SB patients.

CONCLUSIONS

Among patients undergoing RC under ERAS protocol there was no significant difference in postoperative opioid consumption, NRS pain scores, or length of stay among patients receiving SB compared to LB.

Tips and tricks in achieving zero peri-operative opioid used in onco-urologic surgery

PURPOSE

To review non-opioid based protocols in urologic oncologic surgery and describe our institutional methods of eliminating peri-operative opioids.

METHODS

A thorough literature review was performed using PUBMED to identify articles pertaining to reducing or eliminating narcotic use in genitourinary cancer surgery. Studies were analyzed pertaining to protocols utilized in genitourinary cancer surgery, major abdominal and/or pelvic non-urologic surgery.

RESULTS

Reducing or eliminating peri-operative narcotics should begin with an institutionalized protocol made in conjunction with the anesthesia department. Pre-operative regimens should consist of appropriate counseling, gabapentin, and acetaminophen with or without a non-steroidal anti-inflammatory medications. Prior to incision, a regional block or local anesthetic should be delivered. Anesthesiologists may develop opioid-free protocols for achieving and maintaining general anesthesia. Post-operatively, patients should be on a scheduled regimen of ketorolac, gabapentin, and acetaminophen.

CONCLUSION

Eliminating peri-operative narcotic use is feasible for major genitourinary oncologic surgery. Patients not only have improved peri-operative outcomes but also are at significantly reduced risk of developing long-term opioid use. Through the implementation of a non-opioid protocol, urologists are able to best serve their patients while positively contributing to reducing the opioid epidemic.