Opioid-Free Anesthesia for Open Radical Cystectomy Is Feasible and Accelerates Return of Bowel Function: A Matched Cohort Study

Quadratus lumborum block is feasible alternative to epidural block for postoperative analgesia after open radical cystectomy: surgical and oncological outcomes of a randomised clinical trial

OBJECTIVE

The current lack of standardised perioperative pain management protocols for open radical cystectomy (ORC) underscores the need for alternative approaches to the longstanding tradition of epidural block. The aim of this study was to assess the impact of bilateral single injection quadratum lumborum block (QLB) on patients' recovery and complication rates compared with epidural analgesia after ORC in a single-centre, randomised, parallel-group trial including adult patients with bladder cancer.

MATERIAL AND METHODS

Consecutive ORC patients were randomly allocated into QLB and the epidural group. The primary endpoint of this study was related to opioid consumption, and the results have been published earlier. This report focuses on secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

This study included a total of 41 patients, with 20 patients in the QLB group and 21 patients in the epidural group. Finally, 39 patients were included in the analysis.  There was a trend for more frequent need for postoperative norepinephrine and fluid support in the epidural group but without statistical significance. Postoperative complication rate was similar. Two patients in the epidural group compared to none in the QLB group were rehospitalised within 30 and 90 days. Mortality rate within 90 days was higher in the epidural group (4 vs. 0 patients, P = 0.064).

CONCLUSIONS

In this trial, there were no significant differences in surgical and oncological outcomes after ORC when QLB is compared with epidural block for postoperative analgesia.  Trial registration: ClinicalTrials.gov Identifier: NCT03328988.

Persistent Opioid Use Following Artificial Urinary Sphincter Placement: A Large Claims Database Analysis

OBJECTIVE

To assess risk of persistent opioid use and emergency department (ED) and office/outpatient visits following post-operative prescriptions of common opioids in patients following artificial urinary sphincter (AUS) implantation using a nationwide claims database.

METHODS

The TriNetX US Collaborative Network, which encompasses over 115 million patients from 66 healthcare organizations was used to identify males who underwent first-time AUS placement between 2010-2024. Patients with history of opioid dependence/abuse, opioid use within 6 months prior to AUS placement, or surgery within 9 months post-operation were excluded. Patients were distributed into 2 cohorts: those who received opioids post-operatively or those that did not. Cohorts were propensity score matched on demographic characteristics, pain, mental health, and substance-related diagnoses. Primary outcome was risk of persistent opioid use 3-9 months post-operatively. Secondary outcomes included risk of ED or office/outpatient visit 30- and 90-days post-operatively.

RESULTS

Each cohort contained 1036 patients following application of exclusion criteria and propensity score matching. Post-operative Oxycodone, Hydrocodone, or Codeine had a 3-fold increase in risk of persistent opioid use at 3-9 months (15.15% vs 4.92%, RR=3.08, 95% CI=[2.27-4.17]). Risk of ED or office visits was not significantly lower in patients receiving these opioids.

CONCLUSION

Opioid prescriptions following AUS placement increase risk of persistent opioid use without lowering the risk of ED or outpatient visits. These findings highlight the necessity for opioid-sparing approaches to post-operative pain control following AUS placement.

Surgeons' knowledge regarding perioperative pain management in patients with opioid use disorder: a survey among 260 members of the American College of Surgeons

BACKGROUND

Patients with opioid use disorder (OUD) are increasing, challenging surgeons to adjust post-operative pain management guidelines. A literature review identified limited information on how to best care for these patients. The purpose of this study was to determine surgical perioperative management of OUD, challenges, and support needed for optimal care.

METHODS

This study utilized an anonymous voluntary survey that was distributed to members of the American College of Surgeons through the association's electronic weekly newsletter. The survey was advertised weekly for three consecutive weeks. The survey included questions regarding surgeons' management of perioperative pain in patients with opioid use disorder and perceived barriers in treatment.

RESULTS

A total of 260 surgeons responded representing all specialties except ophthalmology. General surgery (66.5%) and plastic and reconstructive surgery (7.5%) represented the majority of responders. Ninety-five percent of surgeons reported treating a patient who used opioids in the past month and 86% encountered a patient with OUD. Nearly half (46%) reported being uncomfortable managing postoperative pain in patients with OUD. Most (67%) were not aware of any guidelines or standards pertaining to perioperative management of patients with OUD. While consultation was sought by 86% of surgeons, analyses identified lack of timely response and a lack of care coordination among specialists. Lack of knowledge and fear of harm (contributing further to addiction) were the most common themes.

CONCLUSION

Nearly half of surgeons report discomfort caring for patients with OUD with the vast majority involving a consulting service to assist with their care. Most surgeons believe that it would be helpful to have guidelines regarding the care of these patients. This provides an opportunity for increased education and training on the perioperative management of patients with OUD and further collaboration with addiction medicine, psychiatry and pain management colleagues.

Comment on Crettenand et al. Is Continuous Wound Infiltration a Better Option for Postoperative Pain Management after Open Nephrectomy Compared to Thoracic Epidural Analgesia? J. Clin. Med. 2023, 12, 2974

We have read with great interest the retrospective study recently published by Crettenand et al. in this journal [...].