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

Comparison between multimodal and intraoperative opioid free anesthesia for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy: a prospective, randomized study

Anesthesia for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy and perioperative management remains a challenge. Several clinical studies indicate that opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) may be beneficial, but there is no consensus on the most optimal anesthesia technique in clinical practice. The aim of our study was to assess the potential benefits and risks of intraoperative OFA compared to multimodal analgesia (MMA) with remifentanil infusion. In a prospective, randomized study, we analyzed 59 patients' data. Primary outcome measures were oxycodone consumption and reported pain scores (numerical rating scale, NRS) at 1, 6, 12, and 24th hours after surgery. Postoperative sedation on the Ramsay scale, nausea and vomiting on the PONV impact scale, desaturation episodes, pruritus, hemodynamic parameters, and hospital stay duration were also documented and compared. There were no significant differences in NRS scores or total 24-h oxycodone requirements. In the first postoperative hour, OFA group patients needed an average of 4.6 mg of oxycodone while the MMA group 7.72 mg (p = 0.008, p < 0.05 statistically significant). The PONV impact scale was significantly lower in the OFA group only in the first hour after the operation (p = 0.006). Patients in the OFA group required higher doses of ephedrine 23.67 versus 15.69 mg (p = 0.039) and more intravenous fluids 1160 versus 925.86 ml (p = 0.007). The mode of anesthesia did not affect the pain scores or the total dose of oxycodone in the first 24 postoperative hours. Only in the first postoperative hour were an opioid-sparing effect and reduction of PONV incidence seen in the OFA group when compared with remifentanil-based anesthesia. However, patients in the OFA group showed significantly greater hemodynamic lability necessitating higher vasopressor doses and more fluid volume.

Opioid-Free Versus Opioid-Based Anesthesia on Postoperative Pain After Thoracoscopic Surgery: The Use of Intravenous and Epidural Esketamine

BACKGROUND

The effectiveness and safety of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) regimens in distinct types of surgeries remain controversial. In this study, we investigated whether OFA could reduce the occurrence of chronic postoperative pain in patients receiving video-assisted thoracoscopic surgery (VATS).

METHODS

We conducted a 2-center, randomized, controlled trial from September 2021 to January 2022. A total of 162 lung tumor patients scheduled to undergo VATS were randomly divided into an opioid-based anesthesia (OA) group and an OFA group. The OA group received general anesthesia combined with thoracic epidural block using morphine, while the OFA group received general anesthesia combined with thoracic epidural block using esketamine. Patient-controlled epidural analgesia (PCEA) was used after surgery (ropivacaine and morphine for the OA group versus ropivacaine and esketamine for the OFA group). The primary end point was chronic pain rates at 3 months after VATS, which were analyzed using a logistic regression model. The secondary end points were chronic pain rates at 6 months, acute pain rates at 24 hours and 48 hours postoperatively, postoperative side effects, and perioperative variables.

RESULTS

The final analysis included 159 patients. Acute postoperative pain at 24 hours occurred in 0 of the 79 (0%) patients in the OA group and 10 of the 80 (17.5%) patients in the OFA group (odds ratio, 52.14; 95% confidence interval [CI], 6.47-420.10; P < .001). Acute postoperative pain at 48 hours occurred in 3 of the 79 (3.8%) patients in the OA group and 2 of the 80 (2.5%) patients in the OFA group (odds ratio, 2.07; 95% CI, 0.99-4.32; P = .053). In this study, none of the patients had moderate or severe pain in either group at 3 and 6 months postsurgically. Mild chronic postoperative pain at 3 months occurred in 27 of the 79 (34.2%) patients in the OA group and 14 of the 80 (17.5%) patients in the OFA group (odds ratio, 3.52; 95% CI, 1.49-8.31; P = .004). At 6 months, mild chronic pain still occurred in 23 of the 79 (29.1%) patients in the OA group and 9 of the 80 (11.3%) patients in the OFA group (odds ratio, 5.55; 95% CI, 2.01-15.33; P = .001). In addition, the OFA group included fewer patients with side effects, including nausea, vomiting, and pruritus, within 48 hours after surgery.

CONCLUSIONS

Replacement of opioids by esketamine, intraoperatively as intravenous injection and epidural infusion and postoperatively as epidural infusion, reduces the incidence of mild chronic postoperative pain and side effects in patients after VATS.

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).

Recent trends in anesthetic agents and techniques for ophthalmic anesthesia

Effective and safe ophthalmic anesthesia is essential for the delivery of ophthalmic perioperative care both for children and adults. Recent years have seen a major change in form of smaller incisions for most ophthalmic surgical techniques, thus making them less invasive. Additionally, most ophthalmic surgeries are now day-care surgeries at ambulatory surgical centers. The parallel advancements in the field of anesthesiology have boosted the standard of perioperative care. The purpose of this narrative review was to evaluate current trends in anesthetic agents and techniques for ophthalmic anesthesia primarily centered around deep sedation and general anesthesia as per the concerns of practicing anesthesiologists while briefly acquainting with local anesthesia advances.

General Anesthetic Care of Obese Patients Undergoing Surgery: A Review of Current Anesthetic Considerations and Recent Advances

Obesity has long been linked to adverse health effects over time. As the prevalence of obesity continues to rise, it is important to anticipate and minimize the complications that obesity brings in the anesthesia setting during surgery. Anesthetic departments must recognize the innumerable risks when managing patients with obesity undergoing surgery, including anatomical and physiological changes as well as comorbidities such as diabetes, cardiovascular diseases, and malignancies. Therefore, the purpose of this review is to analyze the current literature and evaluate the current and recent advances in anesthetic care of obese patients undergoing surgery, to better understand the specific challenges this patient population faces. A greater understanding of the differences between anesthetic care for obese patients can help to improve patient care and the specificity of treatment. The examination of the literature will focus on differing patient outcomes and safety precautions in obese patients as compared to the general population. Specifically highlighting the differences in pre-operative, intra-operative, and post-operative care, with the aim to identify issues and present possible solutions.

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.).

A Novel Opioid-Sparing Analgesia Following Thoracoscopic Surgery: A Non-Inferiority Trial

Purpose

This randomized, non-inferiority study aimed to observe the feasibility of opioid-sparing analgesia based on modified intercostal nerve block (MINB) following thoracoscopic surgery.

Patients and Methods

60 patients scheduled for single-port thoracoscopic lobectomy were randomized to the intervention group or control group. After MINB was performed in both groups at the end of the surgery, the intervention group received patient controlled-intravenous analgesia (PCIA) of dexmedetomidine 0.05 µg/kg/h for 72 h after surgery, and the control group received conventional PCIA of sufentanil 3 µg/kg for 72 h. The primary outcome was a visual analog scale (VAS) on coughing 24 h after surgery. Secondary outcomes included the time to first analgesic request, pressing times of PCIA, time to first flatus, and hospital stay.

Results

There was no difference in the cough-VAS at 24 h (median [interquartile range]) between the intervention group [3 (2-4)] and control group [3 (2-4), P = 0.36]. The median difference (95% CI) in the cough-VAS at 24 h was [0 (0 to 1), P = 0.36]. There was no significant difference in the time to first analgesic request, pressing times of PCIA, and hospital stay between groups (P > 0.05). A significant decrease in time to first flatus was observed in the intervention group (P < 0.01).

Conclusion

Opioid-sparing analgesia provided safe and analogous postoperative analgesia with a shortened time to first flatus, compared with sufentanil-based analgesia in thoracoscopic surgery. This might be a novel method recommended for thoracoscopic surgery.

Opioid-free anesthesia with lidocaine for improved postoperative recovery in hysteroscopy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Anesthesia with opioids negatively affects patients' quality of recovery. Opioid-free anesthesia attempts to avoid these effects. This study aimed to evaluate the effect of opioid-free anesthesia on the quality of recovery, using lidocaine on patients undergoing hysteroscopy.

METHODS

A parallel-group, randomized, double-blind, controlled trial was conducted in Yichang Central Peoples' Hospital, Hubei Province, China, from January to April, 2022. We included 90 female patients (age: 18-65 years, American Society of Anesthesiologists Physical Status Class I-II) scheduled for elective hysteroscopy, 45 of whom received lidocaine (Group L), and 45 received sufentanil (Group S). Patients were randomly allocated to receive either lidocaine or sufentanil perioperatively. The primary outcome was the quality of postoperative recovery, which was assessed using the QoR-40 questionnaire (a patient-reported outcome questionnaire measuring the quality of recovery after surgery).

RESULTS

The two groups were similar in age, American Society of Anesthesiology physical status, height, weight, body mass index, and surgical duration. The QoR scores were significantly higher in Group L than Group S. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting, as well as the time to extubation were significantly lower in Group L than Group S.

CONCLUSION

Opioid-free anesthesia with lidocaine achieves a better quality of recovery, faster recovery, and a shorter time to extubation than general anesthesia with sufentanil.

TRIAL REGISTRATION

The trial was registered on January 15, 2022 in the Chinese Clinical Trial Registry ( http://www.chictr.org.cn/showprojen.aspx?proj=149386 ), registration number ChiCTR2200055623.(15/01/2022).

Effect of Different Administration Routes of Dexmedetomidine on Postoperative Delirium in Elderly Patients Undergoing Elective Spinal Surgery: A Prospective Randomized Double-Blinded Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

Intravenous dexmedetomidine has been reported to decrease the occurrence of postoperative delirium (POD) in elderly patients. Nevertheless, some previous studies have indicated that intratracheal dexmedetomidine and intranasal dexmedetomidine are also effective and convenient. The current study aimed to compare the effect of different administration routes of dexmedetomidine on POD in elderly patients.

METHODS

We randomly allocated 150 patients (aged 60 years or more) scheduled for spinal surgery to receive intravenous dexmedetomidine (0.6 μg/kg), intranasal dexmedetomidine (1 μg/kg) before anesthesia induction, or intratracheal dexmedetomidine (0.6 µg/kg) after anesthesia induction. The primary outcome was the frequency of delirium during the first 3 postoperative days. The secondary outcomes were the incidence of postoperative sore throat (POST) and sleep quality. Adverse events were recorded, and routine treatment was performed.

RESULTS

Compared with the intranasal group, the intravenous group had a significantly lower occurrence of POD within 3 days (3 of 49 [6.1%] vs 14 of 50 [28.0%]; odds ratio [OR], 0.17; 95% confidence intervals [CIs], 0.05-0.63; P < .017). Meanwhile, patients in the intratracheal group had a lower incidence of POD than those in the intranasal group (5 of 49 [10.2%] vs 14 of 50 [28.0%]; OR, 0.29; 95% CI, 0.10-0.89; P < .017). Whereas, there was no difference between the intratracheal and intravenous groups (5 of 49 [10.2%] vs 3 of 49 [6.1%]; OR, 1.74; 95% CI, 0.40-7.73; P > .017). The rate of POST was lower in the intratracheal group than that in the other 2 groups at 2 hours after surgery (7 of 49 [14.3%] vs 12 of 49 [24.5%] vs 18 of 50 [36.0%], P < .017, respectively). Intravenous dexmedetomidine had the lowest Pittsburgh Sleep Quality Index score on the second morning after surgery (median [interquartile range {IQR}]: 4 [3-5] vs 6 [4-7] vs 6 [4-7], P < .017, respectively). Compared with the intranasal group, the intravenous group had a higher rate of bradycardia and a lower incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting ( P < .017). The intranasal group was associated with the highest incidence of hypertension ( P < .017).

CONCLUSIONS

For patients aged ≥60 years undergoing spinal surgery, compared with the intranasal route of dexmedetomidine, intravenous and intratracheal dexmedetomidine reduced the incidence of early POD. Meanwhile, intravenous dexmedetomidine was associated with better sleep quality after surgery, and intratracheal dexmedetomidine resulted in a lower incidence of POST. Adverse events were mild in all 3 administration routes of dexmedetomidine.

Esketamine opioid-free intravenous anesthesia versus opioid intravenous anesthesia in spontaneous ventilation video-assisted thoracic surgery: a randomized controlled trial

Background

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) provides adequate analgesia and can reduce postoperative opioid consumption, but its efficacy in spontaneous ventilation video-assisted thoracic surgery (SV-VATS) has not been demonstrated. We aimed to investigate the hypothesis that OFA could provide the same perioperative pain control as opioid anesthesia (OA), maintain safe and stable respiration and hemodynamics during surgery, and improve postoperative recovery.

Methods

Sixty eligible patients (OFA group: n=30; OA group: n=30) treated between September 15, 2022, and December 15, 2022, at The First Hospital of Guangzhou Medical University were included. They were randomized to receive standard balanced OFA with esketamine or OA with remifentanil combined with sufentanil. The primary outcome was the pain numeric rating score (NRS) at postoperative 24 h, and the secondary outcomes were intraoperative respiratory and hemodynamic data, opioid consumption, vasoactive drug dosage, and recovery in the post-anesthesia care unit and ward.

Results

There was no significant difference in the postoperative pain scores and recovery quality between the two groups. The OFA group had a significantly lower dose of phenylephrine (P=0.001) and a lower incidence of hypotension (P=0.004) during surgery. The OFA group resumed spontaneous respiration faster (P<0.001) and had a higher quality of lung collapse (P=0.02). However, the total doses of propofol and dexmetomidine were higher (P=0.03 and P=0.02), and the time to consciousness was longer (P=0.039) in the OFA group.

Conclusions

OFA provides the same level of postoperative pain control as OA, but it is more advantageous in maintaining circulatory and respiratory stability and improving the quality of pulmonary collapse in SV-VATS.

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

The aim of this study was to evaluate the feasibility of opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) in open radical cystectomy (ORC) with urinary diversion and to assess the impact on recovery of gastrointestinal function. We hypothesized that OFA would lead to earlier recovery of bowel function. A total of 44 patients who underwent standardized ORC were divided into two groups (OFA group vs. control group). In both groups, patients received epidural analgesia (OFA group: bupivacaine 0.25%, control group: bupivacaine 0.1%, fentanyl 2 mcg/mL, and epinephrine 2 mcg/mL). The primary endpoint was time to first defecation. Secondary endpoints were incidence of postoperative ileus (POI) and incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV). The median time to first defecation was 62.5 h [45.8-80.8] in the OFA group and 118.5 h [82.6-142.3] (p < 0.001) in the control group. With regard to POI (OFA group: 1/22 patients (4.5%); control group: 2/22 (9.1%)) and PONV (OFA group: 5/22 patients (22.7%); control group: 10/22 (45.5%)), trends but no significant results were found (p = 0.99 and p = 0.203, respectively). OFA appears to be feasible in ORC and to improve postoperative functional gastrointestinal recovery by halving the time to first defecation compared with standard fentanyl-based intraoperative anesthesia.

Cistracurium Besylate 10 mg/mL Solution Compounded in a Hospital Pharmacy to Prevent Drug Shortages: A Stability Study Involving Four Degradation Products

BACKGROUND

Stability study of a 10 mg/mL injectable cisatracurium solution stored refrigerated in amber glass ampoules for 18 months (M18).

METHODS

4000 ampoules were aseptically compounded using European Pharmacopoeia (EP)-grade cisatracurium besylate, sterile water for injection, and benzenesulfonic acid. We developed and validated a stability-indicating HPLC-UV method for cisatracurium and laudanosine. At each stability study time point, we recorded the visual aspect, cisatracurium and laudanosine levels, pH, and osmolality. Sterility, bacterial endotoxin content, and non-visible particles in solution were checked after compounding (T0) and after M12 and M18 of storage. We used HPLC-MS/MS to identify the degradation products (DPs).

RESULTS

During the study, osmolality remained stable, pH decreased slightly, and the organoleptic properties did not change. The number of non-visible particles remained below the EP's threshold. Sterility was preserved, and bacterial endotoxin level remained below the calculated threshold. Cisatracurium concentration remained within the ±10% acceptance interval for 15 months and then decreased to 88.7% of C0 after M18. The laudanosine generated accounted for less than a fifth of the cisatracurium degradation, and three DPs were generated-identified as EP impurity A, impurities E/F, and impurities N/O.

CONCLUSION

Compounded 10 mg/mL cisatracurium injectable solution is stable for at least 15 months.

Balanced Nonopioid General Anesthesia With Lidocaine Is Associated With Lower Postoperative Complications Compared With Balanced Opioid General Anesthesia With Sufentanil for Cardiac Surgery With Cardiopulmonary Bypass: A Propensity Matched Cohort Study

BACKGROUND

There are no data on the effect of balanced nonopioid general anesthesia with lidocaine in cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass. The main study objective was to evaluate the association between nonopioid general balanced anesthesia and the postoperative complications in relation to opioid side effects.

METHODS

Patients undergoing cardiac surgery with cardiopulmonary bypass between 2019 and 2021 were identified. After exclusion of patients for heart transplantation, left ventricular assistance device, and off-pump surgery, we classified patients according to an opioid general balanced anesthesia or a nonopioid balanced anesthesia with lidocaine. The primary outcome was a collapsed composite of postoperative complications that comprise respiratory failure and confusion, whereas secondary outcomes were acute renal injury, pneumoniae, death, intensive care unit (ICU), and hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

We identified 859 patients exposed to opioid-balanced general anesthesia with lidocaine and 913 patients exposed to nonopioid-balanced general anesthesia. Propensity score matching yielded 772 individuals in each group with balanced baseline covariates. Two hundred thirty-six patients (30.5%) of the nonopioid-balanced general anesthesia versus 186 patients (24.1%) presented postoperative composite complications. The balanced lidocaine nonopioid general anesthesia group was associated with a lower proportion with the postoperative complication composite outcome OR, 0.72 (95% CI, 0.58-0.92; P = .027). The number of patients with acute renal injury, death, and hospital length of stay did not differ between the 2 groups.

CONCLUSIONS

A balanced nonopioid general anesthesia protocol with lidocaine was associated with lower odds of postoperative complication composite outcome based on respiratory failure and confusion.

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.

No association of postoperative opioid usage with long-term surgery outcomes in patients with liver cancer: a population-based retrospective cohort study

ABSTRACT

Hepatocellular carcinoma (HCC) is a fatal cancer worldwide, and surgical resection remains the standard treatment. Postoperative opioid prescription has been believed to affect cancer recurrence through complex biological pathways. We conducted a retrospective cohort study using the Longitudinal Health Insurance Database of Taiwan to evaluate the relationship between postoperative opioid use and long-term surgical outcomes of patients with HCC. This study had a retrospective cohort design. In total, 812 patients older than 20 years who underwent hepatectomy because of HCC were included. The exposure group comprised patients who used opioids during hospitalization postoperatively. The comparison group included those who never used opioids during hospitalization postoperatively. A Cox proportional hazards model was used to evaluate the overall survival or recurrence-free survival rate between the opioid group and the nonopioid group. A total of 530 patients received opioids postoperatively and 282 patients did not. The hazard ratios of overall survival and recurrence-free survival were 1.10 (95% confidence interval [CI], 0.85-1.41) and 1.15 (95% CI, 0.91-1.46), respectively. Total postoperative opioids were converted into oral morphine milligram equivalents and then divided into 3 equal subgroups: low dose, <40 mg; medium dose, 40 to 144 mg; and high dose, ≥145 mg. The hazard ratios of overall survival were 0.88 (95% CI, 0.63-1.24) for the low-dose group, 1.27 (95% CI, 0.92-1.74) for the medium-dose group, and 1.14 (95% CI, 0.83-1.58) for the high-dose group. Postoperative opioids do not affect overall and recurrence-free survival in patients undergoing hepatectomy or liver transplantation because of HCC. Cancer recurrence should not be a clinical concern regarding postoperative opioid prescription.

Can Opioid-Free Anaesthesia Be Personalised? A Narrative Review

Background: A significant amount of evidence suggests that Opioid-Free Anaesthesia (OFA) may provide better outcomes for patients undergoing surgery, sparing patients who are particularly vulnerable to adverse side effects of opioids. However, to what extent personalizing OFA is feasible and beneficial has not been adequately described. Methods: We conducted a narrative literature review aiming to provide a comprehensive understanding of nociception and pain and its context within the field of OFA. Physiological (including monitoring), pharmacological, procedural (type of surgery), genetical and phenotypical (including patients’ conditions) were considered. Results: We did not find any monitoring robustly associated with improved outcomes. However, we found evidence supporting particular OFA indications, such as bariatric and cancer surgery. We found that vulnerable patients may benefit more from OFA, with an interesting field of research in patients suffering from vascular disease. We found a variety of techniques and medications making it impossible to consider OFA as a single technique. Our findings suggest that a vast field of research remains unexplored. In particular, a deeper understanding of nociception with an interest in its genetic and acquired contributors would be an excellent starting point paving the way for personalised OFA. Conclusion: Recent developments in OFA may present a more holistic approach, challenging the use of opioids. Understanding better nociception, given the variety of OFA techniques, may help to maximize their potential in different contexts and potential indications.

Opioid Reduced Anesthesia in Major Oncologic Cervicofacial Surgery: A Retrospective Study

Opioid sparing is one of the new challenges in anesthesia and perioperative medicine. Opioid reduced anesthesia (ORA) is part of this approach, and it consists of a multimodal analgesia-associating non-opioid analgesic regional anesthesia to reduce intraoperative opioid requirements. Major cervicofacial oncologic surgery could specifically benefit from ORA, since it is known to generate intense and prolonged postoperative pain, with a high risk of pulmonary complications.

METHODS

This is a retrospective case-controlled study of 172 patients with major cervicofacial oncologic surgery. Group ORA (dexmedetomidine and lidocaine), n = 86, was compared to patients treated with standard opioid based anesthesia, Group control, n = 86. The main endpoint was to study perioperative opioid consumption and postoperative pain scores, and the secondary endpoint was to observe opioid related side effects.

RESULTS

The ORA group received 6.2 ± 3.1 mg morphine titration at the end of surgery, while the control group received 10.1 ± 3.7 mg p < 0.0001; there was no significant difference in post-operative analgesia requirements and pain scores between the groups. Intraoperatively, the ORA protocol yielded bradycardia in 4 persons, while in the control group, only 2 persons had bradycardia necessitating intervention, p < 0.05. Postoperatively, episodes of hypoxemia (50%) and the need for additional pressure-assisted ventilation (6%), was significantly different in the ORA group than in the control group (70% and 19%), p < 0.05. There was no difference between the two groups for the incidence of nausea and vomiting, ileus, or postoperative delirium.

DISCUSSION

ORA was not associated with a decrease in postoperative pain and opioid requirement, but possibly reduced the incidence of hypoxemia and the use of additional pressure-assisted ventilation, although we cannot rule out confounding factors. The possible benefits of ORA remain to be demonstrated by prospective studies.

Postoperative Nausea and Vomiting According to Target-Controlled or Manual Remifentanil Infusion in Gynecological Patients Undergoing Pelviscopic Surgery: A Randomized Controlled Trial

BACKGROUND

We compared the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) and postoperative outcomes, according to the remifentanil infusion method, during surgery in patients with a high-risk of PONV.

METHODS

Ninety patients undergoing elective gynecological pelviscopic surgery were randomly allocated to either target-controlled infusion (TCI, T) or manual (M) infusion. The primary outcome was the incidence of PONV until postoperative day (POD) 2. The secondary outcomes were perioperative heart rate (HR), blood pressure (BP), numerical rating scale pain scores up to POD2, and postoperative hospital length of stay.

RESULTS

Forty-four patients in the T group and 45 patients in the M group were analyzed. The total dose of remifentanil infusion was significantly higher in the T group (T group: 0.093 (0.078-0.112) μg/kg/min; M group: 0.062 (0.052-0.076) µg/kg/min, p < 0.001). Within POD2, the overall PONV was not significantly different (27 (61.4%) vs. 27 (60.0%), p = 0.895). The HR (82 ± 11.5/min vs. 87 ± 11.1/min, p = 0.046) and mean BP (83 ± 17.2 mmHg vs. 90 ± 16.7 mmHg, p = 0.035) were significantly lower in the T group after tracheal intubation. The other postoperative outcomes were comparable between the two groups.

CONCLUSIONS

Although the total remifentanil infusion dose was higher in the T group than in the M group, the postoperative outcomes were similar. If stable vital signs are desired during tracheal intubation, remifentanil infusion with TCI should be considered.

Opioid-free anesthesia for postoperative recovery after video-assisted thoracic surgery: A prospective, randomized controlled trial

Purpose

Opioid-based anesthesia is a traditional form of anesthesia that has a significant analgesic effect; however, it can cause nausea, vomiting, delirium, and other side effects. Opioid-free anesthesia with dexmedetomidine and lidocaine has attracted widespread attention. This study aimed to compare the effects of opioid-free and opioid-based anesthesia (OFA and OBA, respectively) on postoperative recovery in patients who had undergone video-assisted thoracic surgery.

Methods

Eighty patients undergoing video-assisted thoracic surgery were assigned to receive either opioid-free anesthesia (OFA group) or opioid-based anesthesia (OBA group) according to random grouping. The primary outcome of the study was the quality of recovery-40 scores (QoR-40) 24 h postoperatively. The secondary outcome measure was numerical rating scale (NRS) scores at different times 48 h postoperatively. In addition to these measurements, other related parameters were recorded.

Results

Patients who received opioid-free anesthesia had higher QoR-40 scores (169.1 ± 5.1 vs. 166.8 ± 4.4, p = 0.034), and the differences were mainly reflected in their comfort and emotional state; however, the difference between the two groups was less than the minimal clinically important difference of 6.3. We also found that the NRS scores were lower in the OFA group than in the OBA group at 0.5 h (both p < 0.05) and 1 h (both p < 0.05) postoperatively and the cumulative 0-24 h postoperative dosage of sufentanil in the OBA group was higher than that in the OFA group (p = 0.030). There were no significant differences in postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) (p = 0.159). No surgical or block complications were observed between the groups.

Conclusion

Opioid-free analgesia potentially increased the postoperative recovery in patients who underwent video-assisted thoracic surgery.

Trial registration

The study protocol was registered in the Chinese Clinical Trial Register under the number ChiCTR2100045344 (http://www.chictr.org.cn/showproj.aspx?proj=125033) on April 13, 2021.

Short-Term Patient Outcomes After Implementation of Robotic-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy Under Opioid Free Anesthesia at an Ambulatory Surgery Center

PURPOSE

Opioid free anesthesia (OFA) is associated with decreased risk of PONV and need for rescue analgesia, making it ideal for patients anticipating same-day discharge. The purpose of this project was to describe the perioperative care and short-term outcomes for patients undergoing robotic-assisted radical prostatectomy (RARP) under OFA at an ambulatory surgical center (ASC).

DESIGN

A retrospective descriptive design was used to examine the perioperative care and short-term outcomes of patients undergoing RARP under OFA at an ASC.

METHODS

The records of all sequential patients undergoing RARP over an 18-month period were reviewed. Data collected included patient comorbidities, surgical procedures, medications administered, verbal numeric rating scale (VNRS) for pain scores, times to oral intake, ambulation, and discharge, patient disposition, and unplanned return to the ER or hospital within 30 days.

FINDINGS

Data were extracted from 54 sequential records. Median VNRS scores were zero throughout PACU stay. Fifty-three patients (98.1%) were successfully discharged home, with an average postoperative stay of 250.8 (SD 35.0) minutes. There were no complaints of post-discharge nausea and vomiting or intractable pain at 72 hours after surgery. One patient was transferred to the hospital and two patients returned to the emergency room within 30 days.

CONCLUSIONS

Although generalizability is limited, these results suggest that carefully selected patients can be discharged home after RARP under a balanced OFA technique. Innovative practices are needed to address the current backlog of patients needing non-emergent surgery. Discharge home avoids the increase in resource consumption and infection risk associated with hospital admission.

Efficacy of Dexmedetomidine vs. Remifentanil for Postoperative Analgesia and Opioid-Related Side Effects after Gynecological Laparoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Remifentanil is widely used for intraoperative analgesia, but often causes remifentanil-induced hyperalgesia (RIH) and related side effects. Dexmedetomidine, a non-opioid analgesic, has been used as an alternative to remifentanil to prevent RIH. We aimed to investigate the effect of dexmedetomidine on postoperative recovery after gynecological laparoscopy. Ninety-six adult patients undergoing elective gynecological laparoscopy were randomly assigned to the dexmedetomidine or remifentanil groups. The primary outcome was the pain score at 30 min after surgery. The secondary outcomes were intraoperative adverse events (hypotension and bradycardia) and postoperative opioid-related side effects (nausea, vomiting, requirement for rescue analgesics, and shivering). We also performed an ancillary cytokine study to evaluate oxidative stress, one of the causes of RIH. Compared with the remifentanil group, the dexmedetomidine group had lower pain scores at 30 min after surgery (4.0 ± 1.9 vs. 6.1 ± 2.0, mean ± SD, p < 0.001) and lower incidence of intraoperative hypotension and postoperative nausea, vomiting, and shivering. Furthermore, the proportion of patients requiring rescue analgesics was significantly lower in the dexmedetomidine than in the remifentanil group (25% vs. 66.7%, p < 0.001). Cytokine levels did not differ between the groups. Dexmedetomidine showed a better analgesic effect with minimal opioid-related side effects and is considered superior to remifentanil for intraoperative analgesia.

Effect of co-administration of intravenous lidocaine and dexmedetomidine on the recovery from laparoscopic hysterectomy: a randomized controlled trial

BACKGROUND

Some evidences have reported that intravenous lidocaine and dexmedetomidine alone can improve the quality of recovery after surgery. The main purpose of our study to explore whether co-administration of lidocaine and dexmedetomidine infusion could further improve the quality of recovery after laparoscopic hysterectomy compared to either lidocaine or dexmedetomidine administration.

METHODS

A total of 160 subjects were randomly allocated to four groups: the control group (group C) received an equal volume of normal saline, the lidocaine group (group L) received lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 1.5 mg/kg/h for continuous infusion), the dexmedetomidine group (group D) received dexmedetomidine (0.5 µg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 0.4 µg/kg/h for continuous infusion), the lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine group (group LD) received lidocaine (1.5 mg/kg for bolus over 10 min before induction of anesthesia, 1.5 mg/kg/h for continuous infusion) and dexmedetomidine combined infusion (0.5 µg/kg for bolus over 10 minutes before induction of anesthesia, 0.4 µg/kg/h for continuous infusion). The primary endpoint was the quality of recovery-40 (QoR-40) scores on postoperative day 1 (POD1). The quality of sleep on POD1, remifentanil total dose, visual analog scale (VAS) pain scores, the number of patients with self-press the pump, time to open eye and extubation, length of postanesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, the incidence of intraoperative bradycardia, hypotension, arrhythmias, hypoxemia in the PACU, and nausea or vomiting within 24 h after surgery were regarded as the secondary outcomes.

RESULTS

The total QoR-40 scores were significantly increased in groups L, D, and LD on POD1 compared with group C (all P<0.05). The total QoR-40 scores were the highest in group LD on POD1 compared to other three groups (all P<0.001). Sleep quality was significantly improved in group LD compared to other three groups on POD1 (all P<0.05). The VAS pain scores were obviously reduced at 8 h in group L and at 4, 8 h in group D after surgery compared to group C and were the lowest in group LD (all P<0.05). The number of patients with self-press the pump was significantly reduced in groups D and LD compared to group C (8(20.0%) and 27(67.5%), P<0.001; 2(5.0%) and 27(67.5%), P<0.001, respectively). Length of PACU stay significantly prolonged in groups D (21.7±3.0) and LD (25.5±4.0) compared to group C (19.6±3.3) (P=0.028, P<0.001). The incidence of intraoperative bradycardia was significantly higher in groups D and LD than in groups C and L (all P<0.001). The rate of hypoxemia was higher in groups D (55.0%) and LD (70.0%) than in groups C (15.0%) and L (20.0%) (all P<0.05). The incidence of nausea was lower in group LD (10.0%) than in group C (37.5%) (P<0.05).

CONCLUSIONS

Co-administration of lidocaine plus dexmedetomidine infusion improved to some extent the quality of recovery on POD1 compared to lidocaine and dexmedetomidine alone, but it significantly increased the incidence of intraoperative bradycardia and hypoxemia in the PACU, and prolonged the length of PACU stay.

Opioid-sparing anesthesia and patient-reported outcomes after open gynecologic surgery: a historical cohort study

PURPOSE

Dexmedetomidine and ketamine may be administered intraoperatively as continuous infusions to provide opioid-sparing anesthesia. Recent evidence has yielded controversial results regarding the impact of opioid-free anesthesia on postoperative complications, and there is a gap in knowledge regarding patient-reported outcomes (PROs). This study aimed to determine the impact of opioid-sparing anesthesia and opioid-based anesthesia on PROs among gynecologic patients within an enhanced recovery after surgery (ERAS) program.

METHODS

We formed a single-center historical cohort from patients enrolled in another study who underwent open gynecologic surgery on an ERAS program from November 2014 to December 2020 (n = 2,095). We identified two cohorts based on the type of balanced anesthesia administered: 1) opioid-sparing anesthesia defined as the continuous infusion of dexmedetomidine and ketamine (adjuvants) during surgery or 2) opioid-based anesthesia (no adjuvants). We measured the quality of postoperative recovery using the MD Anderson Symptom Inventory (MDASI), a 29-item validated tool that was administered preoperatively, daily while admitted, and weekly after discharge until week 6. The primary outcome was interference with walking. We matched both cohorts and used a multilevel linear mixed-effect model to evaluate the effect of opioid-sparing anesthesia on the primary outcome.

RESULTS

In total, 498 patients were eligible (159 in the opioid-sparing anesthesia cohort and 339 in the opioid-based anesthesia cohort), of whom 149 matched pairs were included in the final analysis. Longitudinal assessment showed no significant or clinically important difference in interference with walking (P = 0.99), general activity (P = 0.99), or other PROs between cohorts. Median [interquartile range (IQR)] intraoperative opioid administration (expressed as morphine milligram equivalents [MME]) among matched patients in the opioid-sparing anesthesia cohort was 30 [25-55] mg vs 58 [8-70] mg in the opioid-based anesthesia cohort (P < 0.01). Patients in the opioid-sparing anesthesia cohort had a lower opioid consumption in the postanesthesia care unit than those in the opioid-based anesthesia cohort (MME, 3 [0-10] mg vs 5 [0-15] mg; P < 0.01), but there was no significant difference between cohorts in total postoperative opioid consumption (MME, 23 [0-94] mg vs 35 [13-95] mg P = 0.053).

CONCLUSIONS

In this single-center historical cohort study, opioid-sparing anesthesia had no significant or clinically important effects on interference with walking or other PROs in patients undergoing gynecologic surgery compared with opioid-based anesthesia. Opioid-sparing anesthesia was associated with less short-term opioid consumption than opioid-based anesthesia.

Association of intraoperative dexmedetomidine use with postoperative hypotension in unilateral hip and knee arthroplasties: a historical cohort study

PURPOSE

Dexmedetomidine is frequently used as a sedative agent for orthopedic surgery patients undergoing total hip or knee arthroplasty. Although the benefits of dexmedetomidine are well described in the literature, there is also potential for harm, especially regarding the hemodynamic effects of dexmedetomidine in the postoperative setting.

METHODS

This historical cohort study included all primary unilateral total hip or knee arthroplasties conducted from April 2017 to February 2020 in a single, university-affiliated, tertiary care centre (Jewish General Hospital, Montreal, QC, Canada). We used multivariable logistic regression to analyze the predictors for postoperative hypotension, defined as a systolic blood pressure < 90 mm Hg or any systolic blood pressure while on a vasopressor infusion in the postanesthesia care unit. Models were validated using calibration and discrimination with bootstrapping technique.

RESULTS

One thousand five hundred and eighty-eight patients were included in this study. Postoperative hypotension occurred in 413 (26%) patients. Statistically significant predictors for postoperative hypotension included female sex (adjusted odds ratio [aOR], 3.24; 95% confidence interval [CI], 2.29 to 4.58), a history of transient ischemic attack or cerebrovascular accident (aOR, 1.97; 95% CI, 1.04 to 3.72), and intraoperative dexmedetomidine use (aOR, 2.61; 95% CI, 1.99 to 3.42). Moreover, the risk of postoperative hypotension was approximately two times higher than baseline, with a total intraoperative dexmedetomidine dose above 50 μg (relative risk, 1.99; 95% CI, 1.63 to 2.44; P < 0.001). A higher preoperative systolic blood pressure (aOR, 0.98; 95% CI, 0.97 to 0.99) was a protective factor for postoperative hypotension.

CONCLUSION

In this historical cohort study, dexmedetomidine was a strong risk factor for postoperative hypotension in total hip or knee arthroplasty patients. Dexmedetomidine, and particularly at high cumulative doses above 50 μg, should be administered judiciously in high-risk surgical patients to minimize the risk of postoperative hypotension.

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).

Is esketamine-based opioid-free anesthesia more superior for postoperative analgesia in obstructive sleep apnea patients undergoing bariatric surgery? A study protocol

INTRODUCTION

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) can certainly prevent nausea and vomiting after bariatric surgery (BS), but its postoperative analgesic effect is still controversial. Obstructive sleep apnea (OSA) is a prominent feature of morbid obesity in BS and accounts for a very high proportion, which significantly increases the difficulty of patients' airway management. Those patients will be more representative and highlight the advantages of OFA. It is not clear whether esketamine can play a more prominent role in OFA for postoperative analgesia. Therefore, this study aims to explore the postoperative analgesic effect of esketamine-based OFA on BS patients with OSA.

METHODS AND ANALYSIS

This single-center, prospective, randomized, controlled, single-blind study is planned to recruit 48 participants to undergo BS from May 2022 to April 2023. Patients will be randomly assigned to the OFA group and opioid-based anesthesia (OBA) group in a ratio of 1:1. The primary outcome is the Numeric Rating Scale (NRS) at different times postoperatively. Secondary outcomes include analgesic intake, the incidence and severity of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV), Leiden Surgical Rating Scale (L-SRS), postoperative agitation and chills, PACU stay time, EuroQol five-dimensional questionnaire (EQ-5D), length of hospital stay, intraoperative awareness, and hemodynamically unstable treatments.

DISCUSSION

The results of this study may explain the analgesic effect of esketamine-based OFA on patients undergoing BS combined with OSA, and provide evidence and insight for perioperative pain management.

ETHICS AND DISSEMINATION

This study is initiated by the Ethics Committee of The First Affiliated Hospital of Shandong First Medical University [YXLL-KY-2022(035)]. The trial results will be published in peer-reviewed journals and at conferences.

CLINICAL TRIAL REGISTRATION

[https://clinicaltrials.gov/ct2/show/NCT05386979], identifier [NCT05386979].

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.

Standard opioid-containing versus opioid-sparing anesthesia on early postoperative recovery after video-assisted thoracic surgery: A propensity-weighted analysis

PURPOSE

Opioids have several adverse effects. At present, there are no large clinical studies on the effects of opioid-sparing anesthesia on early postoperative recovery after thoracoscopic surgery. This study was to investigate the effects of opioid-sparing anesthesia on early postoperative recovery after thoracoscopic surgery.

METHODS

Adult patients who underwent video-assisted thoracic surgery from 1 January 2019 to 28 February 2021 were enrolled by reviewing the electronic medical records. Participants were divided into opioid-sparing anesthesia (OSA group) and opioid-containing anesthesia (STD group) based on intraoperative opioid usage. The propensity-score analysis was to compare the early postoperative recovery of two groups. The outcome measurements included the incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting (PONV) during an entire hospital stay, need for rescue antiemetic medication, postoperative-pain episodes within 48 h after surgery, need for rescue analgesia 48 h postoperatively, duration of postoperative hospital stay, length of PACU stay, postoperative fever, postoperative shivering, postoperative atrial fibrillation, postoperative pulmonary infection, postoperative hypoalbuminemia, postoperative hypoxemia, intraoperative blood loss, and intraoperative urine output.

RESULTS

A total of 1,975 patients were identified. No significant difference was observed in patient characteristics between the OSA and STD groups after adjusting for propensity score-based inverse probability treatment weighting. The incidence of postoperative nausea and vomiting was significantly lower in the OSA group than in the STD group (14.7% vs. 18.9%, p = 0.041). The rescue antiemetic use rate was lower in the OSA group than in the STD group (7.5% vs.12.2%; p = 0.002). PACU duration was longer in the OSA group than in the STD group (70.8 ± 29.0 min vs. 67.3 ± 22.7 min; p = 0.016). The incidence of postoperative fever was higher in the STD group than that in the OSA group (11.0% vs.7.7%; p = 0.032). There were no differences between the groups in terms of other outcomes.

CONCLUSIONS

Our results suggest that opioid-sparing anesthesia has a lower incidence of postoperative complications than opioid-based anesthetic techniques.

Opioid-Sparing Techniques in Orthopedic Anesthesia-One Step to Opioid-Free Anesthesia?

Opioid-free anesthesia is a multimodal anesthesia aimed at avoiding the negative impact of intraoperative opioid on patient's postoperative outcomes. It is based on the physiology of pathways involved in intraoperative nociception. It has been shown to be feasible but the literature is still scarce on the clinically meaningful benefits as well as on the side effects and/or complications that might be associated with it. Moreover, most studies involved abdominal and/or bariatric surgery. Procedure-specific studies are lacking, especially in orthopedics.

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.

The Effect of Opioid-Free Anesthesia on the Quality of Recovery After Gynecological Laparoscopy: A Prospective Randomized Controlled Trial

Purpose

Opioid-free anesthesia (OFA) is an emerging technique that eliminates intraoperative use of opioids and is associated with lower postoperative opioid consumption and reduced adverse postoperative events. The present study investigated the effect of OFA on the quality of recovery in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopy.

Patients and Methods

Seventy-five adult patients undergoing elective gynecological laparoscopy were randomly assigned to the OFA group with dexmedetomidine and lidocaine or the remifentanil-based anesthesia (RA) group with remifentanil. Patients, surgeons, and medical staff members providing postoperative care and assessing outcomes were blinded to group allocation. The anesthesiologist performing general anesthesia could not be blinded due to the different drug administration protocols by groups. The primary outcome was the quality of recovery measured using the Quality of Recovery-40 (QoR-40) questionnaire. Secondary outcomes were postoperative pain score, intraoperative and postoperative adverse events, and stress hormones levels.

Results

The patients in both groups had comparable baseline characteristics. The QoR-40 score on postoperative day 1 was significantly higher in the OFA group than in the RA group (155.9 ± 21.2 in the RA group vs 166.9 ± 17.8 in the OFA group; mean difference: −11.0, 95% confidence interval: −20.0, −2.0; p = 0.018). The visual analog scale score at 30 min after surgery was significantly lower in the OFA group than in the RA group (6.3 ± 2.3 in the RA group vs 4.1 ± 2.1 in the OFA group; p < 0.001). The incidences of nausea and shivering in the post-anesthetic care unit were also significantly lower in the OFA group (p = 0.014 and 0.025; respectively). Epinephrine levels were significantly lower in the OFA group (p = 0.002).

Conclusion

OFA significantly improved the quality of recovery in patients undergoing gynecological laparoscopy.

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 lidocaine administration via the perforated outer cuff of a dual-cuff endotracheal tube and remifentanil administration on recovery from general anaesthesia for female patients undergoing thyroidectomy: a single centre, double-blind, randomised study

Background

Cough caused by endotracheal tube (ETT) placement is ubiquitous and correlates with adverse outcomes. Remifentanil administration via target-controlled infusion (TCI) is one of the cough prevention measures used during recovery. In a pilot study, lidocaine administered via the perforated outer cuff of a dual-cuff endotracheal tube was also found to prevent cough due to ETT placement. We therefore compared these two cough prevention approaches during recovery after thyroidectomy in a single-centre, double-blind, randomised study conducted in China during the period from 09/10/2020 to 30/04/2021.

Methods

Ninety-eight female patients aged 18–65 years with American Society of Anaesthesiologists Physical Status scores of I and II were scheduled to undergo thyroidectomy. The ETT contained an internal cuff covered by a perforated outer cuff to allow for lidocaine delivery. Patients were randomised to receive either 4 ml of saline solution (Group R, n = 49) or 4 ml of 2% lidocaine in the outer cuff (Group L, n = 49) at the beginning of skin suturing. Remifentanil (2 ng/ml) was maintained in Group R until extubation, while remifentanil was maintained in Group L until the end of skin suturing. The primary outcome was cough during patient transfer, at 1 min before extubation, and at extubation. The secondary outcomes were haemodynamics and other recovery parameters.

Results

Primary outcomes were compared between remifentanil vs. lidocaine application, namely, the incidence of cough during patient transfer (0% in Group R vs. 0% in Group L), at 1 min before extubation (22.45% in Group R vs. 4.08% in Group L; P = 0.015), and at extubation (61.22% in Group R vs. 20.41% in Group L; P < 0.001). Compared with remifentanil, lidocaine more effectively decreased heart rate elevation and hypoxemia at 5 min after extubation, the spontaneous respiration recovery time, the extubation time, the duration of post-anaesthesia care unit (PACU) stay, Richmond Agitation-Sedation Scale scores in the agitated range and Critical-Care Pain Observation Tool scores.

Conclusion

Lidocaine administered via the perforated outer cuff of the ETT significantly improved recovery from general anaesthesia compared to remifentanil in female patients after thyroidectomy.

Trial registration

Chinese Clinical Trial Registry (No. ChiCTR2000038653), registered on 27/09/2020.

Supplementary Information

The online version contains supplementary material available at 10.1186/s12871-022-01734-1.

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.

An Opioid-Sparing Strategy for Laparoscopic Sleeve Gastrectomy: A Retrospective Matched Case-Controlled Study in China

Background: Opioid-sparing anesthesia may enhance postoperative recovery by reducing opioid-related side effects. The present study was to evaluate the effect of an opioid-sparing strategy in bariatric surgery.

Methods: This study was conducted as a retrospective matched case-controlled (1:1) study. A total of 44 patients receiving either an opioid-based approach (OBA group) or an opioid-sparing strategy (OSA group) who under laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy were included between May 2017 and October 2020. The primary outcome was the postoperative hospital length of stay (PLOS). Secondary outcomes were the hospital costs, operative opioid consumption, time to recovery, postoperative pain score at rest and rescue antiemetic administered in the PACU.

Results: The clinical demographic and operative data in both groups were comparable. There were no significant differences between the two groups in the PLOS (OSA vs. OBA: 6.18 ± 0.23 days vs. 6.73 ± 0.39 days, p = 0.24). Compared to the OBA group, opioid consumption in the OSA group was significantly decreased (48.79 ± 4.85 OMEs vs. 10.57 ± 0.77 OMEs, p < 0.001). There were no significant differences in the hospital costs, time to recovery, and rescue antiemetic administered, the incidence of intravenous opioids and vasopressor use in the PACU.

Conclusion: The opioid-sparing anesthesia for laparoscopic sleeve gastrectomy was feasible but did not decrease the PLOS.

Effect of additional equipotent fentanyl or sufentanil administration on recovery profiles during propofol-remifentanil-based anaesthesia in patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopic surgery: a randomized clinical trial

Background

In clinical practice, sufentanil has a stronger sedative effect on patients than fentanyl at equivalent doses. This study hypothesized that, at equivalent doses, patients undergoing gynaecologic laparoscopic surgery (GLS) receiving fentanyl would have an earlier emergence from anaesthesia (EA), a shorter time to extubation (TE), and a better degree of wakefulness. Therefore, this study evaluated the effects of equipotent doses of fentanyl and sufentanil on the quality of emergence in patients undergoing GLS.

Methods

One hundred seven patients scheduled for GLS under general anaesthesia were randomly divided into two groups and were induced with 0.35 µg/kg sufentanil (Group S; n = 55) or 3.5 µg/kg fentanyl (Group F; n = 52). When the GLS was almost over, the patient's abdominal cavity was flushed with warm saline, and 5 µg of sufentanil or 50 µg of fentanyl in a double-blind manner was intravenously injected into the patients. The primary outcomes of the study included EA, TE, the rate of leaving the surgical bed voluntarily and the incidence of endotracheal tube tolerance. The Ramsay Sedation Scale (RSS), and Verbal Rating Scale (VRS) scores at 15 and 30 min in the postanaesthesia care unit (PACU), as well as other adverse events, including nausea and vomiting, itching, delirium, dizziness, chills, and respiratory depression (SpO₂ < 95%) in the PACU, were evaluated as secondary outcomes.

Results

There were no statistically significant dissimilarities between the two groups with respect to baseline characteristics. For recovery, the EA (9.0 ± 4.8 min vs. 8.9 ± 3.0 min; P = 0. 146), TE (9.5 ± 4.7 min vs. 9.0 ± 3.0 min; P = 0.135), rate of leaving the surgical bed voluntarily (31.18% vs. 38.46%; P = 0.976), and incidence of endotracheal tube tolerance (94.55% vs. 96.15%; P = 0.694) were not significantly different between the two groups. In the PACU, the 15-min RSS score (2.07 ± 0.38 vs. 2.15 ± 0.36; P = 0.125), the 30-min RSS score (2.02 ± 0.13 vs. 2.04 ± 0.19; P = 0.207), the 15-min VRS score (0.50 ± 0.57 vs. 0.67 ± 0.55; P = 0.295), and the 30-min VRS score (0.45 ± 0.50 vs. 0.75 ± 0.52; P = 0.102) were not significantly different between Groups S and F. No adverse events, such as nausea, vomiting, pruritus, delirium, and tremors, occurred in either group. The rates of respiratory depression (1.82% vs. 1.92%; P = 0.968) and dizziness (0.00% vs. 4.85%; P = 0.142) were not different between Groups S and F in the PACU.

Conclusions

The majority of patients scheduled for GLS were able to rapidly and smoothly emerge from anaesthesia. After surgery, similar outcomes, including EA, TE, the incidence of endotracheal tube tolerance, the rate of leaving the surgical bed voluntarily, RSS scores, VRS scores, and adverse events in the PACU, were achieved for the patients between the two anaesthetic protocols.

Perioperative Opioids, the Opioid Crisis, and the Anesthesiologist

This review summarizes current evidence related to perioperative opioid prescription fulfillment and use and discusses the role of personalized anesthesia care in mitigating opioid-related harms without compromising analgesia.

Opioid-Sparing Perioperative Analgesia Within Enhanced Recovery Programs

Opioid-based analgesia in the perioperative period can provide excellent pain control, but this approach exposes the patient to avoidable side effects and possible harm. Optimal analgesia, an approach that targets the fastest functional recovery with adequate pain control while minimizing side effects, can be achieved with opioid minimization. Many different options for nonopioid multimodal analgesia exist and have been shown to be efficacious, with certain modalities being more beneficial for specific surgeries. This review will present the evidence and practical tips for these management strategies.

Budget impact and pharmacy costs with targeted use of oliceridine for postsurgical pain in patients at high risk of opioid-related adverse events

BACKGROUND

Oliceridine, a new class of μ-opioid receptor agonist, may be associated with fewer opioid-related adverse events (ORAEs) due to its unique mechanism of action. Thus, it may provide a cost-effective alternative to conventional opioids such as morphine.

PATIENTS AND METHODS

Using a decision tree with a 24-hour time horizon, we calculated costs for medication and management of the three most common AEs (oxygen saturation <90%, vomiting, somnolence) following postoperative oliceridine or morphine in high-risk patients. Costs were enumerated as differences in cost of analgesics and resource utilization in the first 24 hours post-surgery. An economic model compared expected AEs and costs in a blended cohort where elderly/obese patients at higher risk for ORAEs received oliceridine while those presumed to be at lower risk received morphine with a cohort that received morphine alone.

RESULTS

In high-risk patients, use of oliceridine resulted in overall savings of $363,944 (in 1,000 patients). Implementing a targeted approach of oliceridine utilization in patients with high risk for ORAEs can save a typical hospital system $122,296 in total cost of care.

CONCLUSION

Use of oliceridine in postoperative care among patients at high risk provides a favorable health economic benefit compared to the use of morphine.